Editor's Note: When Laboratory Director G. Peter Nanos announced in August that the 9/80 modified work schedule was being suspended, he stated that the decision was not made lightly, but rather, that it was a business decision. The director has stated on several occassions that while the Laboratory was in a suspension of operations status he needed all employees to be at work Monday through Friday, working to ensure that the Lab could safely resume operations. The director also stated that he is amendable to reviewing his decision to suspend the 9/80 schedule. Any decision to return to a modified work schedule would have to be in keeping with best business practices and with assurances that the Laboratory can operate safely, securely and in compliance with all Laboratory policies and procedures.

Sept. 7, 2004

Director's statement regarding resumption of 9/80 work schedule

The director's decision to suspend the 9/80 work schedule was a blow to morale. (Maybe by now he has become informed of some consequences to some employees he did not anticipate.) Maybe the Editor's Note in John Bremmer's letter was an attempt to repair morale. Yet the statement seems loaded with innuendo implying the original decision to institute the 9/80 schedule was ill founded or that it hasn't worked out. This hardly instills confidence that the 9/80 schedule will resume, and, instead of improving morale, has a different, deleterious effect on it.

The decision to institute the 9/80 schedule was carefully studied over a long period of time and found to have enough merit to be the "standard schedule" at the Laboratory. Do we need another study? Maybe we do. I feel that if that original claim cannot be compellingly refuted, based on something other than personal feelings, then the 9/80 schedule ought to be reinstated immediately. If anyone feels a new study is needed, it ought to be carefully conducted while the 9/80 schedule is in effect, to show whether or not it has worked out substantially as the original studies led the previous administration to believe it would. That will repair morale significantly, no doubt, but only if the employees trust that the study, if conducted, will not be a sham.

The 9/80 schedule was created in response to a need and a large, enthusiastic, persistent demand. The adverse effect on morale of suspending it will not die away simply by playing a waiting game while encouraging false hope.

--Richard Kandarian