Re: furlough

[JMUCKERHEIDE@delphi.com]

Mr. Altman states,

>           The government furlough is hard enough to endure and one 
>           would expect comments like those I have seen posted on 
>           radsafe to appear on "hate" radio talk shows.

Considering the light nature of the comments this seems a pretty large
over-reaction, or perhaps over-sensitivity. 

>           The furlough is a political game, and federal workers are 
>           being used as pawns.  I do not think radsafe is a forum to 
>           make such comments as those that I have seen recently and 
>           especially from someone as well respected (or was well 
>           respected by me) as Dr. Vetter.

Why is radsafe not a forum to make comments about potential, perceived or
real, problems in the massive costs being expended by government in some areas 
that are essentially unrelated to any public health and safety benefit. While
real people are always involved in considering reductions in unnecessary
costs, it would be better to seriously consider the lack of justification for
current missions and costs, and perhaps explore job and career alternatives. 

VERY many of those of us who have been in utilities, engineering, consulting,
medical, manufacturing, and many other positions have dealt with more severe
job and paycheck consequences than a delay in pay (are there consequences to
this action that are more significant? why is this not just a paid vacation?), 
but it would be well to consider the need to find real alternative
professional options (if the DOE- and EPA-led destruction of the entire field
of radiation and nuclear science and technology applications is not
unalterably affected). 

I would note that Dr. Goldman's comments in his Feb 95 Newsletter editorial
states that the government (primarily DOE) proposes to spend >$trillion for
"negligible" health benefit. The $billion/year costs to nuclear medicine,
strongly noted by the Am College of Nuclear Physicians, whether one agrees or
not, these are real issues about the role of government radiation
bureacracies, with massive costs for similar lack of contributions to public
health and safety by many other roles and functions. 

Note that Congress has cut the HLW program so severely that many government
and contractor positions are being eliminated as we "speak". Unless you are
one of these people, entirely separate from the "furlough" issue, being upset
about the impact on the bureaucracies is rather unjustified. 

>           I believe that radsafe should stick to what it does best -  
>           serve as a forum for radiological information exchange, not 
>           as a forum for "bashing" federal workers.  I am really ashamed 
>           to be part of such a community!

I see this as "radiological info exchange", though perhaps not considered in a 
serious-enough context in the light of the (informal and perhaps somewhat
bitter) comments related to the programs and missions of government agencies
(usually, of course, NOT with the support and blessing of the technical
staffs, but who can and must appreciate that their positions are often being
used to destroy both the science and the applications at the behest of the
political regime). Understand that the "bashing" is directed to the federal
programs more than to the federal workers (with many workers, especially those 
who really have long-term commitments and no real opportunites to find
alternative employment) as frustrated by the current destructive Federal
leadership and ignorance in this areas as anyone else). 

I suggest that being "ashamed" may be better applied to working for this DOE.

>           Stuart M. Altman
>           U.S. Department of Energy
>           Defesne Programs (DP-34)
>           STUART.ALTMAN@DP.DOE.GOV
> 
> ______________________________ Reply Separator 
> _________________________________
> Subject: furlough
> Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu_at_internet at x400PO
> Date:    11/16/95 2:35 PM
> 
> 
> Message authorized by:
>     : rvetter@mayo.edu_at_internet at x400PO
> Errors-To: melissa@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> Originator: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> Precedence: bulk
> X-Listserver-Version: 6.0 -- UNIX ListServer by Anastasios Kotsikonas
> X-Comment:  Radiation Safety Distribution List
> 
>  To: IN14994 --POST
> 
>  *** Reply to note of 11/16/95 13:16
>  From: R.J.Vetter
>  Subject: furlough
>  It makes a big difference in mail volume, doesn't it. Perhaps we should
>  consider a proposal to permanently furlough some govt. radiation divisions.
> 
>  I will be meeting with the Texas Panhandle Chapter Feb 21 in Amarillo and
> the
>  North Texas Chapter Feb 22 in Dallas. Are you planning to attend one or
> both
>  meetings?
> 
>  ***************************************************************
>  *    Richard J. Vetter, Ph.D. CHP   email: rvetter@mayo.edu   *
>  *    Phone: 507-284-4408  Fax 507-284-0150                    *
>  ***************************************************************
> 
>