NASA Knows How To Party

doug141 writes "NASA spends between $400,000 and $1.3 million on a party at every shuttle launch, according to CBS. Select personnel are treated to 5 days at a 4 star hotel. This year alone, they've spent $4 million on parties. NASA asked for, and was given, $1 billion more from the Senate this year. NASA proponents argue it makes more sense to give money to talented, productive people in exchange for scientific knowledge, than spend in on unproductive people in the form of straight welfare."

Re:Morale booster? No, contractor pleaser.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's fairly routine for key consultants to be treated exactly like the true employees when it comes to celebrations. After all, if Jane shows up to work every day, has a cubicle with everybody else and is a key employee, the detail that her pay has a few extra steps is irrelevant. She is, essentially, just like everybody else.

That said, there's nothing worth discussing here. This is just propaganda.

If the real issue was fiscal responsibility, the reporters would be sorting the budget by largest to smallest amounts, and then examining each line. After all, you don't balance a budget starting with something that is, literally, less than a millionth of the total spending. That'd be like balancing the family budget by eating one less ramen noodle per day.

Re:The truth hurts.

[penix1]

I'm of course assuming that, like in my country, welfare is contingent on proving that you've actually tried to get a job.

That was your first error. Unemployment insurance is based on continuing job searches while welfare isn't to the same extent. Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 (commonly called the Welfare Reform Act although to my knowledge no such act is in existence) made sweeping changes. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_reform [wikipedia.org]

"One of the bill's provisions was a time limit. Under the law, no person could receive welfare payments for more than five years, consecutive or nonconsecutive. Another controversial change was transferring welfare to a block grant system, i.e. one in which the federal government gives states "blocks" of money, which the states then distribute under their own legislation and criteria. Some states simply kept the federal rules, but others used the money for non-welfare programs, such as subsidized childcare (to allow parents to work) or subsidized public transportation (to allow people to travel to work without owning cars).[Haskins 2006; Blank 2002]."

The only motivator is the fact that one can only get it for a cumulative 5 years. After that, tough luck for you!

Re:Morale booster? No, contractor pleaser.

[rokkaku]

NASA has very few actual employees -- most everybody is a contractor. When I worked at Ames, we had a small handful of NASA employees in the building, with several hundred contractors. I'm not sure why NASA works this way (it seems less efficient to me), but I suppose it is easier to hire and fire and this way they don't have to deal with complicated government employment rules.

Re:Well, yes

[Eponymous Bastard]

The two disasters were warned against by NASA owns personnel, had the managers listened to their rocket-scientists then those 'accidents' would not have happened.

Excuse me? The rocket boosters were warned against, but the piece of foam was studied by NASA's engineers, ran two simulations on it, and the engineers studying it decided it was safe to reenter.

There were some comments by other people at NASA about "what about the foam" a couple days before landing, and a "why are you bringing this up now and not last week" somewhere in there, but the study was done.

Granted, the study was flawed, but it was not a management decision. It was sad watching the press conferences after the events with all but the CNN reporter trying to imply that there was some gross negligence to blame.

(Or would you prefer they had decided to let the astronauts die of starvation in orbit rather than risk a reentry they thought was safe?)

This is just cover for the stargate program

[Joe The Dragon]

This is just cover for the stargate program

Re:money for "scientific knowledge"

[cyclone96]

I've been to one, most of the party attendees are not upper management. It's part of the Space Flight Awareness [nasa.gov] award program. To quote the site:

SFA Honoree

This award is one of the highest presented to NASA and industry and is for first-level management and below. This award is presented to employees for their dedication to quality work and flight safety. To qualify, the individuals must have contributed beyond their normal work requirements to achieve significant impact on attaining a particular human space flight program goal; contributed to a major cost savings; been instrumental in developing modification to hardware, software, or materials that increase reliability, efficiency, or performance; assisted in operational improvements; or been a key player in developing a beneficial process improvement.

Re:Contractors?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it is for the "worker bees." The party metioned here is for Space Flight Awareness Launch Honorees. This is an award that is is award to less than 1% of the workforce per year and is a once in a lifetime award given to 1st level managers and below (see description below). Of the honorees that I know, none were management when they recieved the award.

SFA Honoree

This award is one of the highest presented to NASA and industry and is for first-level management and below. This award is presented to employees for their dedication to quality work and flight safety. To qualify, the individuals must have contributed beyond their normal work requirements to achieve significant impact on attaining a particular human space flight program goal; contributed to a major cost savings; been instrumental in developing modification to hardware, software, or materials that increase reliability, efficiency, or performance; assisted in operational improvements; or been a key player in developing a beneficial process improvement.