I forgot to add this;

He did not earn significant employment income which is obviously taxed far higher, and most of the income he paid taxes on are of the dividend and long term cap gains type, so you can imagine how much he is risking in the equities market........pretty gutsy guy if you ask me and just maybe, the kind of economically talented type we need as president to get us out of the mess we are in.

"all one has to do is look at the percentage of income that Mitt Romney paid in taxes and then look at your own last income tax form....."

You guys are just too much. The rich and the wise ones do well because they play the game hard and they play by the rules. The rest of us are either too lazy or too dumb to do the same. So what do you want to do? Punish the productive people in the population and reward the slovenly? No one likes too see the filthy rich get even dirtier rich......but what else is there? Giving more breaks to those who are less efficient with the system?......I don't think so, that is money down the drain. If the opportunity is available to all but only the smart ones "work it", well thats just too bad. The smart ones deserve the rewards.......we can all do the same if we learn all the rules and act accordingly, and from these types of responses, you guy's do not have a clue. Mitt payed low tax rates sure, but it was legal and he then donates to charities of his choice in a huge manner..........what is so evil about that?
Oh, by the way how did he lower his taxes to 13-15%? He invested 10's of millions of dollars in dividend paying equities and also sold long term holdings at the long term capital gain rate of 15% (while also getting other legal write-offs).........this is something ALL OF US can do. But do you clueless complainers have the guts to commit most of you life savings in the stock market to get these tax rates? Noooooo you are tooooo afraid of losing it. Mitt commits 10's of millions of his net worth to do this, while propping up the market w/ his wallet, and risking loosing his life savings. I'd say he deserves the tax rate he pays, for helping us all make money in the stock market by keeping his millions in it. You have to say that he is a very firm believer in the American dream, so get over complaining about the tax rate he pays......ALL OF US CAN DO THE EXACT SAME THING IF YOU HAVE THE GUTS.

Why Romney's low income tax tax should bother me? I know it's not his fault to pay only 14% while you and I pay 24 to 34%. If it really bothers you, then write to your congressmen and urge them to change the tax code.

On the other hand, if you add the donations that Romney has made in the past, each year his actual "give-out" rate is close to 40% of his income.

The fact is no matter how high Romney pays his taxes, most of us here will continue to pay around 30% until Siemens lay you off.

"This is where a large percentage of your taxpayer $$$ go."

Large percentage? You don't know what you are talking about. It's a tiny percentage. And why are there so many people on food stamps? Ask the previous administration who's policies put all those people out of work in the first place.

If you want to talk large percentages, all one has to do is look at the percentage of income that Mitt Romney paid in taxes and then look at your own last income tax form. I'm willing to bet that you pay an higher percentage than he does, but that doesn't seem to bother you at all.

How about starting a new thread for your long winded conversations that have nothing to do with Siemens layoffs????

You may be correct when comparing public and private schools. When you compare small, single owner businesses to government you may also be correct when it comes to efficiency. However, when it comes to mid- to large-size corporations, the waste is at least, if not greater than, government waste. I've worked for both and have many acquaintances who have worked for both and they all tell me the same thing. Remember that you hear about government waste by exception. When government operates efficiently and effectively, which it does most of the time, you don't hear about it because it's not news. And being more transparent and political, there is always someone around to yell and scream about every inefficiency. Companies don't even bother to hide it any more. All of the lavish spending, bonuses, stock options that have nothing to do with performance or whether the company is making money or not are just considered as part of the cost of doing business.

There are also many excellent public school systems as well as bad ones. And the same holds true for private schools. The problems with the education system in the US are complex and go way beyond any differences between public and private facilities. However, blaming the government for everything is both easy and simplistic, and moreover, is quite in vogue these days. Simply cutting and eliminating government programs will not solve the problems they are designed to deal with. Turning everything over to the states will only force states to raise taxes. Ironically, if this were to happen, the states who tend to be most anti-Federal government would stand to lose the most since they tend to get the highest per capita pieces of the Federal budget. Funny how those who seem to benefit the most from government policies, including all of the tax preferences available to the wealthy, seem to complain the most about government. What do you think all the noise about Romney's taxes is about? No one is saying he broke the law. The problem with his taxes are that they expose all of the ways that people like him can shield their income or have lower tax rates for income that they didn't have to lift a finger for. Somehow it just doesn't sit well with those earning the average income of around %50,000 a year, and who work and sweat for that money, who will probably never even think about retiring before age 65 or having a vacation home, and who wind up paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes.

The big difference between the public sector and the public is the one thing that keeps private inductry slim and trim. Yes there are always exceptions but in the private sector, the owner (private business) or the controlling board of directors (publicly owned)has control and full blame for hiring/ firing decisions and therefore shoulder the responsibilities of a companies gains or losses. In the public sector the taxpayer is footing the bill and the managers/ directors/ officers are not directly fiscally resposible for losses so the ship is never run quite as tight. Rationalize anyway you want, but when the bottom line is paid for by the taxpayer, things are never run as efficiently as the private sector. The simplest example is private vs public schools; the private schools pay less for techers salaries and per student funding and do a far better job than the public sector. But the public sector is required to accept any and all students you say......well that is precisely the point......the public sector cannot bring its fat ass to do the right thing and throw out the troublsome students or the ones who refuse to make an effort. These students need a separate system for those who fail to adapt to minimum scholastic requirements, but should be given a chance at redemption, while being warned that continued failure will bring them back to the compromised schools. No one should be allowed to disrupt academic endevors under the guise of fair and equal treatment.......adapt or suffer consequences. These are the types of policies that the public sector will never get straight because those responsible are not paying for the bottom line.........the taxpayer is.

That last post was frightening, guess it is about time for Halloween!

Ssssoooo, on that cheery post, how about any news of layoffs? October 1 brings a New Fiscal Year to Siemens - any news?

"Talk about unions -- Check out the teacher in Poughkeepsie NY who stabbed another in the hallway 5-10 times with a screwdriver last year. She is still collecting a paycheck! Try that in a private company and you would be fired ON THE SPOT."

OK .. how about a corporate VP who physically attacks an engineering in the lab and is allowed to stay on the job for a few months before enough internal pressure builds up to let him retire gracefully, probably will all benefits intact. How about another VP who made sexual advances against several men and the company took years before they let him go. Since you know about Poughkeepsie schools, you must know about Tarrytown crimes as well. Once again, you only see things on one side and somehow believe that what occurs in private companies is all good, ethical, and proper whereas it is only public employees that get away with stuff. I won't even go into the issue of the same Tarrytown company that knowingly sold potentially HIV contaminated Factor VIII in Asians countries when the sale of that product had been banned in the US.

The point here is that bad things happen in both public and private settings. People are people and it makes little difference where they work. But you choose to only talk about the public sector and live in some sort of fantasy world that says that the private sector is good and pure and clean and almost at the level of being holy. You want to control or eliminate all public workers and at the same time, allow private companies to do anything they choose, regardless of how it impacts others. You say market forces will eventually straighten everything out, but it is hard to find a shred of evidence for that other than a few theoretical publications. You love to attack teachers, but I would like to hear your proposal for teachers without a union. How much would you pay them? What would class sizes be? How about benefits? Are there any circumstances under which a group of employees are entitled to negotiate as a group or even to strike? It's one thing to identify a problem; that's the easy part. It is quite another to come up with an alternative that can stand up to critical scrutiny and will really work in practice. For instance, the idea of year-round school has been talked about for years and has gained virtually no support from the general public. I hope you are not suggesting that the evil government of 'them' will impose such an unpopular thing on the American public against their will. Do you really think that our problems in education are simply a matter of the number of teaching days each year? If so, then you believe our shortcomings are due to quantity of education and not the quality; a position that is simply not accepted by most people in the educational business.

What could possibly cause such a bias against public employees (the evil ones who are part of the 47 % who believe they are entitled to living) and yet such acceptance and blindness to anything that private enterprise (the guys wtih the white cowboy hats)? Unlike such extreme positions, I agree that unions have done many bad things as well as the good things they have done for the American worker. I don't believe that the solution is to simply outlaw all unions as many on the right believe. Less drastic modifications would be far preferable to wholesale destruction of unions which might make us more competitive with China, but would also make us more like China in terms of workers and their working conditions and pay. Since I would hate to think that you have been brainwashed, I will simply chalk it up to someone who probably subsists on a diet of funny cigarettes, cheap wine, and low quality lunch meats.

I agree; unions have done a lot of good.

I also agree dropping tenure would help a lot. What would teachers do the other 180 days? Humm,,,,, maybe the school year could be extended. It is year round in Japan and many other countries. Sure as all heck the students coming out of school now a days are not up to par with other countries.

Talk about unions -- Check out the teacher in Poughkeepsie NY who stabbed another in the hallway 5-10 times with a screwdriver last year. She is still collecting a paycheck! Try that in a private company and you would be fired ON THE SPOT.

I agree the preventing of pollution is a good move. (By the way -- the EPA was formed under NIXON)

You are right that costs can't be passed on to consumers forever. You are also right that there is competition in many industries including the auto industry. There also appears to be collusion among the competitors who seem to raise prices in lockstep and offer special rebates and sales, etc. in lockstep. So much for 'free' enterprise.

The difference between government and private industry is that the government books are pretty much open; private industry books are not. There have been massive anti-government propaganda campaigns that concurrently sing the praises of a free enterprise system that has repeatedly needed to be reigned in by the government due to their economic abuses of power. The restrictions arose as a result of people demanding it; not as an independent cabal of politicans. But you'd say it is government regulations that is killing capitalism in America. I say I don't want to go back to 10-12 hour a day, 6 day a week jobs (imagine how this would affect unemployment numbers). I don't want to go back to widespread use of child labor. I don't want to go back to the days when there was no minimum wage. I don't want to go back to the days when any company could dump any of its waste anywhere they wanted to including our rivers, streams, and the atmosphere. I don't want to go back to the days when people were dying due to air pollution from cars, trucks, and power plants. I don't want to have to drive down the Indiana Toll Road and feel like I need a gas mask when I drive by the US Steel plant in Gary, Indiana (the plant is no longer in operation). Maybe you do, but if so, you are completely out of touch with the vast majority of Americans. You object and scream at any sign of power held by the government, yet are willing to give a blank check to the economically powerful companies that still pretty much control our economy.

You complain about teachers who only work 180 days a year (roughly 9-10 months). What jobs are you offering them to cover the rest of the year? There are many problems that have been created by some teachers' unions, but teachers pay is not among them. Simple question .... would you want a teachers job in your district with the pay you'd get? Could you live in your current lifestyle on teachers' pay? Is it the teachers fault that their chosen professions is not a year round job? The biggest problem in education, in my opinion, is tenure and the lack of performance review, with comcommitant financial rewards. Of course, one could argue that there are many apparently tenured people in private industry who never get fired for incompetance either (once again, this is far less transparent to the public than a teacher). Why don't you complain about those people as well? Simple answer: You are just like Mitt Romney's dad when he came back from his tour of Vietnam. You've been brainwashed and, in this case, I must agree with LBJ when he said: a light rinse would have been sufficient.

You just cannot pass added expenses on to the consumer forever. There will come a point where the consumer will no longer purchase from you, but go to a competitor .. It's called capitalism. The Big 3 auto companies tried passing the high cost of union labor ( and poor quality products) on to the customers .... and we know what happened there ... TV's used to be made in the USA RCA, Zenith,,, .. but again, high costs ended that. Have you looked at teachers parking lots lately. Sure they like their union, but when it comes to purchasing a car -- not from the Big 3.

"* so a person can retire at 45 and start collecting $100K/year. No way did they, our their employer, contribute enough to cover that. So they just tax the next generation."

Many companies allow for early retirement as early as 55. They also penalize those people taking early retirement by paying out less each month. Social security is structured the same way, allowing people to start receiving payments anywhere from ages 62 to 71.

But here is the big difference between private companies that you seem to idolize and the government: Private companies pay out millions each year in the form of 'golden parachutes' to the executives they lay off or fire for incompetance. Private companies pay huge bonuses to executives and unpper management even when they don't make a profit (do you remember what the banks were doing a year after the financial crisis hit?). And what happens to all those costs? The get passed on to us consumers in the form of higher prices. What I don't get is why you have such a big problem with taxes that are used to benefit all Americans (think of things like national defense, road construction, air traffic regulation, etc.) but don't seem to care at all that your every day expenses are being constantly raised to support expensive payments to people who don't need it in the first place and are actually being paid to be incompetant. Can you seriously defend a single bonus paid to anyone at Siemens DX over the past 5 yaers?

Let's get back to the point.
Siemens doesn't have the faintest clue what to do with these three companies.
So what they do is layoff and change responsibilities.
Just what they need.
Less people running around not selling what they don't know how to sell.
Then we have quality issues.
What is being done about them?
But it surely won't affect new methods.

I am a public employee and I don't scream that private has it better. I left the private sector purposely to work for a (somewhat) public entity. I sacrificed higher pay and perks private has to offer for the stability, better benefits and retirement of civil service. A few of my former co-workers at Siemens have been laid off since I have left, and I am pretty sure some of them will be laid off before they can retire--this is why I left.
We are all free to make choices: I made my choice for public, you sound like you made your choice for private. Don't whine about the choice you have made...either make a change or shut up.

Your firefighter example is an exception to the rule.

"pensions of civil service employees are ALL way to generous"

Can you give us some numbers to support your claims? What about pensions or 401k contributions that companies make that they just add to the price of their products or services? It's so easy to complain about the government because their books are open unlike private companies that waste tons of money. Should government employees not have any pensions or plans for their own retirement when private employees do?

Please supply some facts to back up your assertions or go back to your tea party.

"that R&D will be slowed/halted and layoffs will have to be made if the ACA isn't overturned."

1. How can an R&D organization that hasn't produced anything in 5 years or more be slowed down any more? Is is possible to have it go in reverse?

2. The only effect that ACA could have on DX is that there will now be more testing in the US. That alone should lift all ships in the DX business. Hard to see where testing would lessen under ACA, but don't let facts get in your way.

3. The whole statement would make much more sense and have an element of truth if the phrase 'ACA isn't overturned' were replaced with FDA issue can't be resolved quickly. It looks like someone was confusing three-letter-acronyms. I suspect significant R&D resources have already been consumed to respond to the FDA and I suspect additional resources will need to be diverted from new product development until Siemens satisfies the FDA.

Hey, if you don't like ACA, that's your right. But, at least, have some facts when you argue against it and don't try to blame every problem in the world on ACA. Next thing you know, someone will be blaming the NFL 'refs' on ACA ... you know, NFL costs just went up for healthcare, so they had to go cheap on referees.

"Despite what Mitt and Mitch tell you? How about the letter that Siemens sent out stating the costs that it will be forced to pay (and unable to raise prices)? followed up by the summation that R&D will be slowed/halted and layoffs will have to be made if the ACA isn't overturned."

And you believed it!!!
Give me a break.
Since you obviously can't figure it out, they were giving the board the reasons why they will fail.

"Doctors also hate Obamacare."

Do you have any data to support this assertion?

Most polls show that a majority of people approve of many of the features of ACA including provisions dealing with pre-existing conditions, limits on the profitability of insurance companies that are nothing more than intermediaries and contribute zero to actual medical care, annual physicals, raising the age that dependents can be covered. The biggest negative is the mandate for coverage which has been the subject of a negative propaganda attack unequalled in American history. Strangely though, the mandate is a big benefit to both insurance companies and all medical care providers since it will add millions of potential customers. If there would be any reason that doctors themselves would oppose ACA, it would be that they can't handle the extra patient loads which is just a symptom of the shortage America faces in physicians. Data shows that despite a significant increase in the American population, the number of medical school graduates has remained unchanged since 1980.

The anti-ACA people with all of their lies of death panels, etc. had their time in 2010. Parts of ACA are already in effect and guess what? the world hasn't come to an end and most people seem to like the improvements to their medical care. The Supreme Court has spoken as well so the unconstitutional argument is gone and most Americans accept Supreme Court rulings, in general. There have been few, if any, reports of real problems caused by ACA. Despite all of the above facts, there is still a small contingent of loud-mouthed people who will continue to fight ACA to the death without being able to give any real, factual reasons why ACA is worse than what we had before.

The same kind of attacks occurred when Medicare was created. After almost 50 years, it would be hard to find many people who oppose Medicare, per se and most people seem to want it continued and strengthened. How can I be so sure of this? Just look at the reaction to the Ryan budget which proposed to phase Medicare out and replace it with a voucher system. G.W. Bush proposed a similar thing with Social Security which got nowhere once the outrage of the American people was known. If the Ryan plan to phase Medicare is so good, why aren't Romney and Ryan running on it now? Why are they so afraid to keep talking about their ideas? Why are they afraid to give any details on just about anything they propose? Yes, Medicare has some problems (although ACA actually delayed the 'day of reckoning'), but the answer to every problem cannot simply be to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Good leaders find ways to fix problems, not just bury them. One big part of the problem now is due to the unfunded Medicare Part D which a cynic might say was created, but not funded, by the Republicans for the sole purpose of bringing Medicare to 'bankruptcy' sooner.

For those of you who have big problems with the size of the national debt, check out how much it has increased under various Presidents (Republicans will be shocked by the facts) and then check out what parts of the actual debt arise from the so-called Obama stimulus (the percentage of total debt from the stimulus is quite small) and then look at how much of the national debt is due to two unfunded wars, Medicare Part D, and two tax cuts (mostly for the rich) at a time when our country was at war. Do you really want more of that?

Despite what Mitt and Mitch tell you? How about the letter that Siemens sent out stating the costs that it will be forced to pay (and unable to raise prices)? followed up by the summation that R&D will be slowed/halted and layoffs will have to be made if the ACA isn't overturned.

Despite what mitt,mitch and the other preachers of doom tell you, if you look at it closely the DX business will do well under the affordable care act.
END QUOTE

Sure thing! Maybe in China.
DX will continue tanking everywhere else.
Remaining 1400 layoffs will continue through end of December.

Doctors also hate Obamacare.
It there ever was a reason to get this guy out of office...

Despite what mitt,mitch and the other preachers of doom tell you, if you look at it closely the DX business will do well under the affordable care act.

They are in severe panic mode.
Not only cutting people but also restructuring the
entire sales force at the same time.
What a mess!

What "levers" does DX have to pull at this point to stay afloat, other than to pull the "cut costs" lever? There's no new product coming out in the near future, is the "expanding the market" lever working at all? DX will have to continue to "right-size" or risk capsizing - DX is simply too big within Healthcare to sink.

It's because 9 out of 10 employee's hired now are "temps". 11.5month contracts with no benefits. LA already has a bunch as well as east coast facilities.

I agree. What is the point of the CP headcount reduction if there is not at least some sort of "soft" freeze on new hires. I don't get it.

There are many vacancies on the Siemens website. Looks like the company just wants to churn people. The cost to bring new people on board is going to be a whole lot more than letting go all those employees in the near future.

3 DAYS TO GO UNTIL THE END OF FISCAL 2012, HOW MANY GET AXED OVER THE NEXT 3 DAYS??

You're the one who is blaming and laughing at Siemens management, not the LA people.

On time would have meant that Siemens' expectations of DPC were met. Among those was that the manufacture of reagents had been rigorously documented in a manner that was relatively easy to transfer to a reasonably skilled manufacturing site. Siemens would have probably been alot better off had they tried to transfer DPC reaents' production to Walpole rather than Llanberis, but that is water under the bridge at this point. The fact is that other companies have managed to transfer complex reagent manufacture that requires organic synthesis to relatively unskilled personnel who don't have or need Ph.D.s or years of training in a specific complex task. They are trained to follow directions and, when necessary, to tweak the reagents to meet specifications. What they need is a clear set of directions and a process that allows them to make as many trial lots as is required in order to adjust the documentation to remove any ambiguities. It appears that such things never happened in the old DPC and that they didn't even try to transfer the capability to Llanberis if for no other reason than to hedge against the possibility of an earthquake or fire that could shut LA down for a while. Siemens only added to the problem by not even recognizing it for a long time and then not knowing how to correct the problem. Siemens is far more likely to turn a problem over to the next level down manager than to go out and look for the experts that they still employ who can actually fix things (I seriously doubt if they even know who or where those experts are).

As a consequence, the people in LA have been living in a paradoxical, surreal world for a few years. At times they can sit back and laugh at Siemens management and taunt them about how they are being paid to do virtually nothing and at other times they know it's going to end sooner or later and they have to suffer through the suspense of guessing when the pink slip will come their way. It's not a pretty picture no matter how one looks at it and it, once again, goes back to how poorly Siemens did their due diligence prior to all three of their purchases.

"The real reason is no managers are capable of cleaning up the potential mess AFTER LA close, and nobody wants to touch LA and ruin their career path, so everybody stays out of it.
END QUOTE

Gotta be once of the most ridiculous comments I've read here."

Let me tell you why it's not ridiculous at all. If you close LA on time, people will say it's piece of cake and should have been closed long time ago; if you close LA a few months late, well, you can't even close LA on time and you're a loser.

LA really is a sinking boat that will suck everything into it. If you want to get promotion, then stay away from LA. Just look at how many Germans left LA and DX after the first couple of years.

Remember they're smart insiders, why they didn't try to stay and close LA if it will bring them all the glories?

Plus free food & rental!

YES! WE WON'T PAY IMCOME TAX ANYMORE.

Vote for Obama and everything will be OK

Sorry, but the on decision when and how to close LA does not reside anywhere in LA.
END QUOTE

No one ever said it did. EF might be in charge of LA but he resides in Wales. He runs the Llanberis site.
As it turns out he'll be paying LA a visit this week also.

What happened to the loyal DPC'ers and the person who hates the ones who work at LA? Haven't seen their rants lately and I honestly do miss reading all the vitriol!

Sorry, but the on decision when and how to close LA does not reside anywhere in LA. It might be in Tarrytown and it might even be in Germany. The people running LA are simply puppets in a lawn drawn out tragedy.

Does EF still put Siemens branded prizes under chairs in town halls?

Exactly!
Ruin someones career path?
My goodness.
If anything the person who finally closes LA will get a promotion.
That being said, LA, has shown to have nine lives.
LA's existence is in the hands of one man...EF.
The decision to keep it open or close it and the timing will be his to make.
Everyone Department head there knows this.
Llanberis Rules!

The real reason is no managers are capable of cleaning up the potential mess AFTER LA close, and nobody wants to touch LA and ruin their career path, so everybody stays out of it.
END QUOTE

Gotta be once of the most ridiculous comments I've read here.

Siemens wants deadwood director Like Alex. G Flanders not capable leaders

There was that too, but that was before Siemens entered the picture. It seems to be quite difficult for acquiring companies to find ways to smoothly integrate cultures, or let the ones that work well operate on their own. And when you acquire three new companies at once that have significant overlap in product line, you have to expect intense rivalry as each group tries to promote themselves and put the other people to try to save their jobs. Siemens seemed completely unprepared for this kind of behavior and doesn't seem to know how to deal with it other than the 'we are one big happy family and we are all on the same team'.

Some companies manage these integration issues very well, but they are few and far between. Siemens is clearly not one of them.

So are you saying there was no Dade vs.Dupont turf war? De. and Chicago can't stand each other - this is obvious to anyone with a pulse.

look, will you f&*^% off and stop eroding your finger skin typing. No one cares about siemens beyond the humorous observation it sounds a bit like semen.

Bayer was falling apart, period. Centaur, which they bought, was getting old and each new upgrade was a bit worse that its predecessor. Advia IMS was going down the drain and yet, Bayer did learn one thing from their Tarrytown experience. They learned how to peddle a rosy future to the next sucker, much as Cooper did to them in 1989. What has happened is that the conflicts, politics, backstabbing, etc. has now been extended elsewhere. But it's not all Tarrytown's fault. Each of the three companies came into the famil with big attitude problems; each believing that they, and only they, possessed all the talent and that they were far above the other as well. Tarrytown people got blamed by LA once it started to sink in that LA had no long term future in the Siemens family. That decision came from Germany; Tarrytown was only charged with carrying out the edict. Tarrytown people sort of looked at DPC as a child or much younger sibbling. When the DuPont people came on board and JRA took over, they fell all over themselves singing the praises of DuPont and JRA and ridiculed the other two family members.

The reason most of the focus remains on Tarrytown is that this kind of culture is much more in line with their recent culture and they are just a bit better at it through sheer practice.

[ Leadership has done nothing to bring people together, and very little to discourage the still on-going turf war that is Dade vs. Bayer vs. DPC ]

Bayer was falling apart by internal turf wars well before Siemens acquired them. Nothing has changed since the acquisition.

siemens wants what the germans always want: people who will do what they are told no matter how right or wrong their directives may be.Questioning is not allowed and severely punished.

Remember, Siemens wants MANAGERS, not LEADERS.

And if anyone ever figures out who's driving the bus, let me know...

It was four people, and they were good people.

What we have is an absence of leadership within Siemens Dx. The latest team is no better then the last, maybe one of the worst in fact. They garner no respect, no confidence from general staff in thier abilities, and no-one will ever go the extra mile for any of them. There is no strategy and no executive skill. There exists only paint-by-numbers reactions to blips on the general ledger.

There are good people from the former entities that - if given the chance - could really turn this into a world-class organization. These people work together well, respect one another, care about the customer, and know this business. People are screaming to be led by someone, anyone..

Alas, Siemens isn't after that.

Leadership has done nothing to bring people together, and very little to discourage the still on-going turf war that is Dade vs. Bayer vs. DPC.

To Siemens, Dx is a mechanism to fill out the portfolio - nothing more, the people within it just moving parts easily replaced and assimilated into the uncreative, uninspired, finance-driven organization that is Siemens.

Good people are looking and looking very hard, and leadership is to blame. This is the way things are....

You're absolutely right! It's smart to stay out of LA. If Siemens really wants to close LA, they'd already done it years ago. So stop to worry about LA, but yourself.