|
|
Enron Mail |
Vince,
I agree - I'll talk with Sherriff when he gets back to London next week. - Dale Vince J Kaminski 11/07/2000 20:49 To: Dale Surbey/LON/ECT@ECT cc: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Steve Leppard Dale, My recommendation is to make Steve the head of the research unit in London. We were talking originally about September but I think we should accelerate this process. Of course, Anjam will be very unhappy about it, but we cannot manage around him any longer. I think that the promotion should be combined with a salary increase. I would like to offer him a significant increase that goes with expanded responsibilities and much higher visibility. A salary increase will also bring him closer to the market. We see the market for technical people going through the roof in practically every location where we operate. A contract is not a good solution in my view. It creates a sense of false security for both an employee and the company. I shall send a message to John Sherriff with my recommendation. I shall cc you. I would appreciate if you could bring it up with John as well. Vince Dale Surbey 07/11/2000 10:23 AM To: Vince J Kaminski/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Steve Leppard Hi Vince, HR is working on a mid-year salary review for London people that have a noticeable gap between their compensation at Enron and what we would have to pay in the market for a replacement. They highlighted Steve as someone with a potential gap - particularly in light of what we're seeing in our quant recruiting effort for credit trading and research. I'd like your opinion on the best way to make sure we keep Steve happy and keep him at Enron. There are several things I see we can do: 1) Give him a mid-year pay increase to move him closer to market. I'm not sure this is the best way to go, especially if we only offer him a token salary increase. 2) Offer him more responsibility: What are your thoughts on timing for making Steve the official head of the London research team? With my move to EBS, should we accelerate this? I think this is good way to keep him happy and motivated, and then follow up with a more meaningful salary review at year-end (as part of the regular process) that takes into account his greater responsibility. 3) We have some people that we're trying to get under long-term (3-yr) contract with a 12-month notice clause. Obviously anyone signing one of these will want significant up-front compensation for being handcuffed. We've not had a lot of success with these here in London, and I would prefer to keep Steve happy so he wants to stay with Enron rather than contractually binding him to the job. I'd value your thoughts on this. Thanks, Dale
|