Message-ID: <25450262.1075853126202.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 09:57:20 -0700 (PDT)
From: michelle.cash@enron.com
To: twanda.sweet@enron.com
Subject: FW: Mid Year PRC
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Cash, Michelle </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=MCASH>
X-To: Sweet, Twanda </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=Tsweet>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \MCASH (Non-Privileged)\Cash, Michelle\Sent Items
X-Origin: Cash-M
X-FileName: MCASH (Non-Privileged).pst

Please arrange as many of these as you can.  Michelle
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Skinner, Cindy 
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 11:04 AM
To: Cash, Michelle
Subject: FW: Mid Year PRC
Sensitivity: Confidential


Attached is the email between Robin Johnson and Melissa Becker I described to you.
 
Also, while at Nepco, I would suggest you have an introductory meeting with:
 
    John Gillis (President) 
    Dan Haas (SVP of Operations)   (#2 guy)
    Mike Indivero (Sr. Dir. - HR)
    Robin Johnson (Lead Generalist)
    Gloria Rivas (HR Training & Dev.)
    David Lund (AGC)
 
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Skinner, Cindy 
Sent: Friday, July 20, 2001 1:31 PM
To: mike.indivero@nepco.com
Subject: FW: Mid Year PRC
Sensitivity: Confidential


 

Mike:
 
I was somewhat disturbed by Robin's email below and unclear as to why Melissa Becker needed to know how NEPCO participated in the PRC process.  I would like to discuss this with you as soon as you return from your trip.  I realize NEPCO is a little different.  However, Robin and the rest of the NEPCO team need to understand that as long as they are part of Enron, they will, in some form or fashion, participate in the current performance management process.  Robin needs to discontinue using the term "forced" and begin using the term "preferred".  Also, please explain to Robin that in the overall EEOS PRC meeting held in Houston, in which both John Gillis and Dan Haas participated as voting committee members,  the Enron-wide preferred distribution process was adhered to.  I would like to clear up this confusion as soon as possible.  
 
Thanks,
 
Cindy
 
-----Original Message----- 
From: Walton, Sheila 
Sent: Thu 7/19/2001 6:52 PM 
To: Skinner, Cindy 
Cc: 
Subject: FW: Mid Year PRC



FYI.  Is it wise to put this in writing??? 

Sheila 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Becker, Melissa 
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 9:37 AM 
To: Walton, Sheila; Yowman, Andrea 
Subject: FW: Mid Year PRC 


FYI 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Johnson, Robin 
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:38 AM 
To: Becker, Melissa 
Cc: Mike.Indivero@nepco.com 
Subject: RE: Mid Year PRC 


Hi Melissa: 

Sorry for the late response.  NEPCO did not participate in the preferred 
distribution for PRC.  The only group that I am aware of within NEPCO that 
was "forced" to recognize it was the HR department and we are still 
discussing the outcome of that exercise and forced ratings.  Let me know if 
you have any other questions! 

THANKS! 

Robin Johnson 
HR Manager 
11831 North Creek Parkway, North 
Bothell, WA  98011 
425-415-3178 
Fax:  425-415-3199 


-----Original Message----- 
From: Becker, Melissa [ <mailto:Melissa.Becker@ENRON.com>] 
Sent: Monday, July 16, 2001 1:41 PM 
To: robinj@nepco.com 
Subject: Mid Year PRC 


Hi Robin.  Hope all is going well in Bothell.  I have a quick question 
about PRC ( the performance review process we use in Houston).  Does 
NEPCO use the same process of 360 feedback, followed by assigning 
employee ratings based on a preferred distribution, followed by 
communication with the employee?  I heard that some parts of NEPCO use 
it and some don't.  Could you give me the "lowdown?"  Thanks! 