Message-ID: <11880879.1075840958182.JavaMail.evans@thyme>
Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2002 04:39:41 -0800 (PST)
From: louise.kitchen@enron.com
To: rob.milnthorp@enron.com
Subject: RE: Headcount Latitude
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-From: Kitchen, Louise </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=LKITCHEN>
X-To: Milnthorp, Rob </O=ENRON/OU=NA/CN=RECIPIENTS/CN=RMILNTH>
X-cc: 
X-bcc: 
X-Folder: \ExMerge - Kitchen, Louise\Sent Items
X-Origin: KITCHEN-L
X-FileName: louise kitchen 2-7-02.pst

I think there are issues with this as essentially we are changing the business model - we need to hire into the areas we are lacking people asap in order to ensure we have coverage as much as possible.
 
Will your people mopve to Houston?

-----Original Message----- 
From: Milnthorp, Rob 
Sent: Mon 1/28/2002 5:00 PM 
To: Kitchen, Louise 
Cc: 
Subject: Headcount Latitude



Louise, given the number of declines, is there any latitude in moving up the Canadian Headcount. I believe we cut very deep on the 1st go round. Specifically, there is  a couple of analysts and one manager on the commercial side and on the non-commercial side we'd like to have at least one if not two admins for answering the phones (Admins are roughly U.S. $15K/annum and ours are extremely good). We still might come in under our initial headcount given the decline probabilities, but I would like to offer additional jobs asap as opposed to waiting for responses. 