Message-ID: <14228735.1075858879849.JavaMail.evans@thyme> Date: Mon, 24 Sep 2001 10:37:45 -0700 (PDT) From: j..kean@enron.com To: sarah.palmer@enron.com, cindy.olson@enron.com Subject: RE: Revised LIOTL E-Mail Script Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-From: Kean, Steven J. X-To: Palmer, Sarah , Olson, Cindy X-cc: X-bcc: X-Folder: \SKEAN (Non-Privileged)\Kean, Steven J.\Sent Items X-Origin: Kean-S X-FileName: SKEAN (Non-Privileged).pst Has Koenig seen the IR section? I don't agree with the statement that they have not done a good job communicating with analysts and investors. I can't believe he would think that's accurate. -----Original Message----- From: Palmer, Sarah Sent: Friday, September 21, 2001 11:37 AM To: Denne, Karen; Kean, Steven J. Cc: Clark, Mary; McVicker, Maureen Subject: Revised LIOTL E-Mail Script Importance: High Steve and Karen, Here is the latest draft of the Lay It On the Line memo from Ken. Cindy made some signficant changes this morning. Some of the action items removed were mandatory vacation, leadership training, online communications training, the function of Employee Relations and the employee task force. Mary and I agree that, as it stands now, there is not nearly enough "meat" to warrant a communication to employees. Sending out a memo with a "theoretical" approach and few significant, tangible action items will backfire. As an FYI, I was told by several people, including one in HR, that employees are reacting very sensitively to any changes that are announced. I think we should wait to communicate this until we have solid, positive action items. << File: laysurveymemo.doc >> Warm regards, Sarah Palmer Internal Communications Manager Enron Public Relations (713) 853-9843