|
|
Enron Mail |
Was it not January when we were back and forth and back and forth to
London/Helsinki? And despite the fact that the date sequence from London looks funny, it would seem that Nigel on the 17th of February is talking about beginning the process (actually debating the process) of background checks? ---------------------- Forwarded by Sally Beck/HOU/ECT on 02/24/2000 06:28 PM --------------------------- Steve W Young 02/17/2000 03:51 AM To: Ted Murphy/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Sally Beck/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Background Checks ---------------------- Forwarded by Steve W Young/LON/ECT on 17/02/2000 09:52 --------------------------- Steve W Young 17/02/2000 09:50 To: Nigel Sellens/LON/ECT@ECT cc: John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT Subject: Re: Background Checks If they are still employed (presuming all but Ilkka are still on the payroll) then I believe this should be requested. As a matter of principal it should have been done for all in the first place and there should be no reason why it could not be done now. Admittedly the reasons will now be obvious for the request, we can simply tell those checked that it was overlooked originally. Relative to Ilkka, there is no harm in requesting it as well. Presuming he won't consent then we can discuss further. Nigel Sellens 17/02/2000 07:41 To: Steve W Young/LON/ECT@ECT, John L Nowlan/HOU/ECT@ECT cc: Subject: Background Checks I have made contact with the security folks in Houston and been advised of what we need to do. One obvious point is to understand the legal aspects of such a check. I have now spoken to a Finnish lawyer who has advised that any employee background check (to include credit checks and bank checks) must have the prior written approval of the employee concerned and this would need to be provided to the source of the information before it is handed over. I assume we need to re-think whether we want to go down this route given that this check process will now have a very visible profile in the Helsinki office. What are your views?
|