Michelle,
 
Mary Joyce, David Oxley, and myself discussed the potential exposure of the sick pay policy in light of the WARN notice essentially being "working at home".  Therefore, we wanted to address with you the possibility of adding exclusion to the sick policy for this situation.  Let's discuss; please call me at your convenience at 52407.
 
Thanks
Chris
 
-----Original Message-----
From: Butler, Pam 
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 3:04 PM
To: 'FMackin@aol.com'; Cash, Michelle; Sullivan, Kriste
Cc: Barrow, Cynthia; Rahaim, Christian; Oxley, David
Subject: RE: Revised Restated Plan Docucments; 1 of 2
 
The plan documents sent yesterday are what has been faxed already to the Board today as you will all recall I had a 1:00 pm deadline today.  Therefore, someone needs to take the ball and run with it to determine which documents need to be executed when the Office of the Chair makes a decision this week.    Thanks.  
 
 
   -----Original Message-----
From: FMackin@aol.com [mailto:FMackin@aol.com]
Sent: Sunday, November 18, 2001 2:55 PM
To: Butler, Pam; Cash, Michelle; Sullivan, Kriste
Subject: Revised Restated Plan Docucments; 1 of 2
Attached is one of the plan documents that has been revised in the following manner: 

The beginning of Section 3.2 was revised to include a "subject to" provision. 

Section 3.4 was separated into two parts.  Part A is the original provision.  Part B is a new provision. 

Using this revised design, every laid off employee, whether subject to WARN, would receive the same net amount of severance benefit, whether a WARN penalty had to be paid by the employer, whether a WARN notice was given in advance of layoff, or whether WARN did not apply to the lay off in any way. 

I've received a thumbs up from Michelle for the revisions, which are marked in the attached document to facilitate your review. 

Pat 

The second plan document will be sent as an attachment to a separate email. 

[New Years Resolution:  Learn how to unzip bundled files.]