Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: GraceZ who wrote (145045)	1/21/2002 3:57:47 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 436258

Another way of looking at that though, might be that Ms. Watkins wasn't really a whistle-blower, per se. Hers was an internal memo sent to Skilling and Lay. Her first sentence asks if some relatively new employees (herself) would have the op to become rich like long-termers had. I think that was the catalyst for the letter, which then went on to point out the looming problems Enron had that could cause implosion within two years. JMO, but I think she wanted Lay and Skilling to fix these problems. This may of course mean Ms. Watkins is brilliant after all. Had she left Enron to apply for some other position, she'd have been proscribed from telling a prospective employer anything bad about Enron. The new employer would then wonder what she'd done wrong she was leaving the seventh largest company in the world. Had she taken her findings public, probably no one would have believed her at that time. When her information would have been confirmed, she'd be just another whistle blower and, as you say, persona non grata. Pointing out problems to Lay and Skilling in that memo that would become public was probably the best move she could have made. It shows her to be insightful, loyal, skillful, multitasking, bright and helpful.

To: GraceZ who wrote (145045)	1/21/2002 4:33:00 PM
From: maceng2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

I've never heard of anyone who got rewarded for this kind of honesty unless it results in a happy ending. Well, the idea is, when your a paid employee, you come up with solutions to problems, no matter how hard the problem is. And the solution is a "happy ending", that's why you get paid. Simple question is whether said employee was doing her job or not. Looks as if she was just asking the right questions. Problems were apparent. She was just wanting to understand them. You have to do that before you can think of a solution.