- 4 -
whatsoever, any of such confidential information or trade secrets
of CMS" without the prior written consent of CMS.
Apparently, petitioner's term of employment with CMS began
with a 90-day probationary period, which he successfully
completed. His "Probationary Employee Performance Evaluation",
dated October 17, 1989, reflected that he had met the
requirements of four out of five separate areas of performance,
and he was recommended for "regular status". Rather than a check
the box rating with respect to an area of performance designated
"Knowledge", the following comments were made on the evaluation:
It has been determined that you meet requirements for
the purpose of attaining regular employee status,
except in the area of knowledge where you require
significant support to augment your minimal knowledge
of the industry. However, as you are aware, the most
critical measure of performance for this position is
the generation of new business. Your performance in
this area is vital to the company's growth and
development, and will be the primary basis for future
evaluations.
According to a Managerial Performance Evaluation, dated
January 2, 1990, petitioner failed to meet the overall
requirements for his job because he had failed to secure any loan
servicing contracts. The evaluation indicated that petitioner's
objective was to increase the loan servicing portfolio by a
minimum of 60,000 new loans through subservicing contracts with
other financial institutions on or before the second quarter of
1990, which he apparently failed to do. Consequently, petitioner
received a "Fails to Meet Requirements" rating.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011