--000000000000689e1505f3473ba9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Ok, --and sorry it's taken me so long to respond on this today-- I propose we request an additional eight business days due to the bank access issue. It takes a ridiculous amount of time to add/change users with the smaller banks, especially when there is an international component to the change. Could we get this done in a week, maybe. 8 days would ensure it. We may be pushed to make it happen in a week anyway. Also, and I think we're already all on the same page here, we should push to pull the trigger for all employees at the same time as one package event to help with the morale/confidence issue with these kinds of events. @Timothy Thomas , if you happen to have the data, I'd calculate the total daily and weekly compensation (Salary / 2080 x 8 x 1.15% for a day, and Salary / 2080 x 40 x 1.15% for a week, then multiply both of those x 0.75 to convert to USD) to put the cost into perspective for Tad and make it relatable. I.e. if the total personnel being delayed a week cost us $15,000 USD --made up number--, and your at risk of disrupting $20,000USD of billing --made up number-- (or losing access to $2.87M of USD in cash in Canadian banks -- real $) it doesn't seem so painful to wait. @Angie Markwell I'll make myself available whenever on Monday. Regards, Ethan Stein, CFA Treasurer TheKey.com [image: TheKey] On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 11:29 AM Timothy Thomas wrote: > My understanding is that those individuals listed are the only ones with > access to the company bank accounts in their respective markets, in > addition to Lindsey Fancy in Winnipeg. > > We're working through a plan to address those who still hold billing and > payroll functions and I should have a timeline soon. > > On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 2:12 PM Ethan Stein > wrote: > >> Thanks Tim. Tough one on #1 there. When you say, "Banking" are any of >> these a situation where they're the only existing employee that has access >> to the bank accounts? Is there anything these folks are doing (with the >> bank or otherwise) that we do not have another employee or process to move >> to that would prevent us from operating the business, or substantially >> disrupt it? i.e. the payroll person in Calgary is eye opening and from my >> perspective a strong case of the need to keep them in place or no one will >> get paid. It seems like this is larger than just the banking access needs >> and we should speak to it as such (if that's an accurate view). >> >> Regards, >> Ethan Stein, CFA >> Treasurer >> TheKey.com >> [image: TheKey] >> >> >> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 8:19 AM Timothy Thomas wrote: >> >>> Hi Ethan, >>> >>> Here are the individuals still involved in financial operations in Canada >>> >>> 1. Tim Thomas Sr. - Bookkeeping and banking functions for Montreal >>> 2. Charles Terlesky - Bookkeeping, banking, billing and payroll for >>> Calgary. I spoke with Gary Scott who informed me that he has two new >>> resources joining