> This means an unapproved batched and drawn-out phaseout would be a breach of contract.
You could brownout or kill a few a few days before the real issue, though, potentially.
You could brownout or kill a few a few days before the real issue, though, potentially.
What one could try is to call the CEO directly. Or maybe try the legal backdoor: contact the general counsel, tell them that the contract says such-and-such, that you think the contract is well written and you intend to do what it says, but that the organization should be aware that it may cause a problem. If legal doesn’t know how to get the CEO’s attention, then something is very wrong.
> 4 meetings, 124 emails, and two phone calls a day for the last 14 days have warned them of this.
There's only so much you can do.
> If legal doesn’t know how to get the CEO’s attention, then something is very wrong.
From the thread legal (and / or compliance) is the setter of the issue, and was well aware that it would cause issues (for a minority), but they were not in charge of resolution. And from downthread posts, they likely extensively documented their warnings:
> oh I’m absolutely backing the horse with the 3 miles of email threads proving this
And methinks legal and compliance had very much planned for the issue coming to a head, because they were getting fed up with being blow off, and having to shoulder the legal or regulatory risk.
A year to make fixes and nothing was done?
Legal is like, "We warned you every way we possibly could have."
"two phone calls a day for 14 days" is far from insufficient notice, to say nothing of the rest.
There's value in face to face, but not when it's a wide reaching announcement like this.