“Did you say so?”
“Yes.”
The billionaire leaned forward.
“What happened afterward?”
The technician looked toward her supervisor.
Then answered.
“My schedule changed.”
The financial officer intervened.
“Staff schedules change constantly.”
The CEO turned toward him.
“That's true.”
For a moment, he seemed relieved.
Then she continued.
“Which is why the timing and reason should be reviewed rather than assumed.”
The technician looked down.
Her hands were trembling slightly.
The CEO noticed.
She spoke gently.
“Thank you for answering. Your technical concerns need to be evaluated independently. Your employment situation should be reviewed through an appropriate process as well.”
The billionaire rubbed his forehead.
He had known about the acquisition.
He had known the fleet required routine maintenance.
He hadn't known that an employee had repeatedly raised discrepancies without receiving a satisfactory resolution.
And he certainly hadn't known that a major buyer would hear about those concerns before he did.
He looked toward the maintenance technician.
“How long have you worked here?”
“Twelve years.”
His expression changed.
Twelve years.
An employee who had spent more than a decade maintaining his aircraft.
He should have recognized her.
He should have known her name.
Instead, he had to ask.
He looked toward her folder.
“Do you have the original reports?”
“Yes.”
“Then provide them to the appropriate reviewers through the formal process.”
She nodded.
The CEO turned toward her legal adviser.
“Please coordinate access and preservation with Crestline's technical and legal teams.”
The adviser agreed.
The meeting continued.
For the first time that afternoon, the billionaire seemed more interested in finding the truth than protecting his pride.
But the financial officer looked increasingly frightened.
Because the technician's records led somewhere he desperately hoped the reviewers would never go.
The outside maintenance provider operated from a facility several states away.
It had been selected as part of a cost-reduction initiative two years earlier.
The company possessed legitimate technical capabilities and employed qualified personnel.
But its relationship with Crestline had grown unusually complicated.
Several invoices had been approved quickly.
Some work packages contained vague descriptions.
And the dates on certain maintenance summaries didn't align neatly with the records later supplied.
The initial discrepancies weren't enough to prove fraud.
Aviation maintenance documentation could be complex, and administrative errors were possible.
But the independent reviewers found a pattern that justified further investigation.