Thank you, John D., for expressing better than I could that "For the RM
people it is probably more important that beyond the notion of
retaining something for x number of years they are going to actively
have to ensure that the material is managed and available in someway
for that period."
That was the point I was trying to make in describing organizational
directories, policy manuals, orders, and directives.
I'm still mulling over Bill's comment that "Then again, most of the
corporate attorneys I know today would be
tickled pink if they called up 20 years from now to inquire about a
record series and found that it had been destroyed as part of a
retention program." Yes, of course, I know that there might be
scenarios in the private sector where the existence of records might be
scary. I actually wasn't thinking necessarily of a situation where
someone sues an organization, and the corporate body is a defendant.
My experience is governmental and the focus of my posting this week was
organizational directories, policy manuals, orders and directives.
Such policy records may come into play when an organization is a
plaintiff, not the defendant. See page 6 of the Complaint in Walker v.
Cheney, available at
http://news.findlaw.com/cnn/docs/gao/wlkrchny022202cmp.pdf . You'll
see that this document from 2002 cites a then superceded GAO General
Policy Manual from 1990. Although that manual had been superceded, GAO
still was able to provide a citation for what it's stated policy was as
of May 1990. That's why I noted the need to preserve rather than
merely overwrite some of the dynamic webposted content within your
organizations.
Thanks, John, it was good to hear your perspective from down under!
Take care,
Maarja
________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
