As one who previously had a pretty bad fire in my commercial records
center, I am completely disappointed that some of you chose to have a
discussion about evil CRC's trying to make money and the evil ways we do
it - (which, just like Iron Mountain, is what I'm in business for) -
and especially about their "attitude" - while the fire is still
burning.
Can you guys quit the second-guessing and give them some time to put the
fire out. I'm sure at some point, they'll fill you in. Just because
they are "big" does not mean that everyone you want to talk to or hear
from is not busy.
In my case, I really didn't have time to let you guys know too much.
I'm willing to bet that they are in the same position.
This is a difficult time guys. Give them a little slack.
Thanks
R. Stephen Richards
President & CEO
Richards & Richards
Nashville, TN
615-242-9600 phone
615-242-2100 fax
www.RichardsandRichards.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Graham Kitchen [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 9:31 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] Iron Mountain Fire in East London
Larry:
British organizations do not have to follow a US fire standard, but yes,
they should have one that meets the requirements of British structures.
As for the attitude of the Iron Mountain representatives..... That is
puzzling. They make their money by telling us that they will be
performing the contracted services, but when an incident happens, they
try to put us in the wrong. What is wrong with this picture?
An employee's attitude will most often follow the attitudes of the
employer. That is to say, if an employer is off-handed about safety,
then the employees will have the same attitude. As an example, lets use
the Titanic....... "It's unsinkable".
And I am not singeing out just Iron Mountain, I am talking about any
business. They are there to make the largest profit possible. That
means charging the most for the least effort. Whatever happened to
pride of accomplishment and good value for money spent?
GT
Graham Kitchen
Corporate Records Manager
Unified Western Grocers
5200 Sheila Street
Commerce, California 90040
Telephone: (323)264-5200 Extension 4560
Cell: (323)243-1865
email: [log in to unmask]
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Records Management Program
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Larry Medina
> Sent: Friday, July 14, 2006 6:23 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Iron Mountain Fire in East London
>
> On 7/14/06, Rachel Howse Binnington <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > I saw this on the BBC website and thought ya'll might find
> it interesting,
> > especially the comments of the Iron Mountain Representative:
> >
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5175568.stm
> >
> > "Mostly it is old archives that were not required
> currently, business
> > records. . . In most cases we wouldn't even know because
> most people they
> > use paper documents in boxes - commercial business
> records." He added: "We
> > are just interested as anybody else to know what could have
> caused it. It
> > was a fair-sized warehouse but it was full."
>
>
>
> I always find it "interesting" how a certain vendor
> characterizes the losses
> of their clients and what they feel their personal
> responsibility is related
> to those losses.
>
> If you recall when some data tapes were lost in the not too
> distant past,
> and it should be easy to recall, because it happened a couple
> of times in a
> short time frame (at least those losses that were publicized)
> they felt that
> the data was likely not compromised, but it SHOULD HAVE BEEN
> ENCRYPTED...
> and that became their mantra after the losses, that everyone
> should start
> encrypting their data, or better yet, using their "trusted
> service" to send
> them the data live and online instead of sending all of those
> antiquated
> tapes all over the place... I mean, I'm sure this is a much safer
> solution... and after the tape losses, I'd certainly be looking to get
> involved in another business venture here.
>
> Now, I'm sure that if businesses had their records on
> fireproof paper, or
> had decided to store everything in vaults, they would have
> been protected
> and this wouldn't have happened. But as you read about the
> fire in Ottawa,
> there was a comment made by the service provider that the
> fire protection
> systems met standards... including in-rack sprinklers.
> However, it didn't
> sound as if the facility itself did. And obviously, the
> business practices
> left a little to be desired, if the reports coming out about
> someone using a
> torch on the roof to repair a leaky pipe that resulted in
> embers burning
> through starting the fire was the actual cause. 600,000CF of
> records on the
> upper floor of a building with no firewalls to separate the
> contents into
> 250,000CF volumes?
>
> As many members of the NFPA232 Technical Committee have attempted to
> convince the commercial storage industry, sprinklers alone
> ARE NOT ENOUGH to
> stop a fire once one starts... and they ARE going to start.
> In fact two of
> them did in two days... and that's reminiscent of what happened in New
> Jersey in the past.
>
> We never saw a formal report on those fires, the only thing
> I've ever seen
> is they were suspected to be arson, or "of a suspicious
> nature", but none
> the less, the clients lost all of their holdings in those
> fires as well.
>
> And what of the Bow, London fire? The numbers I've heard are
> 1.6M CF of
> records stored in a newer facility... I wonder what the construction
> standards were there and if they followed the NFPA232 "Standard for
> Protection of Records" guidance about compartmentation, fire
> detection,
> sprinklers, having a facility inspected by a Fire Marshall,
> annual fire
> drills, copies of the fire plan kept off site, etc...
>
> Maybe yes, maybe no... but after all, these were nothing more
> than "archives
> of inactive business records". Of course, clients DID SEE FIT to pay
> monthly storage charges, fees for servicing the contents, fees for
> accessing, and a firm to manage their information assets as
> though they
> obviously were of some great value to the owners, otherwise
> they wouldn't
> have entered into a contractual agreement with a service
> provider to store
> them.
>
> Well, we'll just have to see how it plays out in the court of public
> opinion... and maybe in the court of law.
>
> Larry
> --
> Larry Medina
> Danville, CA
> RIM Professional since 1972
>
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
>
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
