I agree with the suggestions from both John and Fred.  However, you need to also document the possible risks to the organization from the overly complex retention schedule, the lack of vital record identification, and the lack of inclusion of inactive records in the schedule.  Don't be afraid to pull in compliance risks also, legal understands legal risks and may not have considered all possibilities.  For example - are some of the records in storage no longer created but still need to be retained for business, fiscal, or legal reasons?  If so, the company is at risk if these records are not part of the "official" records management policy (think spoliation during litigation) - which includes records retention and disposition policies and procedures.  If the company has such a complicated retention schedule that no one actually follows it OR if the schedule is stand alone from the rest of the RIM processes, then the cost to find records and documents when needed can become cumbersome.

The retention schedule is a piece of the whole, and showing where the risks lie can also show the inadequacies of the schedule being a part of the whole RIM program.  Try to avoid "that's not the way it's done" or " in the past we did this" and point to possible future risk and expense.  This way management will look at your reasoning as protecting company assets and not just protecting your "turf."

Ginny Jones 
(Virginia A. Jones, CRM, FAI) 
Records Manager 
Information Technology Division 
Newport News Dept. of Public Utilities 
Newport News, VA 
[log in to unmask] 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]