Everyone - As someone earlier pointed out, if you don't want to have to
keep records for an indefinite time, conduct a payroll equity audit.
Document your findings, adjust salaries as indicated, and keep to your
regular retention schedule.  The only reason for the old files is to
track discriminatory acts as far back as the plaintiff can claim they
occurred.  With Ms. Ledbetter, it was about twenty years.  

 

Of course, attorneys don't understand records management.  They
specialize in law, record managers specialize in record management.
That is why you want both on a committee designing a company's policies
on document retention.  Mutual education should be taking place, but it
is not reasonable to expect everyone to know everything.  (Although some
of you on this list seem to contradict that statement.) 

 

Bottom line - if you haven't discriminated based on a LOT of different
classifications of employee, the question is irrelevant.  If you cannot
be sure of your guilt or innocence, get a written recommendation from
your attorneys.  Then any mistakes can be blamed on them

 

Margie

Margaret M. deMarteleire

HR/FLSA Analyst

CDI Corporation

1717 Arch Street, 35th Floor

Philadelphia, PA 19103

(215) 636-1219

 

 

-----Original Message-----
Subject: Re: Ledbetter Act

 

On Fri, Apr 24, 2009 at 11:37 AM, Link, Gary M. <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

 

> Hmmmm. A "Permanent" retention for all Personnel Files?  The Act does

> not remove the statute of limitations. It says the statute of

> limitations starts again  "each time wages, benefits or other

> compensation [are] paid resulting in whole or in part from [ a

> discriminatory] decision or other practice."

 

 

 

Once again this points up that many if not most attorneys don't
understand

records management and more especially how retention is determined.  as
an

aside i'm reviewing a retention schedule that has been developed by a
law

firm for a small non-profit organization and it is what you would
expect. A

nice long laundry list of document types but with no tie back to how
those

documents are filed. oh! and they forgot to provide citations to the

regulations

-- 

Peter Kurilecz CRM CA

[log in to unmask]

Richmond, Va

Information not relevant for my reply has been deleted to reduce the

electronic footprint and to save the sanity of digest subscribers

 

 


______________________________________________________________________
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain information which is confidential to, and/or privileged in favor of, CDI Corporation or its affiliated companies (CDI) or CDI's customers.  Any review, use, reproduction, disclosure or distribution by the recipient is prohibited without prior written approval from an authorized CDI representative.  This notice must appear in any such authorized reproduction, disclosure or distribution.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message and any attachments.  Thank you.

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]