RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 27 Dec 2010 16:11:48 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (29 lines)
Pat's description of what's going on here makes sense as written and
naturally, it's following what the laws/statutes of the State and the more
convoluted local laws/statues that accompany it are.

If this were a corporate model though, it would be like having an RM Policy,
which includes an approved retention schedule and then having to renegotiate
the approval for disposing of records every time they reach their assigned
retention.

Further, it seems as if a format makes a difference for how the law/statute
is written (?)  If it's written for 'correspondence', and you change from
(or add) e-mail to written, then the retention period and policy no longer
apply?

I understand what Pat was saying about e-mail has attachments and they could
be a spreadsheet, a document, an audio file, a picture, etc... but those
same things could be enclosed in written correspondence, so in my mind the
rules SHOULDN'T change because of the format- you may have added challenges
managing it in the native format if it has a lengthy retention, but that's a
separate issue.

Larry
[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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2