Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Date: |
Fri, 4 Apr 2014 10:09:48 -0400 |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
8bit |
In-Reply-To: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
<as a municipality, don't you have a further concern related to Public Records?>
And any Freedom of Information regulations set for municipalities in Canada. I also think there are some local and federal Canadian laws and regulations regarding retention of certain records. You would have one heck of a list of "exceptions" in order to meet most legal requirements. If you plan to cover as many record values as possible with one retention for all emails, you will be keeping a huge amount of emails for a very long time - adding to the search burden when required to produce particular correspondences. What you are proposing is not a "different approach." It has been put in place in many government and private sector organizations, usually by IT policies, to the detriment of the organization. Take a look through many of the RAIN postings to see how the courts view a short term "unified" retention for all emails.
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]
|
|
|