I don't think anyone is suggesting the automatic destruction of the
records. I fully agree that the owner should be notified of the upcoming
destruction. The problem is getting that owner to respond in a timely
manner. In my experience the owner tends to not want to authorized
destruction until they check with Legal and Tax (and anyone else they can
think of). This is why we reversed the process at a former employer. It
broke the log jam caused by the reluctance of the owner to authorize
destruction.

The issue becomes problematic when you enter the realm of electronic
records destruction. Here the review and authorization to destroy may not
be possible due to sheer volume of records up for destruction. It is easy
to quickly review a listing of 100 boxes, but if the records in the boxes
were instead electronic you might be faced with reviewing and authorizing
the destruction of hundreds of thousands of individual records. Don't know
of many records owners who would be willing to do this. But in many ways
the reason for the review and authorize process done for physical records
is obviated by the hold process built into ERM systems, since only records
not on hold are put up for destruction. The problem with e-records is the
sheer volume that is destroyed on a weekly or monthly basis.

There is no one right way to do destruction authorization, each
organization will have to develop a process that meets their needs and
allows them to destroy records in the ordinary everyday course of business
in a consistent manner.

On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 1:59 PM, Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
>
> Seeing as we aren't the owners, we don't have the right to simply dispose
> of them because the retention has been met. And no, we don't see it as our
> "duty" or "responsibility" to automatically do this- we see our
> responsibility being the notification to organizations that records THEY
> OWN being close to meeting their retention period and requesting them to
> provide approval for the destruction, by returning a written
> acknowledgement.
>

-- 
Peter Kurilecz CRM CA
[log in to unmask]
Dallas, Texas
Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org
http://twitter.com/RAINbyte
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/RAINbyte/
http://paper.li/RAINbyte/rainbyte
http://pinterest.com/pakurilecz/archives/
http://pinterest.com/pakurilecz/records-management/
http://www.linkedin.com/in/peterakurilecz
Information not relevant for my reply has been deleted to reduce the
electronic footprint and to save the sanity of digest subscribers

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]