LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 15.5

Help for RECMGMT-L Archives

RECMGMT-L Archives

RECMGMT-L Archives


Next Message | Previous Message
Next in Topic | Previous in Topic
Next by Same Author | Previous by Same Author
Chronologically | Most Recent First
Proportional Font | Monospaced Font


Join or Leave RECMGMT-L
Reply | Post New Message
Search Archives

Subject: Re: Nitpicky Terminology Question
From: "Seibolt, Robert" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To:Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:Wed, 8 Jun 2005 08:52:59 -0500

text/plain (23 lines)

Charis Wilson, MLS, CRM wrote:

"It has been proposed by this colleague's organization that they rename
their retention schedule and call it disposition schedule.  My argument
is that ultimately the purpose of the schedule is to tell the
organization how long to RETAIN records, hence it should be called a
retention schedule.  As I see it, any disposition instructions within
the schedule are a secondary function only."

I agree with calling it a retention schedule.  In today's tightening
records environment of regulations like Sarbanes-Oxley we are seeing
retention periods that are increasing not decreasing. Retention periods
that were once 15 years are now 50 years for the exact same records
series. In my humble opinion, the current trend is moving towards
retaining more and disposing of less and then only after extended
periods of time.

Rob Seibolt
Records Management Aquila
[log in to unmask]

List archives at
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

Back to: Top of Message | Previous Page | Main RECMGMT-L Page



CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager