The global retention schedule should reflect the geographies in which the 
global enterprise operates and the corporate governance structure over 
those geographical regions.  For example, if a corporation has 
operations/offices/entities in Europe, one retention schedule would cover 
the EU, and another covers non EU countries, if need be.
US, Canada, Mexico make up another region due to the free trade agreements 
among these countries. 
Another possible region is ASEA (Australia and Southeast Asia).
And so on.

Tony Laino, CRM
[log in to unmask]

From:   "Stearns, Jason" <[log in to unmask]>
To:     [log in to unmask]
Date:   2014-09-24 04:49 PM
Subject:        Global Schedule v. Regional Schedules
Sent by:        Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>

Hello all:

I’ve recently rejoined the list after some time away… and I’d like to get 
opinions on the following:

Please share what you see as the pros and cons of having a single global 
retention schedule or having a schedule for each region of the globe where 
there are operations.

I have my preference, but based on what I am hearing around the firm there 
are arguments to be made for both. What are your experiences with these 

Thanks in advance for sharing.



Jason C. Stearns, CRM, IGP
Director | Legal & Compliance | BlackRock
40 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10022
Email:   [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>

This message may contain information that is confidential or privileged. 
If you are not the intended recipient, please advise the sender 
immediately and delete this message. See for 
further information.  Please refer to for 
more information about BlackRock’s Privacy Policy.
For a list of BlackRock's office addresses worldwide, see

© 2014 BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved.

List archives at
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 
mailto:[log in to unmask]