<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>E-Discovery Blog Canada &#187; Records Management</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/category/records-management/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog</link>
	<description>E-Discovery Canada - One Byte at a Time&#60;SUP&#62;TM&#60;/SUP&#62; - Wortzman Nickle Professional Corporation</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Feb 2012 17:14:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Litigation Readiness – Nickle Live from LegalTech 2010</title>
		<link>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/2010/02/03/litigation-readiness-nickle-live-from-legaltech-2010/</link>
		<comments>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/2010/02/03/litigation-readiness-nickle-live-from-legaltech-2010/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 Feb 2010 16:13:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[LegalTech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Records Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigation readiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[policies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-discovery Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigation readiness software]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[records management policies]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/?p=163</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Interesting. I just attended a workshop titled &#8220;Litigation Readiness: The Impact of the Records Management Program&#8221;.  According to the panel, following a market research survey, 80% of companies surveyed reported having a records management policy. I found this statistic extremely high and query whether these reported policies are updated, followed and audited regularly. I have my [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting. I just attended a workshop titled &#8220;Litigation Readiness: The Impact of the Records Management Program&#8221;.  According to the panel, following a market research survey, 80% of companies surveyed reported having a records management policy. I found this statistic extremely high and query whether these reported policies are updated, followed and audited regularly. I have my doubts about that.</p>
<p>However, only 60% of those policies contained a litigation readiness component, and only 20% of those utilized litigation readiness software.  Further only 38% of those companies had a litigation response team in place to handle all of the e-discovery phases.</p>
<p>Also interesting &#8211; in the panel&#8217;s view (and these were employees of a service provider) the effectiveness of a litigation readiness program is based 90% on the policies and the team put in place, and only 10% on the software. In their words, technology is merely an &#8220;enabler&#8221; in the quest for defensible litigation readiness.</p>
<p>More later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/2010/02/03/litigation-readiness-nickle-live-from-legaltech-2010/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Policies of Privacy, Records Management and the Recession</title>
		<link>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/2009/10/29/the-policies-of-privacy-records-management-and-the-recession/</link>
		<comments>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/2009/10/29/the-policies-of-privacy-records-management-and-the-recession/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:50:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>admin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Records Management]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[litigation readiness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[policies]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[e-discovery Canada]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[personal information]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[PIPEDA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy policy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/?p=122</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Wortzman Nickle has been actively working  on records management policies and litigation readiness protocols.   In our experience,  privacy issues and the treatment of personal information are frequently raised as concerns.   There are many reasons for a company to appropriately collect and retain an individual’s personal information.   However, once the information is collected, certain obligations arise under applicable [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Wortzman Nickle has been actively working  on records management policies and litigation readiness protocols.   In our experience,  privacy issues and the treatment of personal information are frequently raised as concerns.   There are many reasons for a company to appropriately collect and retain an individual’s personal information.   However, once the information is collected, certain obligations arise under applicable privacy legislation.</p>
<p> The recent economic recession has resulted in a rise in privacy complaints, largely because companies are more frequently collecting personal information and they are struggling with the manner in which they handle it.</p>
<p> Several provinces are reporting a significant increase in employment related privacy complaints.  In particular, it appears that employers are asking for personal information such as SIN numbers and other information to enable them to perform credit checks on prospective employees even prior to an offer of employment is made.  In some cases, the employer is not even advising the employee that a credit check will be completed.  This collection results in a number of problems: a lack of consent for the collection of the personal information, a failure to advise that a credit check will be performed, the inability of the company to justify why a credit check was required at that stage, and potential problems relating to the retention and disposal of the personal information.</p>
<p> The best way to deal with these issues is with defensible policies and protocols.</p>
<p> Is your business governed by PIPEDA?  Is your policy falling short?</p>
<p>The <em>Personal Information Protection Electronic Documents Act </em>(“PIPEDA”) provides that companies must obtain appropriate consents; collect only what personal information they require for their business purposes; safeguard the information appropriately; and, dispose of the information as soon as the purpose for which it was collected is fulfilled.</p>
<p> To ensure your records management program is consistent and doesn’t run afoul of privacy laws, review your program as a whole.  Ensure that your retention policy integrates well with your privacy policies and all other litigation readiness protocols.  If your policies do not work well together, it’s time for a rewrite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.wortzmannickle.com/ediscovery-blog/2009/10/29/the-policies-of-privacy-records-management-and-the-recession/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

