I work in the healthcare service and like many of the London Trusts we have a heavy involvement in our clinical IT systems by a big US company – we would often have online Teams/Zoom meetings with both their UK and US offices.
In the last six months they were taken over by another US healthcare company – at the last meeting we had with them they were now adamant that these meetings could not be recorded and shared with other teams.
Any reason why this would be? Is there something in the US that prevents this and how are they able to apply that to their UK offices?
It’s a real pain as we now can’t share these meetings with our teams so only the staff able to attend can experience them.
|
Has anyone asked why?
Some US folks are edgy about EU/UK data laws....
|
|
A colleague was co-opted onto a team meeting as secretary and instructed he'd have to write up the minutes, so he recorded the meeting. At the next meeting, he presented the minutes and one of those present, vehemently denied saying what was minuted. Colleague promptly produced the recording. He was taken aside after the meeting and informed "if Isaid I didn't say that, then I didn't say it". Colleague's role as secretary was terminated!
|
Embarrassingly no I haven't asked because at the last meeting I was way down the pecking order... I might ask one of our IT team but I get the feeling that their UK office don't like it as it means them having to write up and send out numerous PP presentations to cover rather than just the recordings.
|
>>"if Isaid I didn't say that, then I didn't say it"
What a dick
(Not you bathtub tom)
|
>> A colleague was co-opted onto a team meeting as secretary and instructed he'd have to
>> write up the minutes, so he recorded the meeting. At the next meeting, he presented
>> the minutes and one of those present, vehemently denied saying what was minuted.
The minutes of the second meeting should have recorded fully and clearly the reasons why those of the previous meeting were amended. If, for example, there was a technical mistake (acronym confusion?) or perhaps words used in anger then an amendment is reasonable.
One place I worked there were one or two people who, at every meeting, had an amendment, usually grammatical to the previous minutes. Both lawyers, one at least of whom enjoyed his reputation as a bit of a gadfly.
It was a sport for them.....
|
|
I worked with somebody who as a very junior member of staff acted as secty and took minutes at a regular meeting of significantly higher level staff. Whenever something in the minutes was questioned he would shuffle the papers and appear to read from what he had in his hands to justify the written meeting notes. Complete theatre, but was always supported by the senior manager who chaired the meeting and had already accepted the notes!
|
Recording meetings - Bromptonaut
