Multiple Asst Financial Ward Clerks

[chrisgrant]

Our usage of the clerk calling was in response to instructions from our mission president and our area authority Seventy. We just do what we're told.

The mission president is aware of this change.

My point is that low-level functionaries should not be implicitly criticized for their actions, when their actions were at the behest of their priesthood leaders. "For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?"

[russellhltn]

My point is that low-level functionaries should not be implicitly criticized for their actions, when their actions were at the behest of their priesthood leaders.

Point noted. However, at the end of the day, it still went against what the even higher leadership wanted.

[chrisgrant]

My point is that low-level functionaries should not be implicitly criticized for their actions, when their actions were at the behest of their priesthood leaders.

Point noted. However, at the end of the day, it still went against what the even higher leadership wanted.

So, should we have gone over the head of the Area Authority Seventy and the Mission President to get their instructions countermanded?

[russellhltn]

So, should we have gone over the head of the Area Authority Seventy and the Mission President to get their instructions countermanded?

Are you saying the mission president can do no wrong?

I'm not pointing fingers at the ones who complied, but the ones that wanted it done.

[chriswoodut]

My point is that low-level functionaries should not be implicitly criticized for their actions, when their actions were at the behest of their priesthood leaders.

Point noted. However, at the end of the day, it still went against what the even higher leadership wanted.

So, should we have gone over the head of the Area Authority Seventy and the Mission President to get their instructions countermanded?

I'm not sure anyone is blaming anyone. They simply said in the past access was granted to get to information the callings didn't have but likely needed. Now, those callings will get access under their own calling to the data they need and this work-around is no longer needed.

[chrisgrant]

So, should we have gone over the head of the Area Authority Seventy and the Mission President to get their instructions countermanded?

Are you saying the mission president can do no wrong?

No. I'm asking what the protocol is for going over the head of our regional file leaders. I can't find where that's discussed in the General Handbook.

I'm not pointing fingers at the ones who complied, but the ones that wanted it done.

How are you communicating your finger-pointing to the Area Authority Seventy and the Mission President? Are they monitoring this forum?

[russellhltn]

Now, those callings will get access under their own calling to the data they need and this work-around is no longer needed.

Hopefully. However, it also seems to be the case that some people have a different understanding of their calling than what the authors of the Handbook had in mind.

[scgallafent]

Our usage of the clerk calling was in response to instructions from our mission president and our area authority Seventy. We just do what we're told.

The mission president is aware of this change.

My point is that low-level functionaries should not be implicitly criticized for their actions, when their actions were at the behest of their priesthood leaders. "For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?"

And my point was not to criticize your actions, so I apologize if you took it as a criticism.

[russellhltn]

I'm asking what the protocol is for going over the head of our regional file leaders. I can't find where that's discussed in the General Handbook.

An assistant clerk can talk to the clerk. Ward/ward assistant clerks can talk to the stake clerk who is responsible for their training (and has the ear of the stake president). As a last resort, they can talk to support. I doubt of support would do much, but it does make them aware and if it's really bad, they may get someone involved. They might also have some tips on how to respectfully "push back" on the request.

[klricks]

The letter said you can only have one of each.

Thanks for that clarification.

I've since found out this change is aimed at those units that used the clerk calling to grant access to information.

In that regard.....Does the Church have the ability to detect or prevent login sharing? I predict that will become a greater temptation now...