Tech Forum

We are trying to migrate to CHI2's policy of differentiating between assignments and callings. It looks like MLS assumes every position is a calling and asks for sustaining and set apart. But for assignments we do not sustain or set apart. But we do want these assignments to roll up to the web site.

How do we do this properly in MLS? Right now we are putting these positions in without a set apart check, but it still requires a sustaining date. And there is no way to distinguish between callings and assignments.

We could put all "assignments" in the non-leadership role, I suppose.

Thoughts?

tortdog wrote:We are trying to migrate to CHI2's policy of differentiating between assignments and callings. It looks like MLS assumes every position is a calling and asks for sustaining and set apart. But for assignments we do not sustain or set apart. But we do want these assignments to roll up to the web site.

How do we do this properly in MLS? Right now we are putting these positions in without a set apart check, but it still requires a sustaining date. And there is no way to distinguish between callings and assignments.

While it is not correct, we use the "called" date as the date sustained to make MLS happy. Those who will be sustained do not (normally) serve until they are actually sustained. Those who are assigned may begin serving as soon as they receive the assignment.

lajackson wrote:While it is not correct, we use the "called" date as the date sustained to make MLS happy. Those who will be sustained do not (normally) serve until they are actually sustained. Those who are assigned may begin serving as soon as they receive the assignment.

I get letters from the temple saying people are "called" as temple workers, and my stake wants these recorded in our ward MLS, but they don't even give me a date to put in to "make MLS happy."

kisaac wrote:I get letters from the temple saying people are "called" as temple workers, and my stake wants these recorded in our ward MLS, but they don't even give me a date to put in to "make MLS happy."

I would use the date on the letter.

But, I hear your real concern. It is imprecise, it is not correct, and it is contrary to everything a good clerk would be comfortable doing in keeping accurate records.

We toyed with adding a label to the position as "assigned", e.g., "camp director - assigned", so on review of the positions for which people have not been set apart, we would then ignore any positions labeled as "assigned".

tortdog wrote:We toyed with adding a label to the position as "assigned", e.g., "camp director - assigned", so on review of the positions for which people have not been set apart, we would then ignore any positions labeled as "assigned".

I just mark them as set apart when I enter them. It may not be strictly accurate but this checkbox isn't a permanent church record so I don't worry about that. It does help us keep track of who still needs to be set apart and that's what's important in my view.

lajackson wrote:... it is contrary to everything a good clerk would be comfortable doing in keeping accurate records.

And when they are "unassigned," how do you remember who was not sustained-do they get a proper "release" if not actually called, or just a "thank you?"

kisaac wrote:And when they are "unassigned," how do you remember who was not sustained-do they get a proper "release" if not actually called, or just a "thank you?"

Here, everyone gets a proper call and release. The only difference is that they are told they are serving in an assignment and will not be sustained.

Even so, we usually ask if they would like to have a blessing. Most do; to some it does not matter.

When they are released, they are thanked, but their name is not presented in any meeting to announce their release.

We only have a few positions that are not sustained. Our executive secretary keeps track of them for us. Since we are a stake, they all still go to the high council for approval, and our record of stake PEC business reflects those callings and releases that are or were by assignment only.

There should be a more accurate way to do this. That being said, MLS and the LUWS are coming along nicely. Although it may indeed be uncomfortable, I agree with eblood66... you have to track what you are doing with the tools available to you. This time we side with the "spirit" of the law, as it were

My thought is we need to discriminate based on assignment/calling in MLS so we don't have to scratch our heads and recollect whether the person has to be sustained/released/set apart each time the person in a position is changed.