Talk:Reconciling a ward account that has not been reconciled for more than two months
I see a couple of significant problems with the criteria suggested in Section 1 that could make these instructions completely unusable in some cases -- precisely the cases where people need the most help. Specifically, the instructions say to "locate within MLS the last month where the reconciliation was completed, all categories should have no unreconciled differences, and no Temporary Items were used."
- It seems much better to look at the paper reconciliation reports, rather than looking in MLS. If any corrections were later made to items in a month that was successfully reconciled, it may well be that that month will no longer reconcile in MLS. Some wards have so many corrections that it may be impossible to find a month that actually reconciles in MLS.
- If you can find a month that reconciled on paper, but it doesn't reconcile in MLS, you may need to create some temporary items for corrections that were made to items dated on or prior to the statement date, but at least you will have a starting point.
- Why is it necessary to have no Temporary Items used on the reconciliation? Temporary Items are entirely appropriate in many cases -- they are the only way to properly handle certain situations. If one of the problems being dealt with is a chronic carrying forward of Temporary Items (which I have seen more than once), then this criterion by itself will make it impossible to find a starting point.
If you make it impossible to find a starting point, the rest of the instructions are pointless. Now I would agree that if you can find a month that reconciles in MLS and has no Temporary Items, then it will be easier to move forward from that point. But that is an argument for making those recommendations, not requirements as it is currently worded. -- Aebrown 19:59, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback. This article was meant to try and cover many different reconciliation issues. The reason they should not consult the paperwork is partially for the reason you stated, it is outdated. Too many times we work with clerks on the phone who show they had no unreconciled differences when they consult the paperwork, then we look in MLS and find there have been check category adjustments, deposit category adjustments or voided checks. This article had to fit these circumstances as well. If we tried to find the starting month using the paper reconciliation reports, these clerks would have a false month to start with and end up wasting a lot of time trying to reconcile with these instructions.
- The reason there should be no Temporary Items is because the majority we see at headquarters when we're assisting a clerk should not be there in the first place. The only way this article works is if they find that "ideal" month with no unreconciled differences and no temporary items. Having worked personally with many different clerks trying to reconcile, we can easily find that "ideal" month the majority of the time. Once they have the starting point the rest of the article guides them through the process of reconciliation. With some clerks we cannot find the "ideal" month and then we need to take additional steps to push the balances and then come forward. This article does not address that, it encourages them to contact the stake.
- This article went through our department and was edited by many who have 20 plus years of reconcile experience. Many changes were made to the original draft. We deal with clerks in these type of situations everyday. I'm glad that the article is prompting this discussion and a nice thread as well on the clerk forum. I love any feedback we can get. Anything we can do to better assist new clerks in the difficult process of reconciliation should be our goal. Levi 21:15, 21 August 2009 (UTC)