• Replies 25 replies
  • Subscribers 3 subscribers
  • Views 2676 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Latest People Management Cover a disgrace

Katie Nalty

Hi All,

I have just received the latest People Management magazine and I am absolutely outraged by the cover which mimics a real solicitors letter addressing a case of unfair dismissal.

I am absolutely horrified that the CIPD would do something as stupid as this!

My building has a communal post service and I would  hate for my neighbours to think my company were gulity of such a thing, more so I feel for HR professionals who have their magazine posted to their work places as I can't imagine the idle gossip it could cause.

I will certainly be taking this matter further and hope that such a well respected professional body would not act so recklessly In future, I am sure other subscribers feel the same way.

Parents
  • Another HR bashing headline from People Management just popped into my inbox
    www2.cipd.co.uk/.../fewer-than-9-000-new-parents-took-shared-parental-leave-last-year.aspx

    This time, apparently the reason people aren't taking Shared Parental Leave is because HR aren't explaining it to them.

    I'm sure it is our fault entirely and the fact that many organisations offer some form of Occupational Maternity Pay, whereas Shared Parental Pay is only at statutory rate has nothing to do with it at all!

    In all the cases I have experienced, people have a very good understanding of Shared Parental Leave, but it simply doesn't make sense for them to end their maternity leave early because they would lose out financially compared to staying on maternity leave and continuing to receive Occupational Maternity Pay. However, the article makes absolutely no reference to this at all.

    It is a flawed system and until a Tribunal rules that if an organisation offers occupational maternity pay, it must also offer shared parental pay at the same rate, take up will remain low. The difficulty you will get then though is that some organisations will simply remove their occupational maternity pay (although hopefully the increasingly competitive recruitment market will make that less likely)

    Most professional magazines support their profession. I'm not actually asking that, but please stop blaming us for things that aren't our fault - or at least give us the option of lower membership fees that doesn't include receiving People Management.
  • in reply to Teresa
    I have to disagree with you Teresa. Surely it is the fault of HR that there's a disparity between occupational maternity pay and the rate fathers get? Isn't it up to HR to recommend new policies which support fathers at work in the same way as we've historically supported mothers? Especially given the number of reports that younger fathers want to be more involved in parenting.

    To my mind pointing out where something is not working or could be improved is not bashing but challenging existing practice - something we should all be doing as the people experts.
  • in reply to Anna
    I was writing my post at the same time as you were, Anna :)
Reply Children
No Data