Hi Peter

I absolutely agree with what you say here about professional accountability.

I wish it was in isolation but experience tells me that this situation is one of many like this - some employers still perhaps hope that employees don't know their rights. I do not think that there are people that necessarily start out deciding to adopt bad practice but I can imagine when strong overbearing influences are at play, say from a demanding and unreasonable manager, this can drive some very wrong decisions to be made.

I do agree with your disgust that a company that provides HR advice has demonstrated such poor practice of their own.

With regard to the wider point of recognition and registration - I'd just say be careful what you wish for. I worked within an industry (nothing to do with HR, it was just the sector I worked in) with that kind of professional recognition which had been hard won - but there were a lot of implications that hadn't been anticipated. Membership fees had to sustain a system of regulation and inspection resulting in an increase that was significant, CPD was mandatory and had to cover specific areas, and systems were much more prescriptive.

What was of more concern (particularly in light of our profession) was the ability for a complaint to the regulator to be used as a 'weapon' (for want of a better word). I was aware of cases where people had complaints made about them (on the basis of professionalism) because the outcome of a grievance hadn't gone their way. The resulting hearings (even when concluded at the investigation stage because there was no case to answer) could be expensive and damaging.

Finally, anyone who wanted to was easily able to just call themselves something different - so rather than HR professional, you are an Employment Adviser, and the protected status is removed but you're free to do whatever you want. Bad practice can remain, and just give itself a different title.

Sorry if this comes across as jaded - but I'd be really concerned if this was our future direction. And if it was, I'd want to think very carefully about how the possible issues might be sensibly avoided.

None of which conflicts with your original point though - that when we get such examples of bad practice, that there should be better accountability, and I share your hope that no one involved with that case is a member of the CIPD.

Nina

I personally am still surprised regularly by senior member of HR teams having no accreditation or qualifications at all.

Having come from a H&S background I remember someone talking to me about "holding my self out" which I think is a legal term where if you gave advice but weren't qualified to give that advice then you could be personally liable... That was over 15years ago now!

IIn my opinion we missed the generational opportunity given by granting of Chartered status to radically change this area. A lack of vision from the profession I very much regret

In reply to Nina Waters:

Having worked most of the last fifty years in professional environments of one kind or another I appreciate your caution Nina, but I feel it comes down to a personal choice which no-one accepting the responsibilities of the HR role can avoid.

That choice is simple: Self-interest in retaining the "cloak" of non-responsibility for the harm our role, if badly practiced by the untrained or incompetent, or unintentionally poorly executed by ourselves, might do; set against the interests of those we profess to serve as employers or clients, relying on our advice, guidance and professed expertise to facilitate their good-practice of their role (whatever that might be)?

Personally I am quite happy to be held responsible for my practice, because I do not knowingly exceed my knowledge or (current) understanding and when I am uncertain of my competence I either say so or go find the answer before offering a definitive opinion. That has been so from the date I first serviced an aircraft before passing it to its pilot as fit for flight (in my area of competence), from the first patient I ever treated at the roadside after they had involved themselves in the loving embrace between their high-speed car and a high-inertia tree, and more recently from the first time I advised a manager that the offence one of their people had committed could be considered Gross Misconduct, opening up the possibility of their dismissal, inability to pay their mortgage, buy their child's new bike for Christmas, or pay the leasing on their partner's car.

I do not consider the responsibilities and potential exposures to criticism or sanction you list as in any way offsetting the damage that incompetent or deliberately irresponsible practice can do to clients, by those whose interests are profits or expedient outcomes through use of a "professional" title they do not merit, but currently share with me, to the detriment of not only employees and their families (as in the case in point), and to my professional credibility (and perhaps also status and justified earning capacity) with an employer or client.

Although now nominally retired, I did not spend he last twenty-five years or more practicing HR simply to earn its rich financial rewards; to wield life-changing (or business harming) poor or ill-informed judgement at will, or to ingratiate myself with an employer who wanted to "get rid" of a troublesome, disabled, or non Christian employees, or a junior team-member who would not accept his advances. I spent the time informing myself of ways in which HR practices could make a positive difference to the efficiency of businesses and the wellbeing and welfare of employees (including also picking up a formal NEBOSH H&S Qualification alone the way). Objectives I am still seeking to achieve.

If the cost of registration to me is to defend myself against malicious accusations occasionally, or to be held accountable for errors I have made that my greater diligence could have avoided, or to suffer any of the other detrimental hazards of informed poor practice that you outline, then that is a price I, as a personal decision, am prepared to pay if it concurrently removes the incompetent, inefficient, or plain opportunistic who can presently sully my profession with their use of its titles and implied authority to wantonly or unwittingly cause harm to employees or businesses.

If we want to right to "talk the talk" and be taken seriously by business SMTs, (and others) then we have to accept the responsibilities of "walking the registered professional walk". and I for one will be prepared and happy to do so.

P

In reply to Peter:

Peter

I concur with pretty much every word of your post.

I'm not familiar with the history of any previous attempts, resistance to the concept and so on - so the question to those that are is 'why hasn't this happened already?'.

In reply to Alun:

Unfortunately, I have worked with people who are HR Directors with no accreditation or qualifications, its mind bogling. I recently saw a person who had been a HRM, just complete his L5 and he has been working in the NHS as a HRM for 3 years!