Editors Blog

Of the many measures announced in last month's Emergency Budget to concern employers, perhaps the least surprising was the confirmation the coalition government plans to scrap the default retirement age (DRA) of 65.

The government revealed it would "quickly phase out" the DRA from April next year - although offering no timescale for this process - and consult with employers on how best to do so. What again?

Continue reading "Coalition should have given date to scrap the default retirement age" »

Desperate times call for desperate measures it seems. With the economy remaining in such a fragile state and deep and painful spending cuts looming large, should the UK follow Spain's example and cut the pay of public sector staff?

A measure that would have previously been inconceivable to public sector HR directors should now been considered, according to some. It's a strategy several private sector employers have been forced to implement as a way of cutting costs and limiting job losses.

A fair way of doing it would be for directors to take a larger hit on their salaries, with a sliding scale for managers and employees. The lowest paid - those earning less than £18,000 - should be unaffected.

This move - no matter how abhorrent in may sound to the trade unions - would only be a temporary measure; when the financial climate improves pay can be reinstated to previous levels.

But will HR directors have the steel to go through with it? Will they have a choice? It may be that an across-the-board pay cut is imposed by chancellor George Osborne in the emergency Budget.

Now the political wrangling has subsided and the new coalition government is in place, HR professionals working in the public sector might be advised to adopt the brace position.

Billions of pounds in spending cuts, the details of which will emerge fully in the coming weeks, are set to provide the toughest challenge for public sector HR teams in decades.

Pay freezes, job cuts, deteriorating industrial relations, falling employee engagement, further outsourcing and organisational redesign are just some of the big issues on the agenda in the years ahead.

Put simply, HR, in the words of John Philpott, chief economic adviser at the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development, is "in for a bit of a shock". A fair proportion of the 500,000 job cuts Philpott has predicted over the next five years will come from HR.

Continue reading "Public sector HR must brace itself" »

As the dust (or should that be ash?) finally settles on the huge travel disruption caused by the volcanic eruption in Iceland, it's good to see one of the UK's largest employers adopting a policy that puts the concerns of its workforce centre stage.

Asda is seemingly bucking the trend and pledging to pay staff who were stranded abroad and unable to get back home - or to work - when flights were grounded because of the ash cloud.

Employers are under no obligation to pay staff who are absent from work - regardless of whether it's through no fault of their own - so hearing Asda commit to investing a six-figure sum to cover pay for affected employees is welcome news.

Continue reading "Volcano disruption: Asda will pay stranded staff" »

The phrase 'social media' would previously had many in HR reaching for the employee handbook checking their organisation's policy on internet use or Facebook activity was up to date.

But all that is changing. Personnel Today's Social Media Week - with content running in the magazine and on our website - is recognition of the rapid change that is taking place in this area.

An increasing number of employers are using social media to gain a competitive advantage, moving away from compliance and restrictions on staff access, to capturing their own employees' (and potential recruits') enthusiasm for all things Web 2.0. 

Another, more tangible, sign of the pace of change is number of people attending a recent HR tweet-up (for Twitter users interested in HR) in London. And we are seeing more HR professionals engaging with the blogosphere.

Continue reading "HR and social media: Time to get serious" »

Employers' bodies have welcomed the Equality Act, passed by parliament last week, for simplifying the UK's over-complex law in this area, while acknowledging that the legislation will create work for employers, and particularly HR professionals.
One of the more problematic ideas in the new law is positive action in recruitment.
The option to select someone from an under-represented group will only be lawful if the job candidates are "as qualified". The problem is that it is extremely difficult to determine whether candidates are as qualified as each other and recruiters are going to be reluctant to make a choice on this basis when an unsuccessful candidate might bring a claim of discrimination.
Where there are specific technical requirements or qualifications it may be possible to apply positive action but this is unlikely to apply to senior roles, and an important goal of equality law is to improve the proportion of under-represented groups in senior positions. 
What employers need to do is to use broader criteria to assess  candidates' experience and capabilities. This is better achieved by a holistic review of organisational culture and recruitment processes than through positive action.

Enter the Personnel Today Awards

It is that time of year again. This week we launch the biggest celebration of HR excellence in the calendar, the invitation to enter the competition for a Personnel Today Award. Previous winners of the prizes now known simply as "the Awards" know what a lift it gives an HR team to go back to colleagues with official recognition that you are doing a great job. Turn to page 14 for more details.

Whoever wins the General Election there will be a meltdown in public finances and the  £11bn cuts to public services announced in last week's budget  is the tip of the iceberg.
Public sector HR chiefs need to get to grips with this issue now, and that was the message at last week's meeting up public sector HR group the PPMA.
The evidence is that public sector organisations are becoming less efficient. Statistics from the Office of National Statistics show productivity has fallen since Labour came to power in 1997. 
One way to improve efficiency is to remodel how the HR service is delivered. The Local Government Association (LGA) last week urged councils to expand of HR shared services to boost efficiency and cut costs, and there are examples of HR teams taking a lead on this.
But HR must go beyond reforming HR service delivery and take a leading role in the root and branch reform of budgets and services inevitable during the next three years. 
The profession must develop credible performance measures on absence and productivity, and share good practice on leadership and organisational design. They must link pay to performance in unionised environments while battle fronts are opening over redundancy terms and job cuts.
It isn't going to be easy but there is no alternative.

The government's attempts to outlaw religious discrimination in the workplace turned into farce last week when a draft code of practice was published by the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
The code aims to help employers interpret the Equality Bill, but eyebrows were raised in the HR community at the revelation that not only will established religions be covered but also vegans, members of Cults and people with no beliefs at all.
The government tried to distance itself with a statement that opinions based on scientific or political theories were not akin to religious or philosophical beliefs and therefore not covered.
But in practice both employers and tribunals may find it difficult to judge what is an opinion and what is a belief.  This was the case in November 2009 when a former manager at residential landlord group Grainger was given the go-ahead to take his employer to a tribunal for allegedly making him redundant because of his views on climate change.
The draft code says atheists will be covered by the Bill. But what if an atheist believes only things that can be scientifically proven? As such opinions are not covered atheists presumably will be protected from discrimination only when their beliefs are based on blind ignorance of the facts. 
The serious concern is that extending the law to cover groups such as vegans will damage the hard-won credibility of workplace equality among employers. The Bill will be debated in the House of Lords on 23 March. Let us hope they can inject some common sense before it is too late. 

With the Football World Cup less than 100 days away, what plans has your organisation put in place to allow employees follow their national team?

Take part in our poll and it will link you to the latest IRS survey which investigates the steps that organisations can take to integrate this and other major sporting events with day-to-day running of their businesses.

Taking part in the complete IRS survey guarantees that you will receive a complimentary copy of the report once it is completed.

The long-term consequences to the anti-bullying movement of Christine Pratt's decision to go public with claims that Downing Street staff had contacted the National Bullying Helpline will be hard to quantify.

Pratt says she spoke out after denials by ministers that bullying took place, and that no employer should issue such a denial until investigating the allegations. Experts have been quick to warn that her actions in breaching the confidentiality of callers could have a serious knock-on effect on the usage of bullying helplines or employee assistance programmes.

It's now incumbent on HR to act quickly to reassure employees they can raise concerns about unacceptable behaviour at work in a safe environment.

Pratt clearly trades off the fact she is a fellow of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development - the CIPD's name is plastered all over the charity's website and promotes services to employers run by chartered members.

The Charity Commission is probing practices at the helpline - now is the time for the CIPD to investigate Pratt's behaviour.

The institute's code of professional conduct states members are required to exercise "appropriate behaviour in all their business, professional and related personal activities". Clause 4.1.7 goes on to say members "must respect legitimate needs and requirements for confidentiality".

The silence from institute bosses on this whole debacle has been deafening so far. The CIPD claims to care about professional standards in HR but - for some reason - doesn't see its role as upholding them. It should think again.