How did HR get to be so well paid?

Christine Neville

I resent the power they have. And yes I resent that they're so well paid given that they're not the real talent in any company. I'd never go to them about a work problem as I'd feel they'd only gossip about it and somehow make it worse. They have a huge amount of power too. I know a lady in HR and some of the stuff she shares with me about others isn't right at all. They can look up anything about anyone in the company.

Perhaps the things they do are important, but in a way I view it as a job that pretty much anyone could do. Okay maybe you need a bit of people skills; meaning be more talkative than average, but outside of that I do have to wonder.

PsychoPete

We don't have HR at my employment, we just fight it out like normal people

horgan_p

One of the main pillars of the gig is to help the company avoid getting sued/taken to the WRC/ Labour courts etc etc.

People will pay good money to stay out of court. See also : solicitors.

rtron

C'mon, did the HR person you know share their salary with you?

sam t smith

Christine, you should report the HR lady who is sharing confidential information. Report her to HR.

igCorcaigh

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119003257#Comment_119003257

This is pretty much why HR exists.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058244073/how-did-hr-get-to-be-so-well-paid

Good point Christine.....never thought about it much before...... it's all a bit of 'codology' really.....the ironic thing is in the company I work for they ( 2 of them I think??) Have a huge turnover......after 20 odd years I've seen a dozen or so " HR" staffers come & go. As another poster said it's basically all about crossing the 't's' & dotting the 'i's',, just a cushion between management and legal. Can't ever recall anyone going to " HR" with an issue/ problem

Whatdoesitmatter

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058244073/how-did-hr-get-to-be-so-well-paid

Which re-reg are you

Richard Hillman

HR will constantly tell senior management about how likely they are to be sued. Scares the bejaysis out of everyone and reeps the benefits.

A bit like marketing. Marketing will market how important marketing is. Completely oversell it and senior management suddenly think marketing is more important than it is.

They are 2 branches of a large company that I have absolutely no respect for. I don't rate people who work in those departments as decent human beings.

HR are busybodies, snitches, nosy fuckers. Marketing/advertising/PR are usually sociopaths. There's nothing genuine about them.

Mrs OBumble

My brother worked for a company with no HR beyond payroll.

They had a budget for getting taken to the labour court each year when managers fùcked up. They figured this was cheaper than paying for HE staff and the associated lost productivity.

Christine Neville

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119003270#Comment_119003270

She was talkiing about some guy we both know and she said "the only reason he got that job was because...". I would not be surprised if she was willing to tell me his salary if I'd have wanted so.

Christine Neville

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119003911#Comment_119003911

I guess Mad Men depicts them well!

BattleCorp

HR is a poxy job.

You are there to bat for the company and not the employee. You are trying to solve problems and get sh1t from one end of the day to the other. You've to try to delicately sort out every lazy, good for nothing dumb fcuk of an employee who has the law on their side. You've to take your orders from those higher up (Directors etc.) and enforce them, even if you don't agree with them and they are unpleasant for the workforce.

It's a sh1t job. More luck to them.

Strumms

i agree with the above. Problem is when you have meetings with them or any sort of electronic communication they advocate their impartiality but if you ever go to them with an issue that relates to management or a disagreement or incident with a manager they are about as useful as a cock flavoured lollipop…tend to talk out of both sides of their mouth simultaneously…

my sole experience was when getting systematically bullied some years ago by a jealous supervisor…

Them: ” I hear what you are saying, but did you ever try and look at it from their point of view ? It’s not an easy job ! “

Me : “ no I look at it from an employment law and company policy point of view, that both forbid this behaviour towards me “

Them : “ ok, but a little more understanding flexibility from your part would be welcomed do you think ? “

Me : “ no, them doing their job legally would be “

Them : “ohhh” 🤣

bertiebomber

HR used to be called personnel, however when they moved to resources then the managers had to be paid well in order to treat the employees as non entities and as nothing more than a resource. Thence the big salaries they are re-numerated to treat you like dirt and at all times cover the firm against you, at all costs . They are rarely on your side and must manoevre you out if you start talking back, thence the big salaries.

whatawaster81

They're not called HR in my company, they're called the Talent Department. Like We're all singing all dancing employees.

Performance reviews tend to be monitored by HR, so they control the hiring, firing, and the giving of promotions or salary increases. Then, there's the absolutely shocking fear many managers have of being called out for sexual harassment (regardless of whether it's true or not), during which HR (in many companies) will be the judge, and jury, before it's sent to the more official external examiners. Doesn't help that HR tends to be populated almost entirely by women, so it's hard to argue against them... as with the "advancement" of HR theory, woke or feminist theories in the workplace, any resistance to them can be put down as sexism, or whatever.

HR has managed to insert itself into the framework for almost every important decision that relates to the operations and management of a company. Of course, they're going to pay themselves well, especially when it's "bad form" to talk about your salary with another employee. I can remember when nobody cared if someone knew your salary and what commissions you earned. Now you can be reprimanded for sharing your own personal information, such as salary amounts, with other employees.

It's absolutely nutty.

CrookedJack

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119003888#Comment_119003888

It's Brid Hegarty again.

silliussoddius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006220#Comment_119006220

How are things at the Billy Barry club?

whatawaster81

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006378#Comment_119006378

Not bad. Actually a large company with 800 employees.

backwards_man

As a director, I can say having a good relationship with HR is key. I have gotten a huge amount of support when dealing with some very tricky situations with my team. I dont relate to most of the comments here, in any company I have worked for HR and Payroll are two distinct departments, they do not decide their own salary (the concept is ridiculous ), and they are there to make sure the company abides by employment law.

Donald Trump

They have to be well paid. After all, it is usually their soul that they are selling (if they have one to begin with)

Cluedo Monopoly

It's is very very difficult to get good experienced HR staff. HR managers often have an inferiority complex with functional/people managers which is why they often go on little power trips with new employees. They don't make decisions, they implement. Employers make labour law mistakes all the time, HRs job is to minimise those but they rarely really involve themselves with growing the talent because they haven't a clue what's going on.

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006325#Comment_119006325

I have never involved HR in performance, progression or pay related discussions. They do not decide who is hired or fired either. They do the admin. Some can appear to be in senior management circle but they aren't really.

Squatman

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006165#Comment_119006165

TEll me more. DM if you need to. sounds great.

hope it went ok for you in the end. never forget that HR is to protect the company, and not you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006750#Comment_119006750

In every company I've worked in, which had a HR department, they set the procedures to be followed, and either, sat in on performance reviews, or were there to check the records of the review afterwards. When I was a manager, performance reviews needed to be signed off by HR before the recommendations could be acted upon.

Oh, and I didn't say that they were in senior management. I said they've inserted themselves into the framework... there's a difference.

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006829#Comment_119006829

Why were they in performance reviews when they did not work day-to-day with the person being reviewed? I have only seen that for PIPs. How do they have the capacity to attend every performance review? Some companies do them quarterly. A performance review should be 1:1 Manager + Report. I'd run them personally. Intimidating to have them in a review.

The senior management comment was a general add on point.

cml387

A key metric for HR is absenteeism.

So they have to come up with ways of stopping people being out sick or else the HR manger (and of course ultimately the HR staff) get their asses kicked.

That's really a hiding to nothing as far as I can see.

cloudatlas

Yes I greatly dislike them, I see them as a barrier to get to people who can actually help, i.e. legal, accounts, higher up people with authority.

The HR qualification is seen as a doss subject in any business school and easy points.

BattleCorp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010427#Comment_119010427

You should try have a go at HR and see if you think it's a doss. It's a pure poxy, thankless job. Problems from one end of the day to the other.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119007441#Comment_119007441

Because in many companies, the metrics by which employees are judged are determined between HR and management, with HR being present to ensure those metrics are being applied "fairly". The fears over discrimination, bias, or whatever have put many companies in the position of wanting a HR representative participate in many similar processes. In my experience, performance reviews would be quarterly.

And I agree that reviews should be 1:1.. but it is what it is. The American way of having HR heavily involved has become rather important in some companies.

n0minus1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006220#Comment_119006220

The overuse of the word "Talent" in HR annoys me no end. It does a disservice to those who have spent time actively and continually upskilling in their career

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010934#Comment_119010934

Ok but I have had 8 employers over the last 26 years and I have never seen it or heard of HR attending performance reviews. A couple of US multinationals in there too. I know people working in multinationals in Galway and I have never come across this practice. I have been doing quarterly reviews for over 4 years now too. What industry are you seeing HR help people managers with performance reviews? Do they just sit there saying nothing?

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119011796#Comment_119011796

Oh, we're comparing resumes? I'm not going to bother competing with you, but for reference, I've worked mostly abroad (Ireland, Germany, Australia, then Asia) originally in Finance (roughly a decade), then moving into management (5 years), and later training/development. Now, I'm primarily a lecturer in Business Management but do consulting work sometimes. I'm not based in Ireland, and spend most of my time in Asia.

Now, I realise you seem to think that all businesses operate the same way.. but they don't. Not getting into an argument over this, as I know it'll go circular and end up nowhere. You have different experiences. Grand. I understand that companies are organised, managed, and operate in different ways.. I'm sure your experience bears out there. Mine is simply different.

Strumms

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006779#Comment_119006779

why would I need to DM you ?:)

they are there to protect the company but they ‘market’ themselves as impartial and that they hold their paymasters to the same legal, ethical and company policy standards as anyone else, from experience all be it thankfully limited, that’s not the case.

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119012199#Comment_119012199

I was just questioning the practice. I'll leave you to it. I hope I never come across that performance review methodology because it's counter productive to a trusting environment.

Cluedo Monopoly

I think Dirty Harry summed it up well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvG3R-xOMzE

Floppybits

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119006220#Comment_119006220

Use to call them the "Arts and Crafts" department as all they seem to do was stick up posters of leaflets on events for morale boosting such as department quiz or halloween fancy dress or some other such party and the odd time on policy.

They do have an important role in that they are the ones that will set the policies that will define the behaviour and culture within in a company, which are usually common sense things like don't be late, appearance and dress code and then down to other things like desk policy's and stuff like that. Now most folks in their working life will not have many interactions with HR except for interviewing, joining or leaving a company and redundancy. Only folks I seen who had any interaction with the HR department outside of management are those folks that can't seen do the most common sense of things like being hygenic. I wouldn't begrudge them having to pull in smelly pete or mary and have to tell them to clean up their act. :)

cloudatlas

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119010854#Comment_119010854

Guess what the easiest module is to do at Smurfit, it begins with a H. Also the title of the thread says it all, they are the ones setting the pay grades in my organisation so they are always well paid. Every year there is an award ceremony in my company and guess who always gets and award because they are a big team and they all nominate each other, you guessed it! I don't really care how people in hr feel, they enable the management to treat staff like ****, they don't send out important timely emails to staff because they don't think we are important so we miss out on benefits, they don't understand employment law they are mere go betweens who are overpaid. I'd advise you to resign.

BattleCorp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119016308#Comment_119016308

You'd advise me to resign? Why is that? I don't work in HR and never have done. Nor would I want to. I've worked out of a large open plan office where HR were based and I saw the sh1t that they have to go through on a day-to-day basis.

Sky King

When I think of HR I think of a clique of wide-arsed women in an office having long boring conversations about childcare and Penney's.

Christine Neville

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119011350#Comment_119011350

Well to be fair, they don't consider themselves the 'talent'. They're claiming they can spot the talent... presumably by looking out for certain skill sets listed on people's LinkedIn profiles. They can really talk the talk. I remember being on to them about job criteria back when I didn't really know what HR was, and they'd be all talk about what's needn't for the job (HPLC or whatever) up until the point that I'd start asking them questions and they'd say (in their own way) "oh I know nothing".

Christine Neville

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119018028#Comment_119018028

Wide arsed? Some of them are in quite good shape and quite attractive. Attractive women probably have that nack for finding the easy way to get what they want anyway... whether it be by accidentally dropping their purse next to the the newly self made millionaire, or going for the easy well paid job.

 

FlubberJones

Use HR all the time and value their input, they stop me saying things that will cause issues for me, the team or the company. And if they get paid well for it, good for them.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058244073/how-did-hr-get-to-be-so-well-paid

Labour is the most expensive cost element in most companies so it would be rather stupid to leave it unmanaged... that is why HR earns the big bucks and that is why they have significant power. And regardless what you may think their companies see the value in having them around.

Recruitment, payroll, holidays and discipline are the areas where you are likely to come in contact with HR, so it is not surprising that you have a rather limited view of the skills and responsibilities involved. In many cases companies outsource payroll/holiday entitlement and recruiting, so clearly there is a lot more going on than you think.

HR are charged with ensuring that the company has and will continue to have the workforce it needs to achieve it's business objectives. That means that there are a lot of things in HR that have much higher priority than your payroll and disciplinary matters for example. It means resource planning - what kind of workforce will you need going forward, who can be unskilled to fill those roles, who won't make it... having succession plans for the replacement for team leads and managers, having target lists of people who could be headhunted in order to fill senior positions in the even someone leaves and needs to be replaced and so on.

I have never worked in HR, but I have designed various systems for HR departments over the years and non of them had anything to do with the usual gripes people have about HR.

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119007441#Comment_119007441

There is no reason why a review should be 1-2-1...

You interact with several people in the workplace to get the job done, so a rounded view of your performance should not depend on one person:

• If you are expected to work as part of team, then a selection of your colleagues should be involved
• If you interact with senior management, some feedback is required
• Likewise if you interact with other parts of the business
• Even customers/clients of occassion
• Your manager or team lead
• Your functional manager if you work in a matrix type environment

I have experienced a lot of review that have done down this road.

Cluedo Monopoly

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119019391#Comment_119019391

We were talking about the actual performance review meeting. The face-to-face feedback meeting and goal setting meeting. Obviously the manager would solicit feedback from the rest of the team (and customers) before the performance review meeting. I think some companies call that '360 feedback'. My point is that HR should not sit in on the performance review meeting. I have never heard of HR sitting in on a performance review meeting.

touts

In my experience of a production environment the hierarchy of best to worst jobs in a company goes like this.

Marketing (Well paid to play on Instagram and Canva all day. And google does all the work for them in the background)

HR (Well paid and cushy as hell. They are mainly planning fun events and for disciplinary events they follow a step by step process)

Accounting (Very well paid but with more stress at month end, year end etc)

IT (Well paid and no one knows what the **** they do and are terrified of them so leave them alone)

Project Management & Consultants (Seriously well paid to basically hold meetings once a week and tell people how they could do the job more efficently if they followed this Gantt chart. Would be higher but they generally get booted out after a few months when senior management realize they are chancers. And then they move onto their next client)

Facilities (Basically well paid plumbers/electricians etc without the uncertainty of the building trade etc)

Training (would be higher but they are dealing with stupid questions from new staff or idiots sent back for "retraining".)

Purchasing (can be stressful and officially not well paid but every supplier to the place "remembers" them at Christmas)

New Product Development (Average pay and have to figure out how to make what sales promised the customer)

Sales (well paid but the stress and targets can be cruel)

Quality (pay isn't great and they are always dealing with stupid mistakes made by others)

Operations/Factory Floor (pay generally not great (but there are exceptions) and physically demanding but unionised 9-5 and zero stress)

Engineering (Have to find technical solutions to the impossible products sales asked New Product development to come up with. Plus all your classmates from college are making double working for an actual engineering company sometimes in exotic locations while you are stuck in Thurles trying to work out a way to defy the laws of physics on a tiny budget)

Payroll (usually not the best paid job and the only time people deal with them is when they are pissed off over something. Plus they see everyone else getting paid more than them. That must be a killer)

Reception/Personal Assistant. (pay is poor and they are expected to be the happy face of the company no matter what. And if they are also a PA which they often are for the CEO etc then they are usually working for an arrogant prick)

Warehouse & Logistics (rubbish pay and physically demanding. Similar to Factory Floor but are generally being shouted at by the factory floor a lot. And one of the worst is in a frozen warehouse. 8 hour shifts in sub zero temperatures. It takes a special breed of lunatic to do that job)

Production Planning (You couldn't pay me enough to do that job. Heart attack central. Stress levels through the roof. Long hours in the office and on call 7 days a week 24 hours a day. And the pay is generally poor by all accounts as most people don't last/live long enough to get well paid)

Jim2007

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119020080#Comment_119020080

Aren't we lucky so many people don't agree with you.

gladvimpaker

Back in the mid 90's HR was about looking after the staff, then slowly but surely it flipped to the other side of the pendulum and it was about looking out for the company.

Back in time some human resources were so good you wouldn't even need a union to sort out problems in the work place. The basically kept management, supervisor's and line leaders in check.... now they're keeping the company in cheque and looking for way's to get rid of people or find loopholes in order for management to screw over staff without getting sued or in trouble.

Good hr staff usually move around quite a bit as they can't handle working for corrupt companies. The one's that stay a long time are usually doing their bosses bidding...

n0minus1

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/119019119#Comment_119019119

I think you misunderstood me, I wasn't implying that HR consider themselves the "talent" rather they measure suitability by the term "talent" in itself. That implies a natural aptitude is a deciding factor rather than someone applying themselves by upskilling in an area where "talent" just isn't enough. In my opinion it just goes to show how out of touch HR can be in certain cases.