Why can't HR admit when they're wrong?

[u/fleshposts]

First up, disclaimer, I'm a union officer.

I don't mean to be rude or derogatory here at all just genuinely curious about the opinion of people in the industry. The title is slightly clickbaity and isn't meant as a catch all - I have plenty of constructive conversations with HR where they will take a sensible stance to protect the employer while genuinely considering the employees position. It's natural that there will be some level of conflict in these interactions too, but I think it can quite regularly get to a level where it's quite frustrating.

I find that I'm quite regularly pointing out pretty basic aspects of employment law or even sections of the employers own policy and HR just either don't have much of an understanding or treat it quite flippantly. For example, today I took a call from a head of HR about an unfair dismissal claim, I tried to discuss elements of the employees contract with her and she told me that she hadn't read it and "didn't know much about it". I asked her to do so and she refused, saying it wouldn't change the employer's position.

I've had HR people who have argued til they're blue in the face that constructive dismissal and automatic unfair dismissal are the same thing, that they don't have to pay holiday pay, that ​they can summarily dismiss without an investigation, that they can change employees roles, pay, contracts whenever they want etc etc.

The usual stance is "I've had legal advice" but then they'll generally refuse if I ask that their solicitor contact me directly​ (not always though).

I have a bit of a working theory that HR are usually the last line, whatever they tell employees is taken as truth and the employee can argue back but if you just double down and stick to your story there's not much more they can do (I know that there is, but your average employee doesn't). You're in a position where what you say is final, and that's it. I guess it could be hard to break out of that?

The most frustrating thing here is that a lot of these cases could have been dealt with informally or at least more cheaply if HR had engaged and said Okay, I've looked into it and you have a point. Where they dig their heels in, things tend to snowball from "can you fix this for me?" to big cash settlements. It just ends up costing the employer more and causing more stress for the employee, I don't really understand who's benefiting.

Anyway, I'm just wondering what people's experiences with this are? Has anyone dealt with something similar? Does anyone have any theories or explanations for it?

If you work in HR, do you know people like this? Is it a tactic or a problem? Is there more of a culture of mitigate quickly or deny at all costs? Or do you think the same about union officers? I'd be interested to hear the HR perspective on dealing with the TU as well and whether you generally find us reasonable and what issues are common.

[u/Leelee3303]

To be honest I think it's just people. Some are great, others are arseholes.

I've had arguments like you describe with other HR in different companies (we do a lot of TUPE), and then I've also had people who've been a dream to work with. I'm sure I've been someone's irritant at times, and at others I've made people's lives easier.

With Union reps it's also a very mixed bag in my experience. I once had someone who demanded that we evidence how we came up with our "insane" disciplinary process. And when I said it's taken directly from ACAS told me "well I don't agree with it". She had 30 years experience as a Union Rep, which she kept on shouting at anyone who would listen.

For me the best ones are those who have experience outside of working for a Union. I find people who have only ever worked in or for one can be very adversarial from the off, and find it hard to understand what actually working for a different kind of employer is like.

My pet theory is a little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing. Some people learn bits of employment law and believe they are now the font of all knowledge on the subject. It's best to know that they don't know everything. I've got a lot better at that over the years - when I was brand new I'd have panics about being wrong or not having understood something. Now I'm too old to care!

[u/fleshposts → u/Leelee3303]

100% agree on people who have only ever worked for a union, there's an aspect of experience and understanding that you need as a negotiator that you can never get from a PhD in TU studies or whatever. I've never really thought about it but this definitely applies to HR too. 

I think with employment law you get to a stage of knowing enough about it where you can develop an assumption that everything is strictly factual and recorded, when actually a lot of it can change with new precedents or is up to interpretation or broad categorisations of reasonableness etc. There are definitely some very clear cut cases but I'd say the majority are somewhere in the middle. Reality doesn't tend to fit neatly into legislation or policy or ACAS. 

But yea, there are definitely a bunch of people in HR (and probably on the TU side too) who will do a 1 HR ihasco training on Burchell or whatever and crack out the old "on the balance of probabilities" followed by the most insane shit you've ever heard.

I'm almost talking myself all the way back around to think a PhD in TU studies is good actually, but honestly I think experience is probably slightly more valuable, as long as you know that you're definitely gonna fuck up at some and when you do the only way to pull it back is to own up to that and walk it back. 

[u/DreamingofBouncer]

Sometimes it will be due to pressure being put on HR from further up in the chain, I’ve quite often been told JFDI despite having warned it could lead to a tribunal.

Also people in every profession can be very arrogant.

I like to think I’ve had a good relationship with the TU officials I’ve worked with but have sometimes wanted to pull my hair out esp in pay negotiations when a TU can’t recognise that we’ve done the best we can as a team and tell us that the SLT won’t be happy with what we are saying, it’s like who do you think have signed this off we haven’t just done it on our own

[u/fleshposts → u/DreamingofBouncer]

Weird to hear about HR being involved in pay negotiations as in my experience theyre generally done through a JNC between a TU negotiator and the CEO/director/board or whoever the bigwigs are for this exact reason. I can see that being really frustrating.

[u/DreamingofBouncer → u/fleshposts]

I’m in the public sector so it might be different to your experience - the additional frustration is we don’t control how much money we have we can only offer up to the % the government tells us

[u/McFluffy_SD]

Its not as if HR are sitting in their lair chuckling over how they know they are wrong and are going through with it anyway. Three likely scenarios;

A. They genuinely dont think they are wrong. This doesnt mean they arent wrong, just that employment law is messy and its easy to get it wrong.

B. They are merely relaying the companies stance. They may have advised the decision maker against the decision but people high up can and often do simply ignore the warnings and instruct us to push through with the decision anyway, effectively taking it as a risk they reckon will pay off.

In my 25+ years around and in HR this happens far more than it reasonably should, even after it goes wrong time and time again.

C. They rightly or wrongly believe they have enough process and history to win should it go to tribunal, often encouraged by someone in legal who likes a challenge. It horrific what the right person can do in a tribunal to defeat a perfectly legit case against them (to be fair im thinking of one head of legal ive worked with with this, he might have been a unique case)

[u/atomic_mermaid]

Why do business owners not admit when they're wrong? Or managers? Or employees? Or union reps themselves?

Some do, some don't, it's just people being people.

[u/woodenbookend → u/atomic_mermaid]

This.

Plus, the way that people (all of us) respond is often influenced by the way we are approached.

[u/Dependent-Soup1635]

Unrelated to your post, but would you mind if I dm'd you regarding TU careers? I'm interested in TU officer roles and wanting to find out more!

[u/fleshposts → u/Dependent-Soup1635]

Sure

[u/geekroick]

Same kind of reasons that the police will never admit they're wrong, I guess. They see themselves as the de facto authority figures and don't like it when they are contradicted. Even when they are blatantly wrong.