Related Posts
Tuesday well spent
Enthusiast
Conversation Starter
What does this even mean?!
Additional Posts in Human Resources
Chief
New to Fishbowl?
Download the Fishbowl app to
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
unlock all discussions on Fishbowl.
If they’re having layoff talks without HR, it’s because they’re still in the ‘whispering in the hallway’ phase. HR doesn’t get invited until it’s time to make the paperwork pretty and lawsuit‑proof. Titles don’t get you in the room — they just get you the cleanup shift.
Quite often, HR is left out for pragmatic reasons.
Those include the CEO using Legal first and foremost to bullet-proof the process; to simplify the hard decisions and to avoid “useless bleeding heart concessions” to employees who will inevitably complain, and HR will not have ANY power to soften-up the rough edges of the decisions; and lastly, once the decisions and the cuts are made, HR is forced to go along with and accommodate the raw deal handed to them—knowing they, too, are under Damocles’ Sword. Like mafia underlings.
To the HR people out there who say, “It’s not like that in my company,” and/or “I’ve never seen that sort of treatment in my life,” I think you need to get out more. It happens the way I said, more than you think. Just because you haven’t seen it, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist.
Consider yourself a lottery winner if you have ethical bosses.
Chief
Have you ever been included in major business decisions? Are you a member of the executive team? Does leadership ever seek your guidance on things other than benefits and compliance? If the answer to any of those questions is "no," then you have your answer. They don't value HR as a strategic business parter, or a business partner at all.
Been there. I was head of HR and found out leadership had been meeting about a RIF without me. Two things to know Don’t ask to be included insert yourself by raising the risks they’re not thinking about (WARN Act, adverse impact analysis, severance consistency, OWBPA if anyone is 40+, separation agreement language). Send it in writing to the senior-most decision maker. If they still keep you out after that, the issue isn’t an oversight it’s intentional. Document everything, protect yourself, and start thinking about your next move.
Critical thinking is great, but let’s not pretend this is an MBA case study. If the head of HR is being excluded from layoff discussions, that’s not a puzzle — that’s a governance failure. HR can’t ‘work around’ being shut out of legally sensitive decisions. At that point, the issue isn’t HR’s strategy; it’s leadership’s.
This is also your Que to buckle up and be prepared for when you are Invited!
Preparation isn’t passive. It’s the discipline of staying sharp when others coast. When the door opens, you don’t scramble — you step in ready, because you’ve already done the thinking everyone else avoided.
That’s the whole point. I stay prepared because I don’t repeat cycles. I adjust, I move forward, and I don’t circle back.
would see this as a concern. Excluding HR from layoffs discussions does not make sense. I would question what is driving that decision.
What you need to do is bring yourself to the table. You can do this by producing a short briefing doc for Managers on the rights and wrongs and the consequences, with selected ETs. Then get alongside you iFnance Director, tell him that you are concerned that the meeting are handled correctly to avoid the consequences, show him you briefing and tell him that you intend to release i. The FD will be your best ally in this with £££ at risk.
Becasue you're on the their list?
Agree…. Also HR is not considered to be a business partner.
Because you might do your job.
My advice - if you haven’t already - learn the operations, learn the business, and ensure you are striving to meet the needs of the business: HR leaders can be the road block, and often that happens bc we try to mitigate risk. But we need to help leaders from themselves and by doing so we learn strategic ways to prevent risk but meet their goals.