While Bill 138 remains controversial amongst members, the HRPA maintains a PR campaign of "It is good for you, now eat!"
While I have said previously that I think that the HR Professionals Act from 1990 could probably use some updating, the attitude of the HRPA prevails.
The attitude of 'trust us, everything is fine'.
It is not fine.
Regardless of 'how good' this act may be, many paying members are upset that they have not had their voices heard or were made aware of what the contents of this new act would be before being submitted.
In the latest email from Antoinette Blunt (HRPA Chair) there is points like:
- The plan was outlined in HRPA's strategic plan -- available on our website to all members -- nearly three years ago;
- Bill 138, which was drafted by the government with input from HRPA, represents the coming of age for the HR profession. For the first time, the Bill puts human resources on par with other first tier professions;
- Bill 138 provides the human resources profession the same regulatory authority as that given to the accounting profession;
Well here are some questions then:
While a plan was outlined, the content was not... This is where many members feel a disconnect.
Drafted by the government with input? You mean input like this:
52. (1) In conducting an investigation under this Act, an investigator may,
(a) at any reasonable time, enter and inspect the business premises of the individual or firm under investigation, other than any part of the premises used as a dwelling, without the consent of the owner or occupier and without a warrant;
And as far a regulatory authority goes, the CGA that we are being compared to is an empowerment for the Association... not the membership.
Some people will tell you that Bill 138 is in the best interest of the profession, but so far this seems to mostly be HRPA(O) staff... Is anyone not employed by them happy with Bill 138?
Not that I can find.
To completely understand why Bill 138 was initiated, you need to understand the HRPA(O); here is a brief history:
As recently as 2007, they were still called HRPAO - a provincial organization.
In May of 2010 they took away the NPPA - the second exam required for the CHRP. Other provinces still have it; Where is the national unity?
In November 2010, Bill 138 was snuck into its first reading. If passed, the HRPA(O) will be granted significant powers over their membership
Experts in change management and public relations, these things have been introduced slowly, but still met with controversy at each stage.
As per my previous blog, trying to open discussion with them has been a futile effort.
As per the HRPA website, they changed their name to HRPA, "In an effort to create a brand that’s relevant to audiences everywhere."
Why would a provincial organization need to do that? Oh right, it's because they are hungry for power!
Bill 138 in my opinion is the HRPA's next step in trying to be a national organization - taking over rather than working together... very un-Canadian.
Recently, the THRPA created an online petition so we can have our voices heard... If you disagree with Bill 138 then perhaps you should sign it by clicking here!