"focus on EDI has led to bloating non-jobs in HR"

[IwantToRetire]

Countering the rise of EDI in the workplace

The number of people working in HR roles increased by 83% between
2011 and 2023.19 This growth significantly outpaced the overall growth of people in employment, which increased by only 13.5% over a similar period

‘This detailed new report by Policy Exchange demonstrates how a wide array of pressures - from government regulation, to activist groups, to staff networks - have been hijacked to undermine business autonomy and impose burdensome EDI obligations across whole sectors. It sets out with precision the legislative reforms that will be needed to curb the worst excesses of this burden and free up businesses to deliver growth.

https://policyexchange.org.uk/publication/putting-business-back-in-the-driving-seat/

(Personally I don think there had been an organised move to undermine business autonomy, but do wonder how this aspect of employment has ballooned - see graph below)

The contemporary model of Active Measures has come on a lot in recent years. Following Vladislav Surkhov's successes at home, the same approach of boosting the extremes in order to foster nihilism in the masses does seem to be working a treat as an export.

What a silly comment.

I made clear i started the thread purely because the numbers in the chart just seems disproporationate.

So resorting to typical knee jerk DEI is sanctified and cant be criticised so must be a Reform / MAGA motices is exactly why this profession could have become so bloated. ie if you actuallly read the OP what can possibly justify it terms of output (ie has equal opportunities in word places improved - reality suggests not) an increase in 83% of those woring in DEI when growth of employees is 13%.

What is so depressing is that it seems to have become even more of a tick box exercise than back in the day when as part of staff training we had EO, and worse still has been hijacked to allow well organised pressure groups like TRAs to impose discrimination in the work place particularly at the expense of women.

Would have thought that on FWR that would be one aspect of what is the current expression of Equal Ops (women being erase in the workplace to placate a small gorup of men) would have been more than a justified attack on how DEI is actually practiced.

It would be horrible to think that employers are happy to pay the costs of the extra staff to give the appearance creating a diverse work force rather than pay the cost of employing a more diverse work force.

Or maybe that's it. These large DEI departments are there to make the directors, Boards etc., feel good about themselves as they can say look we employ X number of people to ensure we implement DEI practices. But if fact just the presense of the DEI staff is thought to be enough!

As far as I'm concerned, when it comes to HR providing value in organisations they have to be able to show in meaningful and measurable ways that they have actually introduced policies that increase productivity, assist the organisation in carrying out its core function, and benefit the bottom line.

I've seen lots of flowery articles in HR magazines and on LinkedIn pushing the 'bring your whole self to work' message but I haven't seen much in terms of HR producing facts and figures to support a lot of EDI policies or proving that they actually assist employees to carry out their jobs on a practical level. And in so many of the ET cases we've seen over the years, HR and EDI personnel are woefully ignorant of basic employment law - so I don't see the CIPD giving adequate bandwidth to performing a useful function in terms of keeping members adequately updated on legislation.