ETHICAL BASIS FOR HRM PROFESSIONALISM 16716.Expectation/legitimation of potential clashes with organizational policyor
particular management demands (e.g. to downsize or fire on the spot).
These clashes are alas common, and some management actions are and
ought to be resisted on the basis of perceived violations of ethics or
injustice. At present the practice of HR practitioners is variable. Code:
Whistle-blower
17.Differential professional fees for serviceare rarely charged except as a bud-
geting mechanism, indeed neither are fixed fees, unless the HR practi-
tioner is an employee of a consulting firm. Code:Variable fee/Floor
18.Pro bono and on call workis not presently required for HR practitioners.
Many worker rights (EEO, safety, privacy, and free association) are of a sort
the employee ought to have protected as a citizen, not just an employee.
Code:pro Bono- The HR practitioner will usually have a private office and one-on-one
meetings with staffas ‘clients’. An HR practitioner isusing diagnostic and
remedial skillsthat are often of a high order. Code:Shingle
20.The social statusvaries with organizational size and rank and is not
particularly high at the lower levels of authority. The autonomy of the
HR practitioner in the work setting is not marked. Code:Status
HRM’s scorecard
At present the case is strong in some areas but not overwhelming. HRM
meets criteria 1–2: vocation and systematic body of knowledge. It could prob-
ably be self-organized, and then with some corporate law changes towards
a more concessional corporate model, be socially authorized to meet, all
the criteria 3–7: mandatory training process, self-licensing, exams/induction,
monopolies, and tradition. It might then meet 10, gazetted expulsion. To
generate the requisite ‘social remit’ dimension something like the ‘corporate
constitutionalism’ of Bottomley (1990, 1997) and Dine (2000), which sees
the company as a state concession, and having its own integrity apart from
shareholders, would need to be adopted. Here, the company can more easily
and explicitly avow an ethical and social purpose. Within the European Union,
such social models, including two-tier and compound boards of governance
which presuppose the arrangements depicted above in Figure 9.1, are more
familiar (Charkham 1994). At present HRM does try to meet criteria 8–9.
Codes of ethics, a crucial mark, are emerging and so are codes of conduct. But
it struggles against the prevailing individualist and contractualist corporate
law model. At present one can work without professional membership and