An article in The Times this week questioned the value of HR professionals and suggested that workplace policies are costing businesses too much money.
This is certainly not a new argument. Whenever employment law shifts or worker protections strengthen, a familiar narrative surfaces. More red tape. More bureaucracy. More cost. More “HR”.
There is some truth in the frustration. Some organisations do experience policy creep. Processes multiply. Documentation expands. Conversations become overly cautious. In those environments, HR can start to feel like the department of restriction rather than enablement.
But that is not the only way to approach this moment.
With significant employment law changes arriving in 2026, many organisations are reviewing policies and systems. Some are bracing for complexity. Others are quietly asking a more interesting question:
What kind of organisation do we want to be?
Compliance Is the Baseline. Culture Is the Choice.
There is no avoiding compliance. Laws change, standards rise, and accountability increases. That is part of operating in a mature employment market. But compliance alone does not create a healthy workplace.
It is entirely possible to meet every statutory requirement and still have a culture that feels rigid, mistrustful or disengaged. It is also possible to use regulatory change as a catalyst for something more constructive.
The difference lies in mindset.
If new laws are viewed purely as obligations to manage, they will feel like weight. If they are viewed as prompts to reflect on fairness, clarity and respect, they can become opportunities.
This is where the conversation needs to mature.
The False Divide Between People and Performance
One of the underlying assumptions in critiques of HR is that people-focused policies somehow sit in tension with commercial success.
In reality, the most sustainable organisations understand that the two are intertwined:
- Clear policies reduce ambiguity.
- Fair processes reduce conflict.
- Respectful cultures reduce risk.
None of these undermine performance, they stabilise it.
Where HR becomes ineffective is not when it focuses on people, but when it focuses only on compliance and loses sight of commercial context. Equally, leadership becomes exposed when it prioritises speed and cost without understanding people impact.
The real work lies in integration, not opposition.
A More Respect-Focused Way to Approach Change
The upcoming employment law changes, including strengthened worker protections and expanded rights, will require thoughtful implementation.
Some organisations will treat this as an administrative exercise: Update the handbook, amend the contracts, and deliver the briefing.
Others may take a broader view:
- How are we communicating these changes?
- How do they align with our values?
- What behaviours do they reinforce?
- Where might they help us improve consistency?
A respectful organisational culture does not see regulation as an enemy. It sees it as part of the operating environment.
When respect underpins decision-making, conversations about rights, responsibilities and expectations tend to be calmer and more collaborative. Leaders and employees are less likely to feel positioned against one another. The focus shifts from “what must we do?” to “how do we do this well?”
That shift matters.
The Role of HR in Bridging Leadership and People
A good HR professional is not simply a policy guardian. Nor are they there to obstruct growth.
At their best, HR practitioners act as translators:
- They understand legal requirements.
- They understand commercial pressures.
- They understand human behaviour.
Their role is to bring those strands together coherently.
In periods of change, that bridging function becomes even more important. Boards and business owners are balancing cost, risk and strategy. Employees are balancing work, security and wellbeing. The law is setting expectations.
Someone has to hold the centre.
Effective HR does not inflame tensions between compliance and growth. It reduces them. It helps leadership make informed decisions that protect both performance and people.
That requires credibility. It requires commercial literacy. And it requires a deep understanding of what respectful culture actually looks like in practice.
Red Tape or Reflection?
It is easy to caricature HR as a source of bureaucracy. In some cases, the criticism has been earned. Overcomplication can undermine trust and agility. But reducing HR to a cost centre misses the bigger picture.
The question is not whether organisations should have policies (they must). The question is whether those policies reflect a coherent culture.
As employment standards evolve, organisations face a choice: They can approach change defensively, layering process on process and hoping risk diminishes, or they can use the moment to clarify who they are as a business.
- What standards do we hold ourselves to?
- How do we treat people when circumstances change?
- How do we balance accountability with fairness?
These are leadership questions, not compliance questions.
Respect as Strategy
Respect is sometimes framed as a moral or cultural ideal. It is also strategic.
When people believe they are treated fairly, they are more likely to engage constructively with change. When leaders communicate clearly and consistently, trust strengthens rather than erodes. When HR professionals operate as partners rather than enforcers, decision-making improves.
Compliance and culture do not sit on opposite sides of a scale. Done well, they reinforce one another.
The organisations that navigate the next phase of employment reform most successfully are unlikely to be those who resist it most loudly. They will be those who integrate it most thoughtfully.
Not because they are chasing virtue, but because they understand that sustainable performance rests on clarity, fairness and respect.
In that sense, the coming changes are not simply about regulation. They are about leadership maturity.
And that is a far more interesting conversation.
