Legal Research

Human Resources Professional Association of Ontario as a Regulator

By Yosie Saint-Cyr

Bill 138, the Registered Human Resources Professionals Act, 2010 received first reading in the Ontario Legislature on November 23, 2010. The aim of the Bill is to make human resources a regulated profession and empower the HRPA to ensure the quality of the HR profession in Ontario. Becoming an official regulatory body will enable the HRPA to ensure that human resources professionals are competent and behave in an ethical manner.

The HRPA hopes that the changes will help raise the credibility of the HR profession and support the premium that designated members command in the workplace. The changes also offer:

• More control over HR as a profession
• Increased ability to influence public policy
• Increases the attractiveness of HR as a career choice
• Controlling the use by unauthorized individuals of the “CHRP” designation

The HRPA will become a regulatory body similar to the regulatory bodies that govern lawyers, engineers and chartered accountants. However, subsection 2 of the proposed Act states:

This Act does not affect or interfere with the right of any person who is not a member of the association to practice in the field of Human Resources.

Meaning: the HRPA would regulate both certified and non-certified members, but wouldn?t restrict or limit the ability of non-association members to practice in the field of human resources (at this time). It will however restrict the use of any title or initials that could be confused with one of the protected titles by the public.

These titles are found in the following chart:

The Bill sets out procedures for dealing with complaints against the association?s members and firms and establishes a disciplinary process, including the right to appeal disciplinary orders.

Bill 138 grants investigation and inspection powers to the association. The powers of investigation are the same, word for word, as those found in the Chartered Accountants Act, 2009, and the Certified Management Accountants Act, 2009. These powers are in the interest of public protection.

The Bill would also allow the HRPA to inspect the practice of a member or firm if they are considered incapacitated because of a physical or mental illness, condition or disorder, another infirmity or excessive use of alcohol or drugs. It further states:

The committee may, on its own or on motion, order the member to undergo a medical or psychological examination.

If professional misconduct is suspected, an investigator may also:

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.

The investigator can also question the individual concerned and his co-workers, along with examining and removing any documents deemed relevant, such as client files. Section 53 of the Bill states:

No person shall obstruct an investigator or inspector executing his or her duties or withhold from him or her or conceal, alter or destroy any document or thing relevant to the investigation or inspection.

Those guilty of an offence are liable to pay a fine up to $25,000.

The Bill also establishes a process for determining and addressing the impact of specified bankruptcy or insolvency events on the practices of members and firms of the association.

Furthermore, it includes provisions respecting the minimum requirements for professional liability insurance that association members and firms must carry, including requiring proof of the insurance.

With the tabling of Bill 138, the HRPA is shifting its regulatory focus to members’ conduct and protecting the public they serve. In 2009, the HRPA introduced its Rules of Professional Conduct, and this year launched a searchable online register of its membership and an Office of the Registrar section on its website to explain the regulatory processes to the general public.

Bill Greenhalgh, CEO of the HRPA, writes that the purpose of creating the HRPA in 1990 was ?to ensure its members are professionally competent and act in an ethical manner.? The HRPA would create the standards for the HR industry would regulate itself. That purpose wouldn?t change with the move toward government regulation. The association would gain power to enforce its rules and standards and to investigate and discipline members and firms.

At the same time, the HRPA says its recent actions demonstrate a ?renewed commitment to self regulation?, which presumably means that the association is expecting more from non-members, whether or not the Bill passes.

The big news though is the investigative and enforcement powers that the association would gain if the government passes the Bill. Ordering a member to undergo a medical or psychological assessment and entering and investigating any business premises with neither consent nor warrant are significant powers, and the Ontario Government must feel very confident in the HRPA?s ability to use the powers wisely. Of course, the association will also be bound by its own code of ethics, standards and now legal regulations, so perhaps the government has all the more reason to trust the association.

At any rate, with the HRPA at 20 years old, it looks like the human resources profession is growing up and maybe about to come into its own. I?ll be watching to see what happens with Bill 138, and if it passes, I?ll be very interested in seeing how it affects the HR profession?members, non-members and firms.

Full post as published by Slaw.ca on December 16, 2010 (boomark / email).