Since the dawn of the Industrial Revolution, the name of the function that manages workforces has gone through many iterations, from the early days of the Personnel office to the more modern Human Resources department. In the last few years, HR function and role titles have continued to evolve to a point where one legislature is even considering formally banning the term “human resources.”
A proposal was recently put forward in the Mexican legislature to prohibit private businesses from using HR, “human capital” and other similar terms to describe their workforces and the processes that manage them. The legislation, proposed by Sen. Alejandro González Yáñez of the Workers Party, is part of a broader effort to advance labor reforms, including around pay transparency and working hours.
In a statement on the measure, González Yáñez says that equating workers to “resources” dehumanizes them and suggests their “primary value” is in their “ability to generate profit.” It also undermines the important work of the function itself, he says.
“By presenting labor management as a technical or administrative matter, tensions inherent in the relationship between capital and labor are rendered invisible,” the senator says. “Decisions that profoundly affect people’s lives—such as layoffs, restructurings or changes in working conditions—are presented as simple resource management processes.”
Instead of HR-related language, the measure suggests organizations utilize terms like “people management,” “employee experience” and “labor relations.”
That the proposal comes alongside efforts to reform labor laws is no coincidence. The broader changes the Workers Party is pursuing are rooted in recognizing the humanity of the workforce: For instance, reducing the standard workweek from 48 to 40 hours in the next four years, mandated salary disclosures in job postings and a universal “right to disconnect” that would protect workers’ ability to step away from work during off-hours.
“Mexico’s proposed ban on the terms ‘human resources’ and ‘human capital’ signals a cultural shift toward human-centric labor management, reflecting broader reforms in labor law, digital rights, pay transparency and workweek reduction,” writes journalist and industry analyst Aura Moreno in Mexico Business News. “As companies adapt to regulatory, operational and workforce challenges, alignment between employee expectations, organizational strategy and compliance will be central to sustaining competitiveness in 2026 and beyond.”
Conversations about HR’s evolving expectations—and, in turn, titles and terms—aren’t just happening in Mexico, but rather worldwide.
In 2024, Benson Executive Search reported that about half of top people leaders at the Fortune 50 use the title CHRO, while 11—including half of the top 10—use chief people officer. The wording is more than a slight nuance, researchers write.
“It underscores the evolving nature of leadership in HR and the growing recognition that people are a company’s most valuable asset,” they say.
As HR continues to move away from an administrative function to a critically strategic one, the ways the department and its leaders are described will likely keep evolving, Allison Borland, chief people and strategy officer at Modern Health, recently told HR Executive. Today, HR is “seen as strategic, future-facing and central to long-term success,” she says. “In my opinion, this shift signals a growing understanding that business performance and people strategy are deeply intertwined.”
Credit: Source link
