In a recent LinkedIn post, Suzanne Lucas addresses widespread misconceptions about the Human Resources department, pushing back against the tendency to blame HR for decisions often outside their purview. Lucas, writing from a perspective of professional experience, clarifies the boundaries of HR’s authority and responsibilities, particularly in sensitive situations involving executive decisions and compensation.
Lucas begins by directly tackling the idea that HR can unilaterally overturn executive mandates, stating clearly:
No, we cannot override a CEO’s decision to keep a serial harasser while giving a package and an NDA to the victim.
This statement underscores a critical point: HR often operates within a framework dictated by higher leadership, and their ability to enact change is not absolute, especially when legal and financial considerations, such as severance packages and non-disclosure agreements, are involved.
Deciphering HR’s Role in Investigations
The post also sheds light on the investigative process for harassment claims. Lucas emphasizes that HR cannot simply take claims at face value, regardless of whether the complaint comes from an employee or a manager. The department’s obligation is to conduct thorough investigations before making any determinations.
As Suzanne Lucas explains:
No, we are not going to believe anyone—employee or manager—when it comes to a harassment complaint until we have done an investigation and learned more information.
She clarifies that this procedural necessity does not signify an inherent distrust of employees or a subservience to management. Instead, it reflects a commitment to due process and fairness, ensuring that decisions are based on facts gathered through a structured investigation.
Understanding Compensation and Budgetary Constraints
Another common point of contention illuminated by Lucas is the determination of salary increases. Many employees believe HR directly controls compensation budgets. However, Lucas points out that financial departments typically set the overall budget, with HR often developing frameworks for managers to distribute allocated funds based on performance.
According to Suzanne Lucas, the notion that HR arbitrarily decides on raises is inaccurate:
No, we didn’t determine the size of your raise. Finance determined the budget.
She further elaborates that while HR might create guidelines for managers on how to allocate raises based on performance goals, they do not unilaterally decide to offer percentage increases without regard to established financial parameters. This highlights the collaborative, and often constrained, nature of compensation decisions within organizations.
The Reality of HR’s Operational Scope
Through these points, Suzanne Lucas aims to correct the public perception of HR as an all-powerful entity capable of solving every workplace issue. Instead, she portrays HR as a department navigating complex organizational structures, legal requirements, and financial limitations. Her candid post, even with a touch of personal candor about the heat affecting her mood, serves as a valuable primer for employees and managers alike on the practical realities of HR functions within a business environment.
📝 About This Content
This article is based on insights shared by Suzanne Lucas on LinkedIn.
📅 Originally posted on June 24, 2026 | View original post on LinkedIn →