At least once a day I find myself saying, “I’m not a lawyer.” This is not because I have a hard time with reality, it’s because so much of what I do seems to deal with the law.

Before I started working in HR, I was one of those people who thought of HR as “personnel.” That was whom I had dealt with in my brilliant career up to that point (retail, fast food and on campus jobs). HR hired. If you were a really big slacker, they fired. That was it.

Now, I know better. Yes we hire and yes we fire, but we also develop training, negotiate with unions, counsel employees, coach managers, work on change management programs, comply with government regulations, implement new systems and even manage the cafeteria and serve as the head of the plant safety committee.

I answered a question on my Blog about classifying someone as exempt or non-exempt. This should be an easy question to answer. The guidelines should be clear and it should be obvious to anyone who cares to spend 5 minutes looking up the rules what the answer should be.

Except it’s not. The EEOC gives you a bunch of legal gobbledygook. (Which, incidentally, Microsoft Word thinks is a real word. I find this fascinating, since it still tells me that the word blog is spelled wrong. So fascinating in fact, that I went to Dictionary.com and looked it up. One definition is the “incomprehensible or pompous jargon of specialists. “ I’m extra pleased because that means I selected the correct word.)

BLR is even offering a lecture to deal with this very problem—what seems obvious and “right” to do, sometimes puts you in conflict with the law.

Now, most HR professionals are not lawyers, but it seems like the government is trying to make force us into that. This is a shame because we have to spend so much time worrying about compliance that we can’t do what really needs to get done—making our companies successful by making sure we have the right people, the right training and the right structures.

So, what do we do about it? Well, in a large company you have the luxury of having specialists instead of generalists. Instead of having to know about all the relevant laws (impossible) each person only has to know the laws in their particular area (still impossible, but more feasible).But what about a small company? Should all small companies have a labor and employment lawyer on retainer? I don’t think so. I don’t even think an HR manager at a small company needs to know and understand all the laws and legal ramifications off the top of her head. What she needs to know is that she doesn’t know everything.

I realize your mother told you this when you were 16 and whining about why you couldn’t go out with “Steve” (although looking back, you see her point), but it is still true today. When you get in trouble is when you start making decisions and taking action in areas that you have no idea what laws are out there. You need to fire someone that has a disability? Not knowing that the Americans with Disabilities act is out there could get you in a heck of a lot of trouble. If you know that ADA exists, you know enough to take the time to research the implications before you act.

We don’t want to turn HR over to the lawyers. (Well, maybe some days we do.) But, we need to know our own limitations and know when to ask questions. Granted, this can slow you down, but being slow and confident can save the company’s hide in the long run. Just answering questions based on your gut could mean you’ll need your own lawyer later on.

About the Author: The Author is a HR Blogger who writes with her pen name "EvilHRLady". She is working as a HR Professional for a Fortune 500 company. Her other interesting articles could be viewed at www.evilhrlady.blogspot.com. She can be reached at evilhrlady[AT]hotmail.com.