Interview: an HR director looks back on the 2024 social elections
For this interview, we spoke with an HR director at a Belgian services company of around 300 people, who ran its 2024 social elections. She asked that neither she nor her employer be named. Her answers have been edited for clarity; the substance is unchanged. This is one person's account, not legal advice.
ONLZ: Let's start at the beginning. When did you really start preparing for the 2024 elections?
Too late, that's the first thing I'd say. We felt ahead because we were talking about it from the autumn. But "talking about it" and "having started the operations" are not the same thing. The first legal obligation falls on day X-60, and we discovered along the way everything that had to be ready before that date. The calendar does not forgive: it runs backwards from voting day, and every step has a fixed date.
ONLZ: What was the biggest mistake?
The technical business unit split. We reasoned from our org chart, legal entity by legal entity, when the law looks at the reality of the work. We had two companies that, in practice, shared a management and premises. We first treated them separately. A worker representative challenged it, rightly, and we had to redo the split under pressure. In hindsight, that is the kind of thing you map out calmly a year ahead, not in a rush.
ONLZ: You had chosen electronic voting?
For part of the staff, yes. And that's where we were surprised, in a good way. We feared the teams' reaction, we imagined dozens of people stuck. In reality, what jammed was not the technology, it was the internal communication. People didn't know when they would get their credentials, or what to do with them. The vote itself worked very well. It was upstream that we had under-invested.
ONLZ: What surprised you most about the workload?
The number of intermediate deadlines. You remember day X and day Y, but between them there are about ten dates: submitting lists, posting notices, complaints, appointing witnesses, composing the bureaus... Each is short and each is mandatory. We spent evenings recounting working days. A clear reverse timeline, from the start, would have spared us a huge amount of stress.
ONLZ: How were relations with the unions?
Better than I feared, on one condition: transparency. Every time we shared information early and in full, it went well. Every time we seemed to be hiding something, even unintentionally, we created distrust. The voter lists, the TBU split, the management-staff list: these are sensitive topics. Playing them openly from the start defuses most of the tension.
ONLZ: One thing you won't do again?
Waiting until we "had time" to choose a provider. We compared solutions too late, under pressure, and made a rushed decision. That choice should be made calmly, in 2026 or early 2027, while you can still ask questions and compare without stress. Not three months before the vote.
ONLZ: And for 2028, what will you do differently?
Three things. One: map the TBU now, before the procedure even starts. Two: treat internal communication as a project in its own right, not a last-minute formality. Three: decide early on the voting channel for each population (who votes online, who votes on a kiosk, who votes on paper). If you frame those three points upstream, the rest almost runs itself.
ONLZ: Any advice for a peer heading into 2028?
Don't underestimate the administrative time, and don't carry it alone. Voting day almost always goes fine. It's everything before it (the deadlines, the split, the lists, the communication) that makes the difference between calm elections and last-minute ones. Start early, write everything down, and talk straight with your worker representatives.
What we take from it
This account matches what we see everywhere: electronic voting is almost never the problem; underestimated deadlines, a TBU split done too late and rushed internal communication are. To place these steps in time, read Social elections 2028: the countdown starts. And if you are preparing for 2028 and want to avoid the 2024 mistakes, let's talk.
