Among the issues the Fair Work Ombudsman raised in the University of Queensland's recent $11 million payroll remediation was a failure to identify relevant PhD qualifications when determining pay.
That creates a clear Core HR requirement: if a qualification affects pay, the HRIS needs to know both that the job requires it and that the employee holds it.
The evidence might originate elsewhere. A learning system may record completion, or HR may verify an external qualification or licence. Core HR should still hold the authoritative status that payroll, WFM and other downstream systems rely on.
Without it, each downstream system works out the answer for itself, or the attribute sits in a document, spreadsheet or separate system with no reliable path into payroll. In payroll assurance work, I think that's worth testing explicitly.
A pay rule can be configured correctly and still produce the wrong result if Core HR doesn't hold the employee and job data it depends on.