A few questions about esl grammar

1. who ("whoever" somehow suggests not only a secretary but others as well, just not colloquial, sounds funny. Whoever has no communication skills, and of course this includes secretaries, is not an asset to the company.

Also the word "good" is superfluous. All skills are good )

2. his (Though to suggest either sex we say "their" even though grammatically wrong. As in the foregoing example, "one's" might somehow include persons other than children

"Its" would be okay too though a bit uncommon)

Somebody could have poor or average communication skills.

Point well taken Con. However in this particular case I maintain my position

Can't defend myself tho, it's Intuition

It is not at all ungrammatical to use 'their' in such a situation, Dale. That is another odious prescription that has never been true as regards the English language.

If you wouldn't mind, show us how it is grammatically wrong or even wrong.

In my day it was rejected on the basis of number or syntax or something, I'm not expert, JTT, but remember I'm very old

It was erroneously rejected in that era [18th century] that gave us most of the silly prescriptions that, today, people still pass on without thinking.

You, that's you Dale, still use 'you' as both a singular and a plural - the singular form 'you' with a plural form verb 'are'. No one whines about rejecting singular 'you' on the basis of number, no one complains about using a singular 'you' with a plural verb 'are'. No one complains about singular 'you' on any basis actually.

What of singular 'we'?

Well now, aren't we just the cat's meow?

Don't you think it odd that these grammar geniuses have missed these?

Here's a good hint for those over ten years of age that want to offer advice on language. You can safely assume that for virtually every rule you were ever taught, exposed to, corrected on, there is an excellent chance that it is a complete or partial falsehood.

Sadly, this is particularly true if you were educated in the US.