We took on a new employee recently and wrote for a simple reference on history and ability etc.
The reply we got basically confirmed that the person had in deed worked for the firm between set dates (and nothing at all about what we wanted to know), but then the letter went on with a standard disclaimer telling us that we should not rely on anything in the letter!
No comment at all on ability etc. and we can't even rely on the fact that the former employers were in fact former employers.
Isn't this all getting a bit silly now?
David Melia
Replies (10)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
ACAS
We had a employee who left voluntarily, with no notice (just a text message "I'm not coming back") and then took us to tribunal for not being paid notice (yes, it was that surreal).
Other issues came up - one of which was a compliant be ex employee that a reference I gave to an employment agency was so bad that she couldn't get work (but, I may add, the truth of the refernece wasn't disputed) and ultimately we settled the whole thing through ACAS.
The terms of the settlement include that if we are ever approached for a reference, all we can do is supply date of joining and leaving, no other information. We are also not allowed to provide a verbal reference.
Seems similar to the refernce you've received? Have you employed "trouble"?
References are pointless and dangerous. If you make comment on anything you can be held liable for it either by the employee if it fails to get you the job or prevents you from getting a job, to the employer if the employee doesn't perform. And of course there is the issue of privacy and data protection.
Standard personnel advice is to stick to facts, which is to confirm that the ex-employee did work for you and from when. All this does is confirm a CV entry. Saying anything more is taking unnecessary risks.
References confirm time and place - that is all they should be relied on to do if that. Criminal records checks attempt to confirm that the individual isn't a fraudster, and hopefully there will be a professional reference from a body as well.
Bear in mind that reading more into a reference than is there can land you in front of an employment tribunal as well.
After that, I'm afraid the only way to work out if the juggler can juggle is to give them some balls and ask them to get on with it. If they drop them then get rid.
Probation periods, psychological screening and structured interviewing are your best weapons against an incorrect hire. Relying on references is a fools game I'm afraid.
NeilW
Reminds me of a good Dilbert cartoon
that came out on 12 October 2005 ...
Prospective Employer (on telephone):
"Hi I'm calling to check the references of your ex-employee named Ted."
Catbert:
"We have a company policy against giving references. But I'd be happy to discuss the weather with you."
Prospective Employer:
"Okay"
Catbert:
"The clouds are moving lazily across the sky, and everyone thinks they're stupid."
Phone the referee ....
... and ask them if they would employ the applicant again now that they know them. I find this always gets results - good or bad.
Agree you could phone the referree
If they get a good recommendation - great. If it's a bad one then what do you propose to do about it if the employee has been very good for you?
There are a small number of very bad employers out there with appalling staff retention records who might not give you a fair review if it's not in writing and are therefore hard to sue. All this ability to sue over a reference started because of such behaviour and giving good references to appalling people to get rid of them easily. Better to make your own mind up I think.
Usual content of employment references
I find a number of the comments above disturbing. Both the companies I have worked for in the last few years (UK Plc's) have had strict rules regarding references. Any reference I have written has been limited to dates of employment, place of employment, job title, and rate of pay if requested.
I believe that this approach is the standard - certainly in larger businesses with (over?)active HR departments. If potential employers make negative assumptions about potential employees based on the reference given this must be hugely detrimental to a large number of capable people.
Does the accountancy profession tend towards more detailed responses?
Perhaps they are trying to tell you something...
I believe that the worst reference you can give for an ex employee is exactly what you have received - simply confirming employment dates but making no comments about ability / character etc. I think that the former employer's silence on the matter speaks volumes.