Job offered but then withdrawn due to references

Raksha

daveboy wrote: »

I have advised my wife to apply for JSA even though she has something lined up. It could be 4 or 5 weeks before she starts that because of another CRB check being required. As this situation (being unemployed) was not through gross misconduct in my view sanctioning it shouldn't happen.

I don't want to depress you, but I'm still waiting for CRB checks to come back from applications made early November

DVardysShadow

terra_ferma wrote: »

In the post I referred to you stated:
"My partner was informed she wasn't being kept on after the three month probationary period"
I made three assumptions:
- your partner at the time is now your wife
- she did not pass her probation and they terminated her contract
- the job was mentioned on her application form (or the employers could have known through other means)

You can correct me if I'm wrong....

What I'm saying is simply that if her new employers found out that she had not passed her probation because they checked her full employment history then they would have good reasons for not giving her the job.

I think it is a bit of a leap to go from wasn't being kept on after the three month probationary period to sacked.

And before you start to say, oh but the new company could quite reasonably.... I do mean that is a bit of a leap on your part. We all know that 'wasn't kept on' is a bit of a euphemism possibly for a sacking. But it is also a quite legitimate description of a state of affairs without a sacking.

Now, taking the emotion of the sacking accusation out of it, it may well be thatthe prospective employer made the same leap of imagination, which has resulted in the OP's partner ending up in this unfortunate position.

terra_ferma

DVardysShadow wrote: »

I think it is a bit of a leap to go from wasn't being kept on after the three month probationary period to sacked.

And before you start to say, oh but the new company could quite reasonably.... I do mean that is a bit of a leap on your part. We all know that 'wasn't kept on' is a bit of a euphemism possibly for a sacking. But it is also a quite legitimate description of a state of affairs without a sacking.

Now, taking the emotion of the sacking accusation out of it, it may well be thatthe prospective employer made the same leap of imagination, which has resulted in the OP's partner ending up in this unfortunate position.

That's what we do all the time on this board... guessing, filling holes etc, because rarely we are given full information.
Sometimes I feel people are keeping certain elements out on purpose.... again big leap... but if the prospective employers had known she had not passed her probation (or maybe that's what they think) they would have not given her the job in the first place, and when they found out through references they were a bit pixxed off....

Or I might be wrong on all accounts, and that was his mistress at the time and his wife has an exemplary employment record.

I guess we'll never know as the PO just ignores the small detail of having lost a job in the past possibly because of poor performance/sickness etc.

mogadon

Surely the OP has no right to pursue or demand anything. If his wife wants to pursue the matter (if there is anything to pursue), she'll have to do it herself.

daveboy

1) A CRB check was done for this job and came through within a few weeks. The issue described came about after my wife received her clear CRB form.....that means no cautions, no convictions, no record of anything on police files. Just for terra_ferma's benefit.

2) I don't usually waste my time on MSE'ers that have all day to sit and trawl through all of my previous posts. But this time I will.

The job with the probationary period was declared on the application form. It wasn't raised at interview by the sheltered housing company. The employer linked to the probationary period issue was not used as a reference.

Additionally, whatever you say terra_ferma, this period covered October 2007 to January 2008. When I nearly died from a serious illness and had to have emergency surgery. So understandably her mind was on me more than the job. As you love to trawl through old posts to stir it up a bit I am quite surprised you selectively didn't mention that. I have certainly posted a few times at least about it.

3) Not putting my wife down but I am more determined on this......I would draw up a letter for her and let her sign it. She is literate, she can spell. I am just better at making the point. I'm sure terra_ferma will have something to say on that, no doubt.

4) PO stands for Post Office to most people.

5) Any more !!!!!! stirring.....do it in PM please. Many people have posted on this thread terra_ferma and you are the only one who appears to get a kick out of stirring it up. To the others I am grateful for your assistance.

terra_ferma

My points were very specific but I think you are now blaming me for everything else now.. (it was not me who commented on the fact that your wife should pursue this, not you. And I never said anything about CRB checks, because you stated that it was OK).

I think employees need to take some responsibility for their actions, in this case giving notice before being given an unconditional offer was not wise. And what I'm saying about references is actually an expert opinion, as opposed to some other people's giving opinions, sympathy etc. (which is great as we need that on this board too...)

It may sound like stirring to you because you/your wife are not prepared to take responsibility for giving notice before you had an unconditional offer of employment. And also because you don't want to hear that the previous dismissal/termination of contract/whatever you want to call it.... has anything to do with her not getting the job.

Now that you give the dates it sounds even more likely, organisations working with vulnerable people normally take up at least 3 years worth of references. Different services are covered by different regulations. I can give you more details if you want.

They don't need you to have given a specific name as a reference, they will just go ahead and contact employers covering the required number of years. This has happened to me in the past.

Also some organisations will not discuss employment history at the interview because they want to ask the same questions to everyone, and not address specific issues (old fashion, and daft, but it happens).

It's up to you if you want to hear this information or ignore it.

bendix

Two jobs - one lost after failing probation. One lost on references.

Two examples of 'it aint fair -she's being treated badly'.

Two threats of legal action to reinstate her rights.

Let's face it and call a spade a spade. There is a bit of a trend developing here, isnt there?

alenax

It makes me laugh when people get !!!!!y because they don't get the answer they want to hear... OP it might be unpleasant to read criticism but remember that 1. It's the internet and people are usually a lot more brave behind a monitor than they would be in person, and 2. Instead of getting defensive, you could simply consider other people's questions and points of view as different perspectives, e.g. someone before me said that employers sometimes ask all places of employment within a certain time period for references, so it could be someone else.

I'm sorry to hear about your wife's circumstances but ultimately, legal action isn't going to do much if they've decided the reference isn't good enough, and even if they did give her the job following legal action, they probably wouldn't go out of their way to make her feel welcome - would you want to work with someone who took legal action against you? I can understand wanting to see the bad reference though.

bendix

alenax wrote: »

It makes me laugh when people get !!!!!y because they don't get the answer they want to hear... OP it might be unpleasant to read criticism but remember that 1. It's the internet and people are usually a lot more brave behind a monitor than they would be in person, and 2. Instead of getting defensive, you could simply consider other people's questions and points of view as different perspectives, e.g. someone before me said that employers sometimes ask all places of employment within a certain time period for references, so it could be someone else.

I'm sorry to hear about your wife's circumstances but ultimately, legal action isn't going to do much if they've decided the reference isn't good enough, and even if they did give her the job following legal action, they probably wouldn't go out of their way to make her feel welcome - would you want to work with someone who took legal action against you? I can understand wanting to see the bad reference though.

There is absolutely no legal right to see a reference given on your behalf. The very idea completely negates the whole point of references.

Indeed, everytime I have been asked for a reference it has always been a verbal conversation - never written down.

alenax

bendix wrote: »

There is absolutely no legal right to see a reference given on your behalf. The very idea completely negates the whole point of references.

Indeed, everytime I have been asked for a reference it has always been a verbal conversation - never written down.

I didn't say there was a legal right, I said I can understand why they would want to see it if a company withdrew a job offer because of it.