I thought bad references were illegal?!

Mistral001

An employer can be tempted to give a good reference for a bad employee just to aid his/her departure from the firm. This could harm the new employer if the person turns out to be just as bad in his/her new job. So as othesr have said, the emplloyer has a duty to the prospective employer as well as the employee to tell the truth.

I believe, it was the case years ago that references were written almost in code, in so far as the present employer was expected to put in some key words, such as honest, trustworthy and punctual and if any of the key words were left out, then the new employer would take it as wirtten that there was a problem. This was in the days when people came looking for work with references in their hand and it was assumed that they could be read by the employee or anybody who the employeee wanted to show them to. They were testimonials rather than references in effect. This is perhaps how the notion of not being able to say anything bad on a reference has come from.

kiwi07

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

What I think they should do is just provide a basic reference and say its company policy to provide no more etc. I think the "truth" is very black and white anyway.Thats what a lot of companies do now anyway.

What do you think an employee should do if they have a bad reference?[/QUOTE]

I want to know it as well.... I've just lost a job couple days ago due to a bad reference. I don't want it to happen again...

Emmzi

do volunteer work sufficient to get a good reference.

kiwi07

Emmzi wrote: »

do volunteer work sufficient to get a good reference.

I do volonteer work and they gave me a good reference but my perspective employer wanted to get a reference from my previous job....

dandelionclock30

Yes good idea, but they still want the old employer as well, so I suppose at least there will be 1 good(hopefully) and you can say you have learned etc and the other one.
I dont think many employers will accept voluntary work insted of contacting the last employer.

SarEl

oki1875 wrote: »

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

What I think they should do is just provide a basic reference and say its company policy to provide no more etc. I think the "truth" is very black and white anyway.Thats what a lot of companies do now anyway.

What do you think an employee should do if they have a bad reference?[/QUOTE]

I want to know it as well.... I've just lost a job couple days ago due to a bad reference. I don't want it to happen again...

And I answered - it depends on what you mean by a bad reference. Is it a truthful reference or not? If someone steals from me and I dismiss them and state that I dismissed them in a reference, it isn't a bad reference, it's a truthful one. Every situation differs and it depends what the employer said - and what the prospective employer read it to say. A reference doesn't have to be "bad" for a prospective employer to decide it isn't what they would regard as satisfactory. I would regard a basic reference as unsatisfactory and would not employ without a fuller reference. That doesn't make it a bad reference - it makes it an unsatisfactory one. If you don't know what the reference said then you can't determine whether it is truthful or not. Nor can you - where is may indeed be truthful - deal with the matter by mitigating what it may say.

I find it interesting that so many people put such faith in the concept of the "basic reference". It's misplaced you know. Back in the day, a basic reference was, as Mistral001 suggested, "code" - it meant "don't touch this person with a bargepole, we wouldn't take them back if they paid us to". A good many employers still regard the basic reference as saying just that. So a basic reference could be as damaging in the eyes of the beholder as a "bad" one.

dandelionclock30

But what if you really wanted the candidate and they though no fault of their own(they hadnt been in trouble) could only provide a basic reference.Their employer only provided a basic reference because that was the policy.You could ring them up etc and explain but they still wouldnt budge.
That would then be unfair to a potentially good worker.

SarEl

dandelionclock30 wrote: »

But what if you really wanted the candidate and they though no fault of their own(they hadnt been in trouble) could only provide a basic reference.Their employer only provided a basic reference because that was the policy.You could ring them up etc and explain but they still wouldnt budge.
That would then be unfair to a potentially good worker.

Yes, and I would lose a potentially good employee. But that would be tough luck on me and them and good luck for the second choice. In a legal office we do not take risks unless we know what the risks are. As some of the "older" posters around here will know, we do employ "risks" - but we also expect to know what the risk is and to hear it from both sides, and we then make a considered decision based on full knowledge. And we are hardly the only type of employer who has such expectations. It is all very well talking about the rights of potential employees, but what about the rights of their clients / customers, other employees etc. The employer has an obligation to them too, and if they are not satisfied with a reference then they must either obtain clarification or not employ or take an unquantified risk. Some of us cannot afford to do that.

But we are still not getting out of this rut - is the "bad reference" a truthful one or not? Or are you suggesting that employers should always provide good references, or even neutral references, for "bad employees". Because just like "bad employers" exist, so do "bad employees".

Emmzi

but the employers job is not to be fair to everyone. It's to get someone who can do the job. Not the best, not someone who needs a break, not someone who has learned. Just a low risk person, who can do the job.

People who have really stuffed up references could also think wbout self employment for a while. Then you have a genuine reason for no recent refences.

BJV

I used to have to write references for staff and as long as it is factually correct. for example if someone is constantly late and the employer can prove it then they are entitled to state poor time keeping.

Don't forget it is your employers reputation on the line. That said I think it is wrong for your new employer to take so long to make a decision. Sorry that is not nice. You are either happy with a reference or not.

Good luck finding another job.