compromise agreement not going well

Uncertain

princessdon wrote: »

Most references (following a CA or redundancy etc) are factutal.

Most employer references are XX started at the Company on YYY date, their salary was XXXX.

Most maybe. But certainly not all. It depends very much on what is the norm in the OP's field.

princessdon wrote: »

Anything else is down to the questions asked by the referer. Eg no of days sick, no of grievances, no of lateness recorded etc.

It is possible to tie the CA up so that the firm cannot answer any such questions - although that may well not be the best thing to do. It depends which is the best option for the OP. If there is something they really don't want saying then it may be best to take the chance of an unfortunate inference being taken from no answer.

princessdon wrote: »

They cannot lie - it will be factual.

As I stated there is a HUGE difference between a "lie" and an "opinion" and an "oversight".

princessdon wrote: »

You will be hard pushed to get any CA that goes further than factual.

Sorry, far too sweeping. It depends so much on the circumstances.

princessdon wrote: »

If you have had a lot of time off sick you need to be getting an agreement that unless asked it won't be divulged, but you can't ask them to lie.

I agree, they will not say six days if the OP has been off for six weeks. However, if the OP had a excellent sick record until a recent major absence then there are ways or accentuating the positive e.g "Apart from one isolated incident the OP had an excellent sick record and was punctual and diligent......"

princessdon wrote: »

They will have a solicitor (needed for a CA) who they can ask.

Well actually the firm don't have to, it will depend on their HR department. They may just try to use an off the shelf agreement or modify one they have used before. It is the OP that must be legally advised for the agreement to be valid.

princessdon

Yes that is what I meant - OP has a solicitor and so he/she can advise.

What I meant was that an actual agreed reference can be hard as different companies will ask different things. Eg a Local Authority will have their own reference form, many of this is tick boxes, someone else may be free form. A HR reference may not ever ask for free form text (that is the 2nd/3rd references). There are a lot of variables as you never know what the other company require (I have had some very strange forms recently for Ex staff).

If someone didn't ask for number of days sickness and their agreed reference says "until recently they had excellent attendance" - Then this becomes a negative, when it may not have been.

It really all boils down to what OP is wanting to hide/not have disclosed. Is it sickness, performance, or a mixture.

The other thing is if they are wanting to say hide sickness and so get an agreement not to disclose then this is interpreted as bad, when it may not be. Eg some companies ask for instances of sick (1 or 2 is fine, even if 1 was for 3 months), whereas 9 separate instances would be not looked on favourably. So by omitting the 1 absence it can look worse than it is.

As I say - depends on what OP is trying to hide or don't wish to be disclosed really.

hcb42

OP

what has not been agreed, the financial agreement i.e. the money or just the reference?

This has been dragging on for way too long, 2-3 days would be enough!

Let us know so we can advise further. They dont of course have to give you a compromise agreement at all, if you are off sick they could have just managed you out..