Unsatisfactory job ref resulted in loss of job offer!

FBaby

As I mentioned I was given an employee reward along with selected others in the team and the prev line manager praised to the HR manager who visited our team that I was a hard worker and competitive.

Do you have evidence of this to show?

What you also need to consider is that for whatever reason, the new employer was looking for a reason to withdraw and used this as an excuse. I would have thought if you gave such an amazing interview, have a perfect sickness record, have the skills they are looking for that they would have at least waited for the other reference.

Undervalued

FBaby wrote: »

Do you have evidence of this to show?

What you also need to consider is that for whatever reason, the new employer was looking for a reason to withdraw and used this as an excuse. I would have thought if you gave such an amazing interview, have a perfect sickness record, have the skills they are looking for that they would have at least waited for the other reference.

Or they may simply have had other candidates who they regarded almost equally but didn't have an indifferent / poor reference.

xapprenticex

Box ticking references are only good if you are friends with the person answering, other HR will just send the usual statement saying you once worked there.

Then again, ive had references in from peoples friends who have marked them badly and they lost the post as a result.

sangie595

There's nothing the OP can do to change this situation now, but, for me, the issue must be what happens next time. Because I'm renowned as someone who places little resistance on references, and certainly wouldn't ever send out one like tha, but seriously, if I received a reference like that I would be digging like mad to find the other shoe! Because that is a bad reference. No employer would consider it anything else. It sends flags up the flagpol, and the message reads " my hr won't let me say what I really think, so this is the worst reference I can get away with". Would anyone here, in the same position as the former manager, do anything other than write back to say that due to the circumstances of the actual line manager leaving, they are unable to make any fair comment on the employee, but records show that they ( and fill in the relevant platitudes)? I doubt the manager thought they were giving a bad reference at the time. They were being lazy. But that would be the definition of a negligent statement! They didn't once stop to think what they would think themselves in the face of a reference that read in that way. And probably won't stop to think about it next time one comes in either.

So I don't think the OP can do nothing. The question is, what can they do? I think that in actual fact this reference would be actionable in court, but it would be a close run thing add to which easy a judgement would go. But, as I said, it was negligent not to tell the potential employer that they had little idea of the persons ability, and to answer at all implies a knowledge they didn't have. Taken with the fact that most people would read this as a bad reference, and that makes it actionable. But you don't actually want to go there, because it's costly and risky to do. But a threat, that costs nothing, and can fix future references - even if all it means is that they say nothing! if you know a solicitor, then would they help out? Or could finances stretch to paying for a solicitors letter? If not, you'd have to do it yourself, but that has less impact.

The letter needs to go to the company, not the manager in question. And to threaten action for negligent misstatement based on the inaccurate reference given which has resulted in the withdrawal of a job offer - the points it needs to cover in that respect include the way any reasonable person would interpret the answers given, the damage done, and potential future damage if given again. If you have to write it yoursel, then try out Google to find some nice case law to make it sound more intimidating.

It isn't a perfect solution. But there isn't one. All it will hopefully do is deter the manager from ever saying anything simular again - ideally you might try for an agreed reference which both parties agree is fair

Undervalued

sangie595 wrote: »

There's nothing the OP can do to change this situation now, but, for me, the issue must be what happens next time. Because I'm renowned as someone who places little resistance on references, and certainly wouldn't ever send out one like tha, but seriously, if I received a reference like that I would be digging like mad to find the other shoe! Because that is a bad reference. No employer would consider it anything else. It sends flags up the flagpol, and the message reads " my hr won't let me say what I really think, so this is the worst reference I can get away with". Would anyone here, in the same position as the former manager, do anything other than write back to say that due to the circumstances of the actual line manager leaving, they are unable to make any fair comment on the employee, but records show that they ( and fill in the relevant platitudes)? I doubt the manager thought they were giving a bad reference at the time. They were being lazy. But that would be the definition of a negligent statement! They didn't once stop to think what they would think themselves in the face of a reference that read in that way. And probably won't stop to think about it next time one comes in either.

So I don't think the OP can do nothing. The question is, what can they do? I think that in actual fact this reference would be actionable in court, but it would be a close run thing add to which easy a judgement would go. But, as I said, it was negligent not to tell the potential employer that they had little idea of the persons ability, and to answer at all implies a knowledge they didn't have. Taken with the fact that most people would read this as a bad reference, and that makes it actionable. But you don't actually want to go there, because it's costly and risky to do. But a threat, that costs nothing, and can fix future references - even if all it means is that they say nothing! if you know a solicitor, then would they help out? Or could finances stretch to paying for a solicitors letter? If not, you'd have to do it yourself, but that has less impact.

The letter needs to go to the company, not the manager in question. And to threaten action for negligent misstatement based on the inaccurate reference given which has resulted in the withdrawal of a job offer - the points it needs to cover in that respect include the way any reasonable person would interpret the answers given, the damage done, and potential future damage if given again. If you have to write it yoursel, then try out Google to find some nice case law to make it sound more intimidating.

It isn't a perfect solution. But there isn't one. All it will hopefully do is deter the manager from ever saying anything simular again - ideally you might try for an agreed reference which both parties agree is fair

But the former manager isn't going to admit that is he, even if your supposition is correct?

He will no doubt say the reference was in line with his honest opinion. Which may well be true.

So that then only leaves what evidence the OP has that would convince a court, on the balance of probabilities, that the former manager could not reasonably have held that opinion.

The op says he was given some reward for good work but doesn't say when. They may well argue, rightly or wrongly, that his performance dropped off after that point.

I agree to a point that sending a solicitor's letter may be worthwhile but very likely that will cause them to ignore any future reference request and there is nothing that can be done about that.

sangie595

Undervalued wrote: »

But the former manager isn't going to admit that is he, even if your supposition is correct?

He will no doubt say the reference was in line with his honest opinion. Which may well be true.

So that then only leaves what evidence the OP has that would convince a court, on the balance of probabilities, that the former manager could not reasonably have held that opinion.

The op says he was given some reward for good work but doesn't say when. They may well argue, rightly or wrongly, that his performance dropped off after that point.

I agree to a point that sending a solicitor's letter may be worthwhile but very likely that will cause them to ignore any future reference request and there is nothing that can be done about that.

But I didn't say anything different! I think there is a case to argue but not one worth the risk. And I agree that they may not provide any reference in the future. If that is the case, it wouldn't be any worse than this damning with faint praise that had already lost the OP one job. On the other hand, that may be enough to ensure that any future reference is no more than basic facts, or an agreed reference.

andygb

I can empathise with the OP, because many years ago I was working for an employer who had given me a good bonus (performance related), and then when I applied for another job (where references were taken up before the job offer) he gave me a bad reference and then made me "redundant". He was well known for his "revenge attacks" on employees.

xapprenticex

andygb wrote: »

I can empathise with the OP, because many years ago I was working for an employer who had given me a good bonus (performance related), and then when I applied for another job (where references were taken up before the job offer) he gave me a bad reference and then made me "redundant". He was well known for his "revenge attacks" on employees.

Do employers even take these scenarios into consideration?

Vectis

sangie595 wrote: »

... I think that in actual fact this reference would be actionable in court...

Certainly ANY reference is potentially 'actionable' i.e. you could take the person giving the reference to Court. But, in reality, what would this achieve and would the op just be wasting their time and, more importantly perhaps, their money?

How is it an untrue reference to say a person, in your opinion, is average? Average is the norm, what most people are. It would be potentially an untrue reference if the writer gave a glowing reference when they didn't actually think the person was anything but average.

As to not employing them again then I would say that's fair enough if there was no likelihood of a suitable role ever coming up again. Over the years we've employed many, many staff but I would definitely say No to the question of reemployment now if they asked it on a reference as we have no job, and no plans for any job, which would be suitable. Yes, the answer could be expanded upon, but with a tick-box answer they haven't said anything untrue - and surely this is the basis on what any Court action would be based?

So, yes, maybe it's not a 'good' reference but it's not 'bad' either. It's average. Whether this is good enough for another employer is debatable but from what's been said it's probably not an untrue or false reference.

And possibly, and I stress the word possibly, the op wasn't quite as good in their job as they thought? Maybe they really were 'average'. Or perhaps there have been problems at work, on-going or historical issues? After all we only have one side of the argument here.

As I said, anything, including references are 'actionable'. But would you even consider it if you had almost no chance of succeeding? Where is the untruth in what has been said in the reference? Saying someone is 'average', if that's what they were, isn't a lie but saying you'd employ someone again when clearly you wouldn't or couldn't would definitely be untrue.

As to sending solicitor's letters to the previous employer - I wonder how that would pan out with any future reference request? A blank refusal to supply a reference would be the best you could hope for and worst case scenario a note on the returned reference mentioning the op threatening legal action over previous references. Far, far worse than getting an 'average' reference in my opinion.

sangie595

Vectis wrote: »

Certainly ANY reference is potentially 'actionable' i.e. you could take the person giving the reference to Court. But, in reality, what would this achieve and would the op just be wasting their time and, more importantly perhaps, their money?

How is it an untrue reference to say a person, in your opinion, is average? Average is the norm, what most people are. It would be potentially an untrue reference if the writer gave a glowing reference when they didn't actually think the person was anything but average.

As to not employing them again then I would say that's fair enough if there was no likelihood of a suitable role ever coming up again. Over the years we've employed many, many staff but I would definitely say No to the question of reemployment now if they asked it on a reference as we have no job, and no plans for any job, which would be suitable. Yes, the answer could be expanded upon, but with a tick-box answer they haven't said anything untrue - and surely this is the basis on what any Court action would be based?

So, yes, maybe it's not a 'good' reference but it's not 'bad' either. It's average. Whether this is good enough for another employer is debatable but from what's been said it's probably not an untrue or false reference.

And possibly, and I stress the word possibly, the op wasn't quite as good in their job as they thought? Maybe they really were 'average'. Or perhaps there have been problems at work, on-going or historical issues? After all we only have one side of the argument here.

As I said, anything, including references are 'actionable'. But would you even consider it if you had almost no chance of succeeding? Where is the untruth in what has been said in the reference? Saying someone is 'average', if that's what they were, isn't a lie but saying you'd employ someone again when clearly you wouldn't or couldn't would definitely be untrue.

As to sending solicitor's letters to the previous employer - I wonder how that would pan out with any future reference request? A blank refusal to supply a reference would be the best you could hope for and worst case scenario a note on the returned reference mentioning the op threatening legal action over previous references. Far, far worse than getting an 'average' reference in my opinion.

I would suggest that you read my post more closely. In the first place, I made it very clear that whilst possibly actionable, it would be risky. However, your test does not apply - negligent misstatement is not defined as "an untrue statement", so whether the reference was true or not is irrelevant. The impression given by the reference, written by someone who apparently did not know the OP, is such as to suggest that they were "adequate" and they wouldn't employ them again. Ergo, at best they weren't up to much.

As for what they might do if the OP sent a solicitors letter. Yes. I said they might simply refuse to give one. And that may be better than an " average reference". Only the OP can decide that. But what they really are not going to do is write about that's of legal action in a reference - for a start off, that would also be negligent misstatement; and it would also leave then very open to questioning as to why they are so bad their employees need to threaten them! Companies rarely like to advertise their inadequacies. Whether the OP wants to risk another reference of this type being given or not has to be up to them. But they deserve the full range of options to be available - they wouldn't have asked if they knew the answer, or were happy with the reference going out like that.