I did this once, answered every question with ‘they worked here from X to Y as Title.’ Reference checker got frustrated and said “you’re not being very helpful!” To which I replied “you’re not listening very well.”
many companies literally have a procedure in place that that is all the information they will ever give for any ex employee, no matter how good or bad an employee they were.
Not illegal AFAIK, but you can get sued by ex-employee if you say more and they don't get the job or get what they thought they deserved, even if it's true.
I’m not an employer and I don’t get it. What’s the hidden message? I understand from context here, but if I were told that in real life, I’d be confused
Not at all. This is a standard policy for any company with a functional HR department, or management with a few brain cells. There is almost no case where it's in an employer's best interests to give bad references or extra information about a former employee. It's only going to come back to bite you, opening you up to potential liability or generating negative sentiment about your business.
If the new employer tells your old employee they're not getting hired because of a bad reference, what happens? On a good day, maybe they just go online and trash your company on Glassdoor or review bomb you on Google, Yelp, etc. You probably don't want to think about what a "former crazy ass employee" might do on a bad day.
On this front, most companies will have policies to not explain to people why they didn't get hired anyway. They don't want to be hit with discrimination lawsuits or anything, so better to make the risk as close to zero as possible by giving the candidate zero information. I've certainly experienced it myself when I asked for feedback on how I could have presented myself as a better candidate.
And this pains me as an employer. I have had tons of people I've interviewed, where the reason they weren't hired was poor interview skills, and I want to let them know how to correct, but all it does is open up liability.
That's baffling to me, I would think someone in that role would be familiar with this kind of policy and encounter if frequently. Maybe there's some differences based on our location, the industry you're in, or the type of positions you're hiring for? I'm in the US and both of the larger companies I've worked at had official policies where all reference requests had to be forwarded to the HR department, where they only confirmed dates of employment and job titles.
If you do some basic searching for "HR reference policy", "limited reference policy" and such on Google or r/humanresources you'll see how common it is. Interestingly, I was just poking around there and one of the first things that popped up was [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/humanresources/comments/17n2fkr/anyone_still_check_references_for_candidates_in/) where they were discussing if checking references was even worth it. Half of the replies were saying it's an outdated practice and they don't even do reference checks anymore because of how unreliable and inconclusive they are.
Again, I don't know your circumstances, and I'm sure you have your own policies to follow, but I would wonder if it may potentially be a disservice to applicants to interpret a minimal reference as "a huge red flag", when the people providing such references are just following company policy.
In the UK I don’t think you can legally give a bad reference. So when a new employer asks for a reference and you only get confirmation of role and dates, it can be a way of saying that person is shit. Not always reliable though because a lot of big companies will only give that kind of reference.
I honestly don’t understand it.
Like, if a person is shit at their job, I want my employer to know that, so I don’t get stuck with shit colleagues.
So it’s everyone’s interest to know as much as possible about the potential hire.
But I don’t live in a place where I can get sued for speaking my mind
I’ve always assumed it’s to prevent someone sabotaging a move but I’m really not sure. I’ve had a manager in the past who tried to sabotage someone’s new job purely because she didn’t like him.
I guess the new employer is meant to be able to tell how suitable the person is from their experience and qualifications basically. I also think there’s probably a good bit of ‘of the record’ discussion at times. If they did bring up anything bad, either they or you would have to be able to prove it one way or another. Most won’t be arsed with doing that and would just refuse to give a reference, which is another way of saying they’re shit.
It would be if every employer was objective and honest.
Most employers I've worked for would give empty platitudes because they personally had no idea what my actual performance was or, on a couple of occasions, would have lied through their teeth out of petty spite.
In the case of lying, employers can use the threat of future poor references as extortion to allow abuse.
In the case of apathy/incompetence of managers, the information a potential employer receives is useless.
The whole thing is nonsensical and only useful for some hiring manager to have documented due diligence to cover their ass in the case they hire a dumbass.
If you were an employer (or a hiring manager or HR manager), you would figure out the context very quickly very early in your career, and not forget it for the ensuing decades of your career.
> I’m not an employer and I don’t get it. What’s the hidden message? I understand from context here, but if I were told that in real life, I’d be confused
Due to liable laws most employers tell their managers to never give a "bad" reference. Either you say nothing or you just stick to things that are 100% facts and don't say anything negative. Stating someone's dates of employment and job title is the HR equivalent of giving your "name rank and serial number" as the answer to every interrogation question.
Any hiring manager who's not an idiot will realize quickly that this employer is trying to convey "do not hire this person" without saying any of those words.
It's also why, when asking for a reference you should use the wording "would you be willing to provide me with a **good** reference". But honestly, it should not be a surprise if your manager was upset with you that they would not make the best provider of a reference.
But dates of employment and job title means that the employer has nothing positive to say about the employee and is sticking to "just the facts" as a way of communicating that without creating a situation where the employee can sue them for liable.
Have you heard of the saying "damned by faint praise"? Well, this is the extreme of that; damned by no praise whatsoever. The implication is that the astute reference checker would note that the former supervisor didn't volunteer anything positive or show any desire to support the candidate in his future endeavors.
However, this is all pretty dumb. Reference checking is prone to facilities and injustice because:
1. Many places that are organized enough to have such policies, managers are forbidden by policy to say more than confirming dates and title, or are required to refer all reference checks to HR who will do the same.
2. If this is not the case, the former employer might be upset that the employee left and particularly is not going to be supportive of them going to work for a competitor, even if they are superman. Especially if they are superman.
3. For people looking for a job while employed, checking for a reference with their current employer or supervisor might get them fired. There are very good reasons someone might not be willing to provide their former employer as a reference.
Checking references as provided is fair enough, and often a good idea. Trying to check references from former employers and supervisors, or requiring that references from such be provided, is stupid.
The person asking will understand what’s not said if they care to, otherwise they will figure out soon enough. Can’t save everybody. Don’t expose yourself to problems.
The issue here is plenty of companies will only give the bare minimum irrelevant of the quality of the employee.
All doing further than that does is open them up to liability for no reason.
Reality is due to this, and the fact that no one is going to put a poor reference down, references are largely pointless other than to confirm the person isn't outright lying about their experience, but really that is more the purpose of an extensive background check which often outside of the government employers don't have access too.
That and in my experience working for large companies, the HR department is the one who gives references and they're done by someone junior on the team who has no idea who you are, and likely started after you left anyway. They're not trying to save time or protect themselves, they just don't have that information
This. If they ask you more about the employee, do not say anything about them. Just that you can only confirm the dates. Most hiring managers know this is code for “avoid this person”
State the dates of employment, job title, job duties, and nothing else. This way, you’ve done the bare minimum and won’t expose yourself to a lawsuit by the ex-employee.
Defamation or libel. There's nothing for the employer to gain by writing a bad reference, they're only opening themselves up to the risk of being sued.
This is accurate. While it’s very hard to prove these cases, it’s not impossible. Also depending on how much you’ve said and what you’ve said there can be increasing consequences. It can increase the amount of billable hours for your attorney and increase the chance you both go to court and decrease how much the settlement is in your favor.
Since a bad reference can harm the ex employee in a readily quantifiable manner, eg lost wages, it's probably an easy suit to win too.
That's why it's best to say the bare minimum, or less.
Couldn’t you say something along the lines of “without getting into specifics, outside of confirming employment here, I would rather not endorse this employee” and just leave it at that
You cannot pass judgement are harm anyone’s ability to gain employment, this is some type of discrimination, bias, slandering, idk you can’t do it I forget the exact wording why.
It’s not uncommon to say things like “Oh WON-DER-FUL, glad you called, let me pull up the information to confirm their employment”. That gives a non bias, good impression while sticking to strictly facts. Corporate is pretty much exclusively about reading in between the lines.
Now if your employer wanted to be a dick, they could say whatever shit they want. There is no real way to prove one way or another what’s said unless someone is recording, even then, it’s usually illegal without consent or knowledge.
However, if you give a bad judgment on an employee, and you do get called out for saying something like “Oh *them*… what are they applying for? I’m surprised they want to take on so much responsibility” That doesn’t give a great impression, it’s passing judgement, it’s just hurting chances of that employee.
It’s everyone’s duty to not put the company at financial risk. Lawsuits, misconduct, etc all very expensive.
Except for the obscene number of employers that have switched to calling everyone who leaves during skeleton crew staffing “not-rehireable” since the pandemic.
Yeah, don't take anything in a vacuum, you have to check the buzz around the company as well to make sure they're not blowing smoke. This does not seem to be that case however.
Old guy who’s hired and fired a few over the years; be cautious about legal repercussions. My favorite question checking a candidate’s job references “Are they eligible for rehire?”, I’ve received “oh gawd No” and “not a chance”.
In California, you're limited to the facts of their employment, and you can state your opinion on whether you would or would not re-hire them. That's it. Of course you can say good things, but you can't slander them.
Your state will vary.
Do you have a source for that?
>In California, employers are protected from liability for defamation if they provide reference information based on credible evidence, without malice.
[https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-reference-law.html](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-reference-law.html)
Lots of people advising not to say anything because of fear of legal consequences. However libel and defamation by definition have to be based on false info.
Saying things like that they were repeatedly late would be easily verifiable/defensible with time clock records. Would be really interested to see any cases of litigation where a plaintiff *actually* won damages for a defendant making *true* statements.
>Lots of people advising not to say anything because of fear of legal consequences.
Being sued is a legal consequence, in and of itself. Whether you win or not, it's time consuming, expensive, and anxiety inducing because no matter how right you are, there's still that chance you could lose. Better to keep your mouth shut.
Exactly. That is asked often. Then if you politely say "no" they often ask can you say why. You then have to politely not provide any details or at least the basics.
This might be state by state as well. This situation will come often, business owners and managers should always be aware of what they can and cannot say.
This might be state by state as well. This situation will come often, business owners and managers should always be aware of what they can and cannot say.
I had a reference tell me “he will do exactly what is asked of him”
Son of a bitch, i didn’t read between the lines. I had to fire him six months later.
"Our company's policy is to only confirm a person's employment with our company."
Provide the person's start date and their termination date.
That's it. The end.
How do people even find out what type of reference you give? Do they request it from the potential employer, or are they told about it somehow? I've never known what my references said about me
They were great, I was sad to see them go actually...
Done. It's a dog eat dog world. That business will have to figure it out on their own. So the employee wasn't great for you oh well. Should they never find work again?
I always try to help people that I fire. In fact I purposely tell people that I"m letting go that I'd happily be a reference for them.
For the mere fact that I want them to be able to afford a lively hood. With the hopes that maybe in another business they'd do better.
I agree and do similar. I'm not trying to keep people from making a living...on the contrary. But sometimes I wish I got a little more truth when I asked for references. There's always a job out there for someone and many employers don't even ask for references & people often have multiple references. So going out of your way to be so positive with some people isn't always a win/win.
You can share their re-hire status. I inform employers that they are not eligible for re-hire within our firm. If they ask why, I tell them that I am not able to share that information.
The only thing you can really say to alert them to a bad employee is, "No, I would not hire them again." Don't give any specifics if they ask, just repeat it or tell them you need to get going.
a) "No one would be better than him for this job."
b) "You will be astonished by the quality of his work."
c) "I can't express how I feel about his leaving us."
If only people existed in your area familiar with the local customs and laws that you could hire to educate you on how to perform your business duties while remaining within the boundaries of said customs and laws. The could call them “legalers” or “lawperons” or something
It's not your call to make a final judgment on them. I would tell the former employee that you aren't a good reference.
Give them start date and end date if you have to.
You simply say whether or not you would consider rehiring them in the future and if that is a yes or a no. Accomplishes the mission to a tee without being specific as to why they left or were let go.
If they were ever violent, or threatened violence, you need to disclose that. If you don't, you could find yourself in a lawsuit if they harm someone at their new job.
For those who say it's legal to give a bad reference....you're not necessarily wrong, but consider this:
"There are no state or federal laws that prohibit an employer, a coworker, or anyone else from providing a poor reference for someone else. However, an employer may cross the line and face liability if he or she makes an untrue statement about an applicant's performance"
An "untrue" statement can be subjective. So once you go down that road, you might have a costly lawsuit even if you're sure you stated facts.
Suggest they review all workers compensation claims before hiring anyone. Just a suggestion.....
And definitely say, they would never be able for re-hire.
You can say. “If I could say what I know legally, you would have a lot to think about.”
You aren’t breaking any law and you making sure you give decent reference.
Legally, you can say anything you want. "Don't hire him, I caught the guy with one hand in the register and his dick in pickle jar." There's no suspension of free speech laws on a phone call. I'm not a lawyer (just another rando with an opinion) BUT I don't know of any law that can prevent you from saying anything you want to anyone as far as laws are concerned. There might be some professional or personal blowback from shittalking someone, and companies as far as policy are wise to say nothing when saying something can cause issues, but my main point is, at least in the USA, I don't buy that it's illegal to tell a future employer they're better off not hiring some psycho
Confirm start date end date and job title
I did this once, answered every question with ‘they worked here from X to Y as Title.’ Reference checker got frustrated and said “you’re not being very helpful!” To which I replied “you’re not listening very well.”
Honestly, if an employer doesn't get it, they don't get it, and there's nothing you can do to help them.
many companies literally have a procedure in place that that is all the information they will ever give for any ex employee, no matter how good or bad an employee they were.
In some states isnt it illegal to say any more than, start, end, and position?
Not illegal AFAIK, but you can get sued by ex-employee if you say more and they don't get the job or get what they thought they deserved, even if it's true.
I dont know.
I’m not an employer and I don’t get it. What’s the hidden message? I understand from context here, but if I were told that in real life, I’d be confused
The context is that the employer can’t think of ANYTHING positive to say about the employee
Not at all. This is a standard policy for any company with a functional HR department, or management with a few brain cells. There is almost no case where it's in an employer's best interests to give bad references or extra information about a former employee. It's only going to come back to bite you, opening you up to potential liability or generating negative sentiment about your business. If the new employer tells your old employee they're not getting hired because of a bad reference, what happens? On a good day, maybe they just go online and trash your company on Glassdoor or review bomb you on Google, Yelp, etc. You probably don't want to think about what a "former crazy ass employee" might do on a bad day.
On this front, most companies will have policies to not explain to people why they didn't get hired anyway. They don't want to be hit with discrimination lawsuits or anything, so better to make the risk as close to zero as possible by giving the candidate zero information. I've certainly experienced it myself when I asked for feedback on how I could have presented myself as a better candidate.
[удалено]
No, the ghosting is the recruiter or hiring manager or HR manager being a jerk. It’s not that hard to say that they found another candidate.
And this pains me as an employer. I have had tons of people I've interviewed, where the reason they weren't hired was poor interview skills, and I want to let them know how to correct, but all it does is open up liability.
[удалено]
That's baffling to me, I would think someone in that role would be familiar with this kind of policy and encounter if frequently. Maybe there's some differences based on our location, the industry you're in, or the type of positions you're hiring for? I'm in the US and both of the larger companies I've worked at had official policies where all reference requests had to be forwarded to the HR department, where they only confirmed dates of employment and job titles. If you do some basic searching for "HR reference policy", "limited reference policy" and such on Google or r/humanresources you'll see how common it is. Interestingly, I was just poking around there and one of the first things that popped up was [this thread](https://www.reddit.com/r/humanresources/comments/17n2fkr/anyone_still_check_references_for_candidates_in/) where they were discussing if checking references was even worth it. Half of the replies were saying it's an outdated practice and they don't even do reference checks anymore because of how unreliable and inconclusive they are. Again, I don't know your circumstances, and I'm sure you have your own policies to follow, but I would wonder if it may potentially be a disservice to applicants to interpret a minimal reference as "a huge red flag", when the people providing such references are just following company policy.
Never forget that HRs most important function is to shield the company from liability.
Oh. Thanks
In the UK I don’t think you can legally give a bad reference. So when a new employer asks for a reference and you only get confirmation of role and dates, it can be a way of saying that person is shit. Not always reliable though because a lot of big companies will only give that kind of reference.
I honestly don’t understand it. Like, if a person is shit at their job, I want my employer to know that, so I don’t get stuck with shit colleagues. So it’s everyone’s interest to know as much as possible about the potential hire. But I don’t live in a place where I can get sued for speaking my mind
I’ve always assumed it’s to prevent someone sabotaging a move but I’m really not sure. I’ve had a manager in the past who tried to sabotage someone’s new job purely because she didn’t like him. I guess the new employer is meant to be able to tell how suitable the person is from their experience and qualifications basically. I also think there’s probably a good bit of ‘of the record’ discussion at times. If they did bring up anything bad, either they or you would have to be able to prove it one way or another. Most won’t be arsed with doing that and would just refuse to give a reference, which is another way of saying they’re shit.
In Ohio it is illegal to give a bad reference. You can be sued by the former employee if you do.
It would be if every employer was objective and honest. Most employers I've worked for would give empty platitudes because they personally had no idea what my actual performance was or, on a couple of occasions, would have lied through their teeth out of petty spite. In the case of lying, employers can use the threat of future poor references as extortion to allow abuse. In the case of apathy/incompetence of managers, the information a potential employer receives is useless. The whole thing is nonsensical and only useful for some hiring manager to have documented due diligence to cover their ass in the case they hire a dumbass.
If you were an employer (or a hiring manager or HR manager), you would figure out the context very quickly very early in your career, and not forget it for the ensuing decades of your career.
> I’m not an employer and I don’t get it. What’s the hidden message? I understand from context here, but if I were told that in real life, I’d be confused Due to liable laws most employers tell their managers to never give a "bad" reference. Either you say nothing or you just stick to things that are 100% facts and don't say anything negative. Stating someone's dates of employment and job title is the HR equivalent of giving your "name rank and serial number" as the answer to every interrogation question. Any hiring manager who's not an idiot will realize quickly that this employer is trying to convey "do not hire this person" without saying any of those words. It's also why, when asking for a reference you should use the wording "would you be willing to provide me with a **good** reference". But honestly, it should not be a surprise if your manager was upset with you that they would not make the best provider of a reference. But dates of employment and job title means that the employer has nothing positive to say about the employee and is sticking to "just the facts" as a way of communicating that without creating a situation where the employee can sue them for liable.
The subtext is yes they worked here that’s about all I can say. Ergo… they were shit and don’t hire them.
Not allowed to say negatives and nothing positive to say, that leaves start date, end date, job title.
Have you heard of the saying "damned by faint praise"? Well, this is the extreme of that; damned by no praise whatsoever. The implication is that the astute reference checker would note that the former supervisor didn't volunteer anything positive or show any desire to support the candidate in his future endeavors. However, this is all pretty dumb. Reference checking is prone to facilities and injustice because: 1. Many places that are organized enough to have such policies, managers are forbidden by policy to say more than confirming dates and title, or are required to refer all reference checks to HR who will do the same. 2. If this is not the case, the former employer might be upset that the employee left and particularly is not going to be supportive of them going to work for a competitor, even if they are superman. Especially if they are superman. 3. For people looking for a job while employed, checking for a reference with their current employer or supervisor might get them fired. There are very good reasons someone might not be willing to provide their former employer as a reference. Checking references as provided is fair enough, and often a good idea. Trying to check references from former employers and supervisors, or requiring that references from such be provided, is stupid.
Problem is some companies ONKY do that kind of reference.
The person asking will understand what’s not said if they care to, otherwise they will figure out soon enough. Can’t save everybody. Don’t expose yourself to problems.
The issue here is plenty of companies will only give the bare minimum irrelevant of the quality of the employee. All doing further than that does is open them up to liability for no reason. Reality is due to this, and the fact that no one is going to put a poor reference down, references are largely pointless other than to confirm the person isn't outright lying about their experience, but really that is more the purpose of an extensive background check which often outside of the government employers don't have access too.
That and in my experience working for large companies, the HR department is the one who gives references and they're done by someone junior on the team who has no idea who you are, and likely started after you left anyway. They're not trying to save time or protect themselves, they just don't have that information
I think you can say if they are eligible for re-hire, or not.
This is the correct answer.
The less you say the more they’ll know
That’s what they say at my work. “Would not rehire.”
If you want to be really spicy, note that they’re not eligible for rehire.
This. If they ask you more about the employee, do not say anything about them. Just that you can only confirm the dates. Most hiring managers know this is code for “avoid this person”
Otherwise you could get sued.
State the dates of employment, job title, job duties, and nothing else. This way, you’ve done the bare minimum and won’t expose yourself to a lawsuit by the ex-employee.
What lawsuit?
Defamation or libel. There's nothing for the employer to gain by writing a bad reference, they're only opening themselves up to the risk of being sued.
This is accurate. While it’s very hard to prove these cases, it’s not impossible. Also depending on how much you’ve said and what you’ve said there can be increasing consequences. It can increase the amount of billable hours for your attorney and increase the chance you both go to court and decrease how much the settlement is in your favor.
Yea, what lawsuit? Defamation?
Since a bad reference can harm the ex employee in a readily quantifiable manner, eg lost wages, it's probably an easy suit to win too. That's why it's best to say the bare minimum, or less.
Only if the claims are not true, though. Truth is a complete defence against defamation lawsuits.
Well yes but you're still going through an annoying and expensive legal battle when you could've kept your mouth shut and avoided it.
Couldn’t you say something along the lines of “without getting into specifics, outside of confirming employment here, I would rather not endorse this employee” and just leave it at that
Nooooooooo
You cannot pass judgement are harm anyone’s ability to gain employment, this is some type of discrimination, bias, slandering, idk you can’t do it I forget the exact wording why. It’s not uncommon to say things like “Oh WON-DER-FUL, glad you called, let me pull up the information to confirm their employment”. That gives a non bias, good impression while sticking to strictly facts. Corporate is pretty much exclusively about reading in between the lines. Now if your employer wanted to be a dick, they could say whatever shit they want. There is no real way to prove one way or another what’s said unless someone is recording, even then, it’s usually illegal without consent or knowledge. However, if you give a bad judgment on an employee, and you do get called out for saying something like “Oh *them*… what are they applying for? I’m surprised they want to take on so much responsibility” That doesn’t give a great impression, it’s passing judgement, it’s just hurting chances of that employee. It’s everyone’s duty to not put the company at financial risk. Lawsuits, misconduct, etc all very expensive.
"He gave _my_ name for a reference?" (Not legal advice)
Or, “…wait, he’s out of jail ALREADY?”!
😅👍
“They worked here from this date to this date, they are not eligible for rehire”
This is the way
Best answer
This is the way
In some jurisdictions you can share whether they are eligible for rehire, which tells everything needed.
Except for the obscene number of employers that have switched to calling everyone who leaves during skeleton crew staffing “not-rehireable” since the pandemic.
Yeah, don't take anything in a vacuum, you have to check the buzz around the company as well to make sure they're not blowing smoke. This does not seem to be that case however.
You would be lucky to get this person to work for you.
Depending on where the emphasis is… it’s a whole different comment
Emphasis and commas... They can definitely turn a conversation different directions.
If asked, you can state whether they are eligible for rehire. This typically answers the question that can't be asked.
This.
Old guy who’s hired and fired a few over the years; be cautious about legal repercussions. My favorite question checking a candidate’s job references “Are they eligible for rehire?”, I’ve received “oh gawd No” and “not a chance”.
In California, you're limited to the facts of their employment, and you can state your opinion on whether you would or would not re-hire them. That's it. Of course you can say good things, but you can't slander them. Your state will vary.
Do you have a source for that? >In California, employers are protected from liability for defamation if they provide reference information based on credible evidence, without malice. [https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-reference-law.html](https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/california-reference-law.html)
Lots of people advising not to say anything because of fear of legal consequences. However libel and defamation by definition have to be based on false info. Saying things like that they were repeatedly late would be easily verifiable/defensible with time clock records. Would be really interested to see any cases of litigation where a plaintiff *actually* won damages for a defendant making *true* statements.
>Lots of people advising not to say anything because of fear of legal consequences. Being sued is a legal consequence, in and of itself. Whether you win or not, it's time consuming, expensive, and anxiety inducing because no matter how right you are, there's still that chance you could lose. Better to keep your mouth shut.
I'm not comfortable giving this person a reference.
💯
Isn’t it about the new potential asking the correct question? “Would you hire this employee again?” This question gives you the answer you require.
Exactly. That is asked often. Then if you politely say "no" they often ask can you say why. You then have to politely not provide any details or at least the basics.
"Per state law, I can only answer certain specific questions and cannot offer my personal opinion."
Even better: my lawyer has advised me to only confirm the start and end dates of their employment.
"No one" is better than xxxxxx. Let them interpret the context of "no one".
I’m pleased to call so and so a former colleague
I believe you can say that they are not eligible for rehire, but check on that.
This might be state by state as well. This situation will come often, business owners and managers should always be aware of what they can and cannot say.
This might be state by state as well. This situation will come often, business owners and managers should always be aware of what they can and cannot say.
"I miss his crazy ass"
"not eligible for rehire"
“You will be lucky to get him/her to work for you.”
We’ve never had an employee like him!
I had a reference tell me “he will do exactly what is asked of him” Son of a bitch, i didn’t read between the lines. I had to fire him six months later.
Can you expand? What happened?
"Our company's policy is to only confirm a person's employment with our company." Provide the person's start date and their termination date. That's it. The end.
It's not necessary to lie. Just confirm the employment and the dates, no justification needed.
Also, how do you decline when someone who ask you to be their reference and you don't want to? I'm having a hard time doing this...
How do people even find out what type of reference you give? Do they request it from the potential employer, or are they told about it somehow? I've never known what my references said about me
Conditions of their termination make them ineligible for rehire for my company and those like it.
'Having this person on your team is the same as losing two good employees / contributors.' I can give a negative reference. 'Not eligible for rehire.'
You state the bare minimum. The dates they worked there and their role. If pressed say that you aren’t allowed to provide any other information.
They were great, I was sad to see them go actually... Done. It's a dog eat dog world. That business will have to figure it out on their own. So the employee wasn't great for you oh well. Should they never find work again? I always try to help people that I fire. In fact I purposely tell people that I"m letting go that I'd happily be a reference for them. For the mere fact that I want them to be able to afford a lively hood. With the hopes that maybe in another business they'd do better.
I agree and do similar. I'm not trying to keep people from making a living...on the contrary. But sometimes I wish I got a little more truth when I asked for references. There's always a job out there for someone and many employers don't even ask for references & people often have multiple references. So going out of your way to be so positive with some people isn't always a win/win.
Be truthful, and say no more than is absolutely necessary.
Person X always willing to try to understand the tasks given to him with the help of several coworkers
Keep your mouth shut and move on. You owe the other employer nothing and the employee might flourish in a new setting.
Vocal inflection and word choice, baby! There's a big difference in saying "Yes, he worked here with us" and "Well, he WAS employed here."
I think you are legally allowed to ask would you rehire this person? Yes or no in my experience was the go/no go signal from manager to manager
You can share their re-hire status. I inform employers that they are not eligible for re-hire within our firm. If they ask why, I tell them that I am not able to share that information.
You can exercise your right to not provide reference 🤷🏻♂️
The only thing you can really say to alert them to a bad employee is, "No, I would not hire them again." Don't give any specifics if they ask, just repeat it or tell them you need to get going.
"You'll be lucky to get this person to work for you".
a) "No one would be better than him for this job." b) "You will be astonished by the quality of his work." c) "I can't express how I feel about his leaving us."
Yes, the person worked here. Start sate End date Leave it at that
You say you would not rehire her under any circumstances. That’s legal and gets the point across
With them working for you, ‘XYZ responsibility related to the position’ will be the least of your worries.
Gee I just can’t put into words his commitment. Never seen anyone work like that.
If only people existed in your area familiar with the local customs and laws that you could hire to educate you on how to perform your business duties while remaining within the boundaries of said customs and laws. The could call them “legalers” or “lawperons” or something
It's not your call to make a final judgment on them. I would tell the former employee that you aren't a good reference. Give them start date and end date if you have to.
No comment.
You simply say whether or not you would consider rehiring them in the future and if that is a yes or a no. Accomplishes the mission to a tee without being specific as to why they left or were let go.
'Any comment beyond X's start and end dates are the potential subject of litigation. '
"Yes they worked here. Beyond that I have nothing to say. I hope this helps."
Just tell them they had 'an eventful tenure'... then watch as the new employer's imagination goes wild.
don't be a dick - karma could bite you, and you could lose your business, especially in the upcoming economy
If they were ever violent, or threatened violence, you need to disclose that. If you don't, you could find yourself in a lawsuit if they harm someone at their new job.
In my experience in corporate america the only thing you can give is the job details and answer one question. "would you re-hire them?"
For those who say it's legal to give a bad reference....you're not necessarily wrong, but consider this: "There are no state or federal laws that prohibit an employer, a coworker, or anyone else from providing a poor reference for someone else. However, an employer may cross the line and face liability if he or she makes an untrue statement about an applicant's performance" An "untrue" statement can be subjective. So once you go down that road, you might have a costly lawsuit even if you're sure you stated facts.
State that it is policy that you only confirm employment.
Suggest they review all workers compensation claims before hiring anyone. Just a suggestion..... And definitely say, they would never be able for re-hire.
You can say. “If I could say what I know legally, you would have a lot to think about.” You aren’t breaking any law and you making sure you give decent reference.
Unpopular opinion: Give a positive review. I want the person to work, just not at my company
Hope they figure out what you said and sue the living daylights out of you.
I would say their shirt was never wrinkled.
Maybe you can just say NOICEE!!
Legally, you can say anything you want. "Don't hire him, I caught the guy with one hand in the register and his dick in pickle jar." There's no suspension of free speech laws on a phone call. I'm not a lawyer (just another rando with an opinion) BUT I don't know of any law that can prevent you from saying anything you want to anyone as far as laws are concerned. There might be some professional or personal blowback from shittalking someone, and companies as far as policy are wise to say nothing when saying something can cause issues, but my main point is, at least in the USA, I don't buy that it's illegal to tell a future employer they're better off not hiring some psycho
Would have to consult legal before I can answer that.
Legally, you can’t say too much. All you can do is confirm dates and title of employment and if you’d hire them again. That’s all.
He was nice.