References - does anyone still give proper ones

[paulears]

When I get reference requests for people who have always been great working for me, I always give really good ones, and for a few even add that I would have them back like a shot if I had something suitable and offten say I'd encourage you to give them the opportunity etc etc. I'm honest. If I get a reference for somebody I really did not get on with, I confirm they worked for me, the dates and what their job role was.

A big firm near me who do my sort of thing had training today and the heads of department were surprised to hear they must only give what I always regarded as the 'bad' reference. They cannot give good ones any more - just a standard proforma that many people like me would read as a bad reference? Have I missed all this?

 

[WaveJumper]

I thought people stopped giving ”proper” references years ago

 

[paulears]

I've given lots in the past ten years, and two this month. Maybe it's because suffolk and norfolk are backwards, but one of my ex-people who left to do baby things, applied for a job looking after vulnerable children and adults - something she would be great for, so I gave her a glowing reference, and invited them to phone for a chat, which they did, and I was pleased she got the job. What's the matter with this?

 

[JEREMY HAWKE]

A bloke we know called "Chuffer" asked for a reference for a new job
The previous employer phoned the new company and said "He knows more millionaires than anybody else in Devon so you had better look after him"

Chuffer got the job and years later he is still there

 

[WaveJumper]

I think its due to the fear of litigation especially if they give a poor reference or the fear of information being misconstrued in some way, but the I think many just cant be bothered and see it as a chore and your lucky if you get confirmation of start and finish dates. Think there’s been a lot of debate on the whole topic of references, are they worth the paper there written on, interesting though as I bet many of these companies still ask for one When recruiting.

 

[IanSuth]

Other than in education where there are a totally different set of rules and expectations re references I think the written reference is dead.

I did recruitment for 27 years and 99% were bland "X worked for us as Y from a date to b date"

If you want real info ignore writing to HR (which is what you will be told to do) as they will give you the vanilla reference - pick the phone up and speak to a current or ex manager - but make sure it is the real person (i had a candidate give us his "managers" name and mobile number, quick check on LinkedIn showed it was a colleague not the manager so I usually went via switchboard and checked job title). All offers are "subject to satisfactory reference" anyway

A real easy test is if an interview is going well ask the applicant "If i want to take you on I will want a quick discussion with your current boss after you have handed your notice in, what will he say ?"

Although the best answer ever to a client asking a candidate nearly that question "If I rang your boss now what would he say about you" was "He would say - I thought he was at home waiting for a new sofa"

 

[HFE Signs]

Written references are a waste of time, much better to phone them up, they are much more likely to be honest with you verbally. People don't like putting anything negative in writing.

 

[IanSuth]

Written references are a waste of time, much better to phone them up, they are much more likely to be honest with you verbally. People don't like putting anything negative in writing.

And less likely to get palmed off with HR

People on average like to help people, so if they liked the now ex employee they will want to help them by giving you a reference, if they are glad to see them gone they will want to help you by telling you why they are glad.

 

[eteb3]

The House of Lords judicial committee found in 1994 that an employer owes a duty of care to a former employee, so the employer can be sued in negligence if they don't take enough care to ensure their reference is accurate.

The trial judge said that allegations in the reference that the employee had been dishonest required "a thorough investigation into their truth". (I imagine the more serious the allegation, the more thorough the investigation required.)

One of the law lords would have dismissed the appeal because of the bland and useless references that would result if the employer was found liable. The majority believed this was not a real inhibition on frank references carefully prepared.

 

[paulears]

I was very annoyed with the place I worked for who after ten years could not even confirm I worked for them. I sent a staff photo from the graduation ceremony that had our names on it! I'd like to think a glowing reference still helps?

 

[Mr D]

I was very annoyed with the place I worked for who after ten years could not even confirm I worked for them. I sent a staff photo from the graduation ceremony that had our names on it! I'd like to think a glowing reference still helps?

My employer provides references to staff at any time - they do not often give references to those who simply ask and managers are wary of discussing staff on calls where other party is unknown.

I was amused by the letter my wife was given when she left her job of almost 20 years - it was a letter to whom it may concern and was somewhat glowing. And full of spelling mistakes and grammatical errors.
Not exactly worth using for any retail or office work.