Charity not giving references to Volunteers

[dottypotter]

AIBU to think a charity should give a reference to a long term volunteer. Have volunteered for a charity for a long time and been reliable etc and was told yesterday that the charity dont give references. They will only confirm you worked there and the duties you did. Anyone else heard of this and why is that? How will that help you if you need to give charity as a reference? Is it right and who decided that?

If they do dates and duties it sounds like they give same reference for volunteers as paid staff.

It’s possibly a time thing, as well as the issues raised if someone doesn’t agree with the reference you write them.

I think this is typical of a lot of places and isn’t seen as a concern to potential employers.

That is a basic reference.

My work (NHS) only do that for all employees now.

Sounds totally normal for anywhere I've ever worked so I wouldn't see why it's any different for volunteering.
That is a modern day reference tbh.

I don't know whether my suggestion is the "done thing", but I thought references were usually personal rather than from the organisation as such.

Would the charity forbid someone who had been your supervisor or worked alongside you from writing a reference enthusing about how well they thought you performed your job?

That is a reference.

Name
Confirmation of Length of service

Would the charity forbid someone who had been your supervisor or worked alongside you from writing a reference enthusing about how well they thought you performed your job?

I could give personal references (education) but I was not allowed to used headed paper. Headed paper references only came out of HR (academy)

Sadly this is common. I used to work around it for those who were brilliant by giving them my details as a personal reference instead.

Dont employers want to know about you though and what your like as a person etc i thought thats what a reference was?

It's fine for them to do that. I think it is becoming more common in general tbh. They don't have to give a reference at all.

Dont employers want to know about you though and what your like as a person etc i thought thats what a reference was?

They do, but they’ll also understand why the reference is as it is.

They’ll also know that references are not always worth the paper they are written on

why arent they worth anything though?

Because how someone fits in in one place isn’t always the same as they do in another.

Plus they depend entirely on the relationship between the person writing the reference and who it’s about.

Where I used to work what kind of reference you got depended entirely on how much Susan* liked you. If you were one of her pals then your reference was glowing, but if you weren’t it was short and factual about duties. The problem with that was that anyone who knew the place knew that managers had the freedom to write what they liked so a short reference or non personalised reference was effectively seen as a bad reference.

That's all my work will give as a reference for anyone, doesn't matter if you were a star or were fired for poor performance. Their rationale is that how you perform at one job won't necessarily speak to how you will perform at the next.

References that tell you anything about someone are getting very rare.

OP there are plenty of decent employers who do this - I think the Police is one, for example. It can be because of staff turnover so you can struggle to get people who remember X volunteer and can give such a detailed reference about them.

Standard reference these days
Whether you work or volunteer

It basically just confirms you are who you say you are

Yeah that’s pretty standard. Reference requests I receive (charity sector) are generally asking you to confirm the person worked there and what they did and sometimes they ask things like sick days, disciplinaries, capacity to perform certain duties and if you would employ again. It’s almost entirely fact-based rather than an opportunity to wax lyrical about how fab you are. I imagine that’s to protect employees from discrimination and to protect employers from false claims.

It’s often a policy put in place to safeguard against claims. If you give a negative reference and the person didn’t agree with it they come banging on your door. Much safer to do standard refs

I thought that it was common knowledge that references these days consist only of the very basic, indisputable facts?

I work for a charity. This is the sort of reference both volunteers and paid staff get.

I worked for a charity for 5 years (permanent, full time) and I got exactly the same type of reference. It’s quite common, my new company were fine with it.

Fairly standard but I agree it is wrong. A law exempting references from libel or other legal action would be the way forward but it will never happen.

Hasn't this been normal for about 15 years. Yes new employer would want to know all sorts but the charity doesn't want to have a claim so...