Refuse to provide a reference

[ByMyName]

I own a small business and we provide employment to a small team.

Last year we took on a junior member of staff through a government backed scheme. The scheme reimbursed the business the cost of employing someone who was on UC and at risk of long term unemployment. In turn we provided training and work experience. Win-win.

This particular employee is on a fixed term contract. If it was not a government backed scheme, we would not have kept her for a week.

She was working from home as most of our staff do since covid. She had no childcare provision and her children would scream during staff meeting. She is constantly late and unavailable during working hours. She also had many sick days. Her work is poor and she has shown no improvement despite training and coaching.

Her line manager has had several informal conversations with her. I asked not to push to a formal warning as it was a fixed term contract anyway.

Can I inform the employee that we will not provide her with a reference?

Oh do not perturb yourself too much. As a current mature job seeker I can assure you that about 50% of the jobs advertised in my area are govt-backed schemes - Kickstart being the flavour of the moment. And 50% of the rest are for elderly carers.

Of the rest that I'm suitably qualified and experienced for, there's major hoop-jumping and a definite reliance on software and various 'online' tests to weed out, if not the 'slackers', then just about everybody else. Eg: my local District Council's Recruitment software asks for my "Social Security Number" - we're in Devon ffs, not bloody California.

After failing an online personality test for emptying bins and picking up dog poo, amongst many other test failures - if your employee passes these hoops and you're actually contacted for a reference - well, it's time for me to head back to the caves.

Gosh what a nasty post. Give the poor woman a break, and a reference.

What benefit would you get if you didn't?

Oh that's right, the satisfaction of making someone who is clearly already struggling feel even lower. 👍

@ByMyName

Let me elaborate a little more. The employee has gone through induction and extensive training at a cost to the business. We have policies in place for sick days etc. All issues have been raised with her verbally and actions have been sent to her via email. I don’t want to raise any formal disciplinary as it’s not worth management time as we have decided not to keep her at the end of her contract.

The main issue is she does not have childcare during all of her working hours. She uses the free 30
Hours and the rest of the time she has very young children around the house, who are very noisy. I am not sure how she manages any work with them around to be honest.

Lockdown was an exceptional time but we did see a
decline in productivity. We are also very flexible when parents need to have children at home when sick etc. but I expect all staff to have childcare in place during their working hours.

I spoke with her today and she got very emotional. She said I’m a single mother, what do you expect me to do? I explained that like every employer I expect her to have childcare arrangements during working hours.

My own children are nursery as are the children of other staff members…

I wonder what her salary is My first salaried job, slightly above minimum wage for my contracted hours, barely covered my round the clock childcare, never mind my other bills (bearing in mind for most people these will be higher if working from home). She is using her 30 hours so she clearly is trying, but sadly the support is not as great as it seems - even with the %of childcare costs you get back from the job centre - you have to pay it upfront and then get it reimbursed rather than them paying their bit and you paying yours, and it left me in an endless cycle of debt. I suspect she is really struggling and was told she has to apply and take on the job even if unsuitable in order to no keep her benefits (which of course in turn would cause a massive knock on effect such as losing housing and other support).

And to add, yes YABU. Hopefully she can find a employer that pays enough to cover her childcare. You don’t need to add to that difficulty when you can just give a very basic ‘yes she worked here’ and dates. Why are you trying to make this poor woman’s life even more difficult?

I can’t believe some of these responses! The woman is employed to do a job, as we all are. What would she do if the role was fully office based? It’s been pointed out many times on here that, barring emergencies, parents should have childcare in place while they’re working.

It might actually help her in future to fully explain what the expectations are (productivity targets, % calls answered etc) and that while she is working, she is meant to be working and not looking after children.

How many hours a week is the role? If she has 30hrs of childcare, that must cover the majority of her working hours, surely?

Maybe the OPs employee is struggling financially.

Equally maybe she's also looking for an easy ride, or more charitably, going through the motions. Not everyone is diligent or committed. There are clearly issues with her performance generally, not just when her children are present.

Just because the OP is a business owner doesn't mean she has to bend over backwards to everyone she employs when they aren't putting any effort in themselves. It doesn't sound like the OP or other staff are unsympathetic per se, but this person simply isn't performing at any level. Not unreasonable to ensure she is well aware of those performance issues and that any reference will be no more than dates of employment, and will include sickness/ other absence, any Bradford triggers met etc.

It's not always as simple as she absolutely can't afford childcare either,; I have seen many posters on here since COVID who view working from home as an ideal opportunity to cut childcare costs by having children (babies in some cases) at home for at least part of the day. Often failing to see that the flexibility offered to parents during lockdown was an emergency measure and should not now become the norm...hence the outrage when people are asked back to the office 2 days a week and they are flapping about childcare for a full working day, when they should have continued to have this in place.

Well chrissy if the employee in question is unable to obtain the prerequisite childcare then that makes her unemployable for awhile doesn't it.

But then, given that UC doesn't meet living costs, without employment this woman and her children will be propelled into a worsening cycle of poverty. I'm quite employment suitable, now,
never stopped working during the years of being an LP of a disabled child (now young adult) but had to be self-employed or unemployed.

And I can't get a job either - too fucking over the hill now.

The main issue is she does not have childcare during all of her working hours. She uses the free 30 Hours and the rest of the time she has very young children around the house, who are very noisy. I am not sure how she manages any work with them around to be honest.

Surely that's a maximum of about 8 hours without childcare? Presumably she could make up the time when the kids are in bed? If noisy kids are the main issue that's a very poor reason for a disciplinary.

I spoke with her today and she got very emotional. She said I’m a single mother, what do you expect me to do? I explained that like every employer I expect her to have childcare arrangements during working hours.

I don't understand how, after all the comments on here, you can think that's a constructive and supportive comment. I wouldn't speak like that to anyone in tears, let alone someone the government was paying me to train back into the workforce.

Teach her to problem solve, help her figure out the best solution and set her small achieveable targets about to how improve her work. It's worth the managment time if for no other reason than it's good practice for you.

'Teach her to problem solve...'

Jesus wept.

Honestly, some people will have an excuse for everything and it's rather naive to think they're all just hard done by and in need of support. Some people just don't want to be helped, they want an excuse not to do something. I can't say if this employee is one of those, but I suspect so. I've come across many people who do the whole 'I can't be expected to do X because...' innumerable times over the years. And even if you gave those people workable solutions to their issues, or even helped them see those solutions themselves, they'd find a reason why it wouldn't or couldn't work for them. Because they simply don't want to.

YABU. Just provide her with a basic reference.

TBH it sounds like you expect the moon on a stick. Cheap labour and an employee with a neat little life who fits exactly into your company.

A single mother relying on min wage and free childcare hours and you expect her to pay for wrap around care? Someone who you have clearly written off and aren't willing to coach and help through a formal process? Yeah, frankly it sounds like you are a shit employer and this person would be better off job hunting again.

You can state she was employed through govmt backed scheme from this date to this date. We would not have continued to employ her

You Can be factual and say less is more

Really though when an employer says person employed from x to x date, l(& on a scheme) and nothing more, it speaks volumes

They can ring you for rent and you can verbally say "I can't discuss but we would not have chosen to employ afterwards"

Usually when someone is a good employer people fall over themselves today what a lovely employee...

Best get your next govt-subsidised employee from the Kickstart scheme, it's for young people aged under 25 so generally childcare shouldn't be a 'factor' to account for.

Let's face it - it's actually impossible for any LP on a low-wage to use state-subsidized childcare as their only childcare option and fulfill the expectations of most employers.

No blame, it's just a fact. It's always only been possible with 'informal' childcare available too. Not so long ago this was the only option, including the 'local woman' who took in kids at a price the working mothers could afford, completely unregulated of course.

Never mind teenagers demanding £10ph for babysitting, rather than a couple of quid for the freedom, tv and phone.

Single parents have always been around, but society as we know it now, hasn't.

Cannot believe some of the responses here.

The OP higher someone to do a job that they have not performed well.

Why on earth would they treat her any different to anyone else in the same position? Fully appreciate it's difficult to manage job and being a single mum but that's not her employers problem.

No one wants to give a false reference as I'm sure the OP wouldn't appreciate it if they hired someone on the bais of a false reference.

I would leave it non specific, X was employed under X scheme from dates Y to Z.

I must say I wouldn’t want to work at your company after reading your OP. How petty and vindictive to not give a factual reference than any other employer would. I am assuming this is a small company but your management style needs work and you should be more supportive to your employees who are trying to get into work. This is a government backed scheme ffs.

I wouldn't give her a reference. How is that fair to any other company who might look at employing her? And the Benefits Office need to know that in her present situation she is unsuitable for work.

Was she actually paid properly? I think a temp scheme does make it hard to commit to childcare that's probably more than she could afford. Personally I'd give someone the benefit of the doubt.

@user062648910

I must say I wouldn’t want to work at your company after reading your OP. How petty and vindictive to not give a factual reference than any other employer would. I am assuming this is a small company but your management style needs work and you should be more supportive to your employees who are trying to get into work. This is a government backed scheme ffs.

I think the company are being quite kind actually. If it were me, I'd terminate her contract early. I suspect the only reason this company isn't is because there'll be penalties under the scheme. It's a place of work not a social centre.

"we would not have kept her for a week."

That's not being kind.

That's writing someone off from the get-go.

I would provide just the standard details as above. Even if you get a telephone call asking for further details, unless a formal HR process has been followed you should never elaborate on your perception of performance the legal risks are too high. You managed your risk by having her on a FTC. Pity her new employer.

You have got a 'free' employee. She's not good enough for you, you resent her and want to further complicate her life by refusing a reference. How very Victorian. I think you should also turn her away from your door and point her towards the nearest workhouse. You know that phrase 'you get what you pay for'? Apply it to your workforce.

Recruiter here and it's pretty standard that companies just verify dates and job title. Many say it is their policy not to provide any other information. Just make this your policy and you protect yourself from being taken to an employment tribunal and this woman gets another chance somewhere else that might be more geared up to support her.

If she's on UC, then 85% of childcare costs will be covered. It seems like her job coach has helped explain this.

Could you change her role to part time so that she only works when she does have childcare, and adjust pay accordingly