Reference request - what to say?

[HonestyOrExpedience]

Posting for traffic, and NC'd in case outing.

Last year I had someone in my team in an administrator role on a fixed-term contract. She was pleasant and hard-working but she just couldn't cut it at the job. I gave her hours and hours of additional support and training over and above what would usually be the case in that (or any) role; she had a lengthy induction; clear action plans; weekly 1:1s; access to all sorts of written guides/training/previous examples of work, including recordings of training sessions that she could repeat as needed; she had a buddy; I encouraged her to join supportive networks; we went through Occupational Health in case there were underlying issues and implemented their recommendations...you name it, I/we tried it but she was simply a square peg in a round hole. Her CV suggested she had done similar roles and she said all the right things at interview (although things she let slip while working with us made it clear there had been some embellishments and omissions) but although she certainly had some strengths and skills, they weren't the ones needed for this job. When it came to the end of her FTC we let her go and didn't seek to explore renewing/extending her contract.

I have received a reference request for her and one of the questions is "would you re-employ X in a similar role?" Now I know I could simply tick 'yes' and she'll be someone else's problem, there'd be unlikely to be any comeback on me, but I have to sign a declaration that I've given honest information and the real answer is no, we absolutely wouldn't employ her again in that or any vaguely similar role!

WWYD?

I thought they coldnt ask those things anymore

id try and get hold of the employer myself and say youd rather just give dates

I'm not sure some of the posters who have replied here have ever actually worked in HR.
Please ignore the "tell the truth, I would" replies.
Exposing the company to a defamation suit, no matter the documentary evidence to support your position is NEVER advisable. Refuse to complete the form. Confirm employment dates and job title and nothing more.

Please just confirm her dates and job title. If you’re being asked for a reference then she’s probably been successful at interview. It seems really nasty to think her offer could be revoked because of you. How is she supposed to get another job if you do this? If you’re her last employer what else is she supposed to do?

I get that you don’t think she was very good. But she might have learnt from her mistakes and you don’t know how she will be in a new environment. If she really is rubbish at her job they can let her go after the probation period.

In my area the reference forms ask for much more than dates employed and are completed by managers rather than HR. They also ask this question. I am always honest and on one occasion ticked no and gave the reason why. So long as references are honest and factual they don't need to be positive.

I would respond to who ever sent you the survey/ non amendable reference form and tell them you will supply role title and dates only.

In these situations, I just ignore the form that the prospective employer has sent me, and I send a brief factual statement instead of dates worked, job title etc. I don't think I have ever had this approach questioned by a prospective employer...I assume that they interpret it in whatever way they see fit!

Not replying will probably have the same affect to replying no.

You'd have to be fairly naive to not spot that someone who won't answer the question with a yes, wants to say no but is avoiding doing so for whatever reason.

Those saying that people have been sued over bad references, surely that the claimant would only win if it can be proven that the bad reference is unfair. If you have evidence that the person in question wasn't competent, then you have nothing to worry about.

Whilst I don't agree that you can never give an substantive reference, I wouldn't ever give one about suitability for a role unless you already manage that role in an organisation. How do you know what they would be asked to do and it what circumstances.

I have given references in the past where I've reported on factual matters such as timekeeping and disciplinary record.

Sorry - just read the post again and see that my answer doesn't make sense!

No not illegal to provide a bad reference illegal to provide a false / non factual reference that could cause loss to the person it is about or the person seeking to rely on it.
What so many people don't realise is a false positive reference could get you into a lot of trouble if someone uses the glowing reference to employ someone and then realise they are a total lemon.

For those interested in the law around this Spring is the first case I remember

www.lawteacher.net/cases/spring-v-guardian-assurance.php

By the way referring to it as illegal isn't correct, we're taking about civil law here

Do you have an HR department? If so, forward to them.

If not, then contact the company, tell them you only send standardised references and email your own letter. I have worked in HR for many years and the only information we include is:

• Full name
• Dates of employment
• Job title

I have been that employee. I was in an admin role that I couldn’t handle, I wasn’t given any training though and they had mentioned at interview that I would need it. I was also on a FTC. I asked them directly about references, they said they would be honest and say they wouldn’t employ me again in a similar admin capacity, but would absolutely give me a job in a customer service role (like on reception) or doing basic admin.

In that case don’t complete it. When they chase you, you should hopefully get a chance to explain why you couldn’t.

It sucks for their future employees that there’s a delay but they can’t force you to complete it.

It's a very common myth.
It has to be true, that's all.

By couldn’t complete it I mean you can say that you’re only able to confirm dates of employment and job title and the form didn’t let you do that.

They might not be much use, but in lots of cases where departments have changed around or there has been high staff turnover, it might be impossible to find a staff member who knew the person. So that's all a lot of people will have.

If you work for a company with an HR department, I'd simply respond to the reference request with their contact details. I sometimes get these reference requests when a former colleague have given my details to the agency / new employer. Our reference policy is that only HR can provide references and they only give date of employment and job title on the date of leaving (might have got that wrong but something like that).

She was wrong for your company but maybe she’d be right for them. Surely, she must have been able to do some things, even if it’s just using Office, Teams etc. It might be that her new role focusses on the skills she has and she may have realised what she’s crap at. If it were me, I’d tick yes just so I didn’t fuck up her chances of hopefully getting better. She may be struggling financially too and really need the job.

these references that just give dates are worse than useless. I want to know what the person was like as an employee so that I don’t waste my time and resources by offering the job to someone who won’t be able to do it.

But referees have no legal right to give you this information, and you shouldn't be asking for it. There are no circumstances under which you are going to be able to make reliable comparisons between candidates on the basis of references. You should sort out your recruiting practices so you can find out whether someone is capable of doing the job. If you are relying on CVs and conventional panel interviews to select staff it's your own fault if you get duds: you can't expect referees to compensate for your HR practices being stuck in the nineteen-fifties.

Put a dot in their mandatory box to save yourself the headache.

Would you employ the pleasant and hardworking employee in a job that was easier/within her capabilities? One that was similar in that it was on the same site? Then that's good enough.

If she isn't able to do your one job, which sounds quite complex going by the amount of things you gave her, it seems unkind to render her unemployable to anybody else.

It doesn't oblige you to take her back. But it does mean she isn't on the dole because nobody looked at the nice and hardworking bit.

I've been that employee albeit in the NHS. One job was a bad fit for my personality and life situation at the time, and they supported me moving into something very different and exploring other longterm career options. When I had to add them as a referee for something I needed to apply for it turned out they had a tick box referencing system that included "would you employ this person". So they ticked no, which was perfectly true, and there was no space for comment or clarification. The role I was trying to move into was a much much better fit for all the reasons the first one wasn't.

16 years later I'm finally revisiting the possibility of clinical work ...

OP, I really don't know what to advise you. The fact that there is room to comment is good, if you do decide to fill it in, for I think honesty should be applied. Hopefully someone in your HR department can advise you whether there is appropriate wording you can use or if you should decline.

I personally would never say ANYTHING that could hurt someone's chances to find a new job unless they had done something dangerous or illegal that could come back on me if it wasn't disclosed. Even if they were lazy, even if I personally disliked them, I would not fuck with their livelihood and future with a bad reference. There's just too much at stake for them. If a request for reference comes through as a form with a tickbox for "would hire again yes/no" and I can't honestly say yes, I just ignore the form and send a reference in the format I prefer.

You are not legally required to answer the question much less expand on it, in spite of the field being marked "mandatory". 99% of the time, the person has already been selected and the references are just a formality. A breezy cheerful reference where you say generic positive things instead of answering specific questions will be very unlikely to cause the hiring manager to start again with their search, but a negative reference very likely would. I don't want that kind of power over someone, and I also know from experience (as an employee and as a manager) that the wrong fit in one job may be the perfect fit in another.

I feel like it's borderline psychopathic to do anything to that might harm someone's chance at being hired (with the exception of dangerous or illegal activity as noted above), especially if you are a reference they can't do without because you were their manager at the last-but-one job. If you absolutely cannot bring yourself to find one or two positive things to say, ask your HR department to send a generic reference confirming their employment dates and nothing else. That's all some companies will do, anyway, even for star employees, out of (misguided) fear of legal reprisals.

As PP have said, it is unusual to provide anything aside from confirming that Ms X was employed from this date to that date in Y role.

Just ignore the form and send back an email saying you only provide basic info as outlined above.