Are basic factual references now standard when recruiting?

[Rainallnight]

I work for a small charity (no HR department) and am trying to recruit someone at the moment.

The former employers of our preferred candidate say it’s their policy only to provide ‘X worked here in the role of Y, from A - Z’ kind of references.

Is this more standard/widespread now? I don’t remember it being like this last time we recruited. And how on earth are we supposed to find out a meaningful account of how someone did in past roles?

Standard for my entire, long career.

the more recent shift at my employer is I am not supposed to answer myself. All queries are directed to HR.

Yes, completely standard.

It makes sense: companies don't want to get sued and specific references from managers run the risk of being subjective.

It makes sense to just have a reference from HR confirming dates of employment and job title.

It's completely normal yes. Most companies don't employ a person whose job it is to write references and so the standard started/finished reference is quick and accurate.

I know in my last place of work this was the case.

Someone told me that if there's a grievance upheld against you that needs to be declared by hr in the reference, don't know if that's actually true though..

It’s been like this for decades OP