Company Policy Not To Give References

whatnext

Just wondering what peoples opinions are on the following.

Do you think it is morally acceptable for companies who will not give references to insist on having references for prospective employees?

I'm having a stand off on moral grounds with a client on it at the moment.

Their policy is only to confirm dates and title for past employees but will not accept the same as a reference. It seems to be more of an issue with multi nationals and the irony of all this is that the position is a HR position and at management level, and the candidate is known to the potential new employers senior management at senior level but HR are digging their heels in. And it gets better, they won't accept an internal reference from one of their own employees.

There is a solution available in this instance, and we will be able to progress but I would be interested to see what peoples views are on the matter.

Procrastastudy

whatnext wrote: »

Just wondering what peoples opinions are on the following.

Do you think it is morally acceptable for companies who will not give references to insist on having references for prospective employees?

I'm having a stand off on moral grounds with a client on it at the moment.

Their policy is only to confirm dates and title for past employees but will not accept the same as a reference. It seems to be more of an issue with multi nationals and the irony of all this is that the position is a HR position and at management level, and the candidate is known to the potential new employers senior management at senior level but HR are digging their heels in. And it gets better, they won't accept an internal reference from one of their own employees.

There is a solution available in this instance, and we will be able to progress but I would be interested to see what peoples views are on the matter.

Most companies only give a very basic reference, which is fine imo. Insisting on full references seems a bit daft though. The only people likely to give them will be doing so outside most companies policy.

Mrs OBumble

My view is that it's totally daft - and that recruiters should tell them so and refuse to work with them in the future.

Frankly it's not worth the recruiter's time, when there is a high risk that potential placements will fall through due to contradictory policies like that.

Irish_Elect_Eng

It may be silly, but both policies are i place for good reasons.

Mr. Loverman

whatnext wrote: »

I'm having a stand off on moral grounds with a client on it at the moment.

I know this is maybe off-topic but you will lose the stand off. Any sort of argument with an employer (even if you are 100% in the right and "win") will only result in them disliking you.

tatli_lokma

It is a foolish policy IMO, as it only encourages people to find a way around it and get fake references. For eg, the last place my OH worked in was a large multinational, and as with the case OP discribes, they will not give any real reference. All he got was confirmation that he worked there from x to y date, his job title and department.

Now hubby had won a few awards whilst there for performace etc, but they would not confirm or deny this. Luckily he had the letters confirming his bonuses and awards for performance so could back up his claims with these. It appears that large multi-nationals, in particular ones who are American are very reluctant to put anything in writing which someone might consider influential when making a job offer.

the new job insisted on a personal reference...so he asked his manager if they would 'off the record' give a verbal reference and they refused as they were afraid they would be disciplined were it to be discovered. Apparently management are terrified into not giving said reference.

In the end OH had other people who could give a personal reference, but the irony of it is that these people were employers for jobs unrelated to his current role - the multinational would have been the most appropriate.

All this silliness does is force people to provide fake references. OH didn't need to, but had it come down to it, might have been faced with getting someone to pretend to be his old manager in the multinational or loose the new job.

This has particular problems if you are not Irish or have a limited work history - if you have only ever worked for said multinational and then want to go for a new job, most places want 2 references. If you can get one really good one, they might be flexible, but if all you can get is a 'so-and-so worked here on these dates' type reference, what hope have you got of moving on, and possibly up?

I find it very unfair - if you worked somewhere and did a good job then the fair and reasonable thing for an employer to do is give a reference to this effect. If you are worried about litigation and dont want to put it in writing, fair enough, but at least give a phone reference.

whatnext

Mr. Loverman wrote: »

I know this is maybe off-topic but you will lose the stand off. Any sort of argument with an employer (even if you are 100% in the right and "win") will only result in them disliking you.

You are totally 100% correct.

But in this instance it is not an issue, I took the role on having been approached by one of the senior management in the company, they had been looking for over a year. I recently placed said managers wife in a pretty good job and she asked me if I wanted to talk to her O/H about it, and he called me. If I never recruit for another multinational again I'll not shed a tear. Generally I work a small niche industry that I have worked in myself and I'm known in and have been recruiting in for over 10 years, and I'm happy in my space.

To be honest if I'm not dealing directly with the line manager I tend to leave it for someone else. I will never figure out how you can recruit for someone you have not at least spoken to, let alone met with. I know of recruiters that are recruiting for pieces of software, they are contractually forbidden from contacting line mangers, its madness, they merely interface with an IT system.

Right from the out set the companys recruitment team have had it in for me as I'm not a "preferred supplier" etc, even though the contract they have with their preferred suppliers says they can work outside it if they deem it necessary.

Anyway, its all sorted now, but I'd still be interested in peoples thoughts on the whole issue.