Referees vs "Available upon request"

B_Rabbit

Which is better for a college student, who would have maybe two referees who would provide good references if called?

Cheers

Mrs OBumble

Never, ever, gives names and numbers in your CV. No matter what age you are.

Stheno

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Never, ever, gives names and numbers in your CV. No matter what age you are.

Agreed, references on request mean you get asked, and can advise people to expect a call.

As you get older, if the referees are people you are close to, some may want to ask you what they should focus on

B_Rabbit

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Never, ever, gives names and numbers in your CV. No matter what age you are.

Can I ask why? If you've already gotten the go ahead from the referees?

Stheno

B_Rabbit wrote: »

Can I ask why? If you've already gotten the go ahead from the referees?

Unexpected/unsolicited calls, giving employers an opportunity to check things in advance, not having the opportunity to talk to referees about your new role and what you'd like them to emphasise

B_Rabbit

Thank you.

Mr. Loverman

Stheno wrote: »

Unexpected/unsolicited calls, giving employers an opportunity to check things in advance, not having the opportunity to talk to referees about your new role and what you'd like them to emphasise

Also, agencies use them as sales leads.

davo10

Stheno wrote: »

Unexpected/unsolicited calls, giving employers an opportunity to check things in advance, not having the opportunity to talk to referees about your new role and what you'd like them to emphasise

Disagree completely. If you are applying for a job, the calls to an employer are expected and in many ways solicited by the fact you have applied for a job. I only check the references of the person I am offering the job to, not everyone who applies. I don't want to talk to a friend of the applicant who has been told what to say. Also, if applicant lists work experience and leaves out a referee from a job they were at for some time, it sets off alarm bells, this is why it is important to leave each job on good terms and with a good reference.

Again, every job might have 20 applicants, if the CV has "references on request" and the others list their employers along with contact details, I think this applicant may have something to hide.

I would like to stress, employers should only contact a referee when they are about to offer the job to that person as I appreciate it can make things awkward with current employers thereafter.

Tarzana

I used to put 'Available on Request', recently I've started to make no reference to referees on my CV at all. Wastes valuable space and sure, it's implied. I got some interviews since the change (same rate as before) so happy I did it.

AltAccount

davo10 wrote: »

Again, every job might have 20 applicants, if the CV has "references on request" and the others list their employers along with contact details, I think this applicant may have something to hide.

Would you really judge a CV badly for not supplying referee details?

dharma200

Would never ever give names and numbers on cv.
Would never expect anyone to put my name and number on their cv.
References available on request is standard now? I thought so....

davo10

AltAccount wrote: »

Would you really judge a CV badly for not supplying referee details?

I recently advertised a job, I got 28 applications, I had to sift through 28 CV's and pick 4 for interview. CV's with spelling mistakes automatically go in the bin, qualifications and experience are important when looking over the CVs, I also look at the referees and see what position they are in, for example manager or owner. Let's say an applicant works in a company for 3 years and does not provide the name of a referee there, that would catch my attention and I would then move on to the next CV.

When employers receive CVs for a position, they don't know you, they don't know how good you might be at your job, they see a three page summary of your qualifications and experience and have to make a decision whether to bother even seeing you based in those three pages. If you make it harder by them having to request something they believe to be integral to their decision, then you may be surprised how much of a difference something as small as that can make.

You should assume that as you are applying for a job, the perspective employer will want to talk to a referee, your manager/employer, not your buddy who works in the same office.

Greenmachine

davo10 wrote: »

I recently advertised a job, I got 28 applications, I had to sift through 28 CV's and pick 4 for interview. CV's with spelling mistakes automatically go in the bin, qualifications and experience are important when looking over the CVs, I also look at the referees and see what position they are in, for example manager or owner. Let's say an applicant works in a company for 3 years and does not provide the name of a referee there, that would catch my attention and I would then move on to the next CV.

When employers receive CVs for a position, they don't know you, they don't know how good you might be at your job, they see a three page summary of your qualifications and experience and have to make a decision whether to bother even seeing you based in those three pages. If you make it harder by them having to request something they believe to be integral to their decision, then you may be surprised how much of a difference something as small as that can make.

You should assume that as you are applying for a job, the perspective employer will want to talk to a referee, your manager/employer, not your buddy who works in the same office.

How many 3 page CV's do you see in an average month. Seem like you look for things on a CV that no-one else does. 3 pages CV for most employer is grounds to put it in the bin.
Plenty of good reasons for not putting the names and contact detail on the CV. Realistically if you are only considering people who are providing such details you are not hiring the best people. Putting contact details on a CV is extremely amatuer and might be okay if your only references are teachers from school.

AltAccount

I think you're missing a trick too. I'd never put referee details on my CV precisely because my referees will be senior-ish people whose time I value and respect.
I wouldn't want to lose the control of when and whether they'll get a call from some over-zealous HR rep.

sawfish

If you ask your referee is it okay to have them on your CV I don't see the problem in it.

I had a quick look at a CV book I have which suggests it's an Irish thing to have the referee contact details on the CV, but it's becoming more common to follow the UK system which is the "referees available on request"

AltAccount

Sequence for me is:

Identify referee (someone good, important, who knows my capabilities)
Ask referee
Send out CVs
Do interview

If asked for referee details:
Call referee and tell them to expect the call, including telling them who I interviewed with and who the contact/interviewer was if it'll be the same person
Give referee contact details to interviewer/HR


The thought of me sending out 5 CVs with the Head of X's contact details on it, with no ability to give them any kind of heads up of when they'll be called, about what and by who, fills me with dread and if they got more than one of the wrong kind of calls from a potential employer, I wouldn't expect them to be my referee for long.

I value my referees and existing relationships more than I value my relationship with the potential new employer/interviewer.

Tarzana

davo10 wrote: »

I recently advertised a job, I got 28 applications, I had to sift through 28 CV's and pick 4 for interview. CV's with spelling mistakes automatically go in the bin, qualifications and experience are important when looking over the CVs, I also look at the referees and see what position they are in, for example manager or owner. Let's say an applicant works in a company for 3 years and does not provide the name of a referee there, that would catch my attention and I would then move on to the next CV.

When employers receive CVs for a position, they don't know you, they don't know how good you might be at your job, they see a three page summary of your qualifications and experience and have to make a decision whether to bother even seeing you based in those three pages. If you make it harder by them having to request something they believe to be integral to their decision, then you may be surprised how much of a difference something as small as that can make.

You should assume that as you are applying for a job, the perspective employer will want to talk to a referee, your manager/employer, not your buddy who works in the same office.

Awful system, man. (apart from screening out spelling mistakes)

enda1

Referees are supposed to be contact by a potential employer only AFTER interview.
To put them on a CV makes no sense as they can just ask for for them in the interview or after offering the job.

Tarzana

sawfish wrote: »

If you ask your referee is it okay to have them on your CV I don't see the problem in it.

I had a quick look at a CV book I have which suggests it's an Irish thing to have the referee contact details on the CV, but it's becoming more common to follow the UK system which is the "referees available on request"

"Becoming more common"? It's the absolute norm in Ireland.

drumswan

davo10 wrote: »

Disagree completely. If you are applying for a job, the calls to an employer are expected and in many ways solicited by the fact you have applied for a job. I only check the references of the person I am offering the job to, not everyone who applies. I don't want to talk to a friend of the applicant who has been told what to say. Also, if applicant lists work experience and leaves out a referee from a job they were at for some time, it sets off alarm bells, this is why it is important to leave each job on good terms and with a good reference.

Again, every job might have 20 applicants, if the CV has "references on request" and the others list their employers along with contact details, I think this applicant may have something to hide.

I would like to stress, employers should only contact a referee when they are about to offer the job to that person as I appreciate it can make things awkward with current employers thereafter.

This is total nonsense. If anything the fact that an applicant has peoples details printed on their CV for any unscrupulous recruitment agent to pick up smacks of unprofessional behaviour. People are highly sensitive about where their personal details go these days.

davo10

Greenmachine wrote: »

Plenty of good reasons for not putting the names and contact detail on the CV. Realistically if you are only considering people who are providing such details you are not hiring the best people. Putting contact details on a CV is extremely amatuer and might be okay if your only references are teachers from school.

I'm not just considering people who have references, my point is that when bundles if CVs arrive in, you are not going to interview every one. It is difficult to whittle down the number based on a couple of pages. Two people have the same qualifications and roughly the same experience, something as small as this may be the difference between getting an interview and not. I understand people's reluctance but you have to take for granted that your new employer will want to make that call, having it on there saves asking for it.

sawfish

Tarzana wrote: »

"Becoming more common"? It's the absolute norm in Ireland.

Just saying what it says in the book pal. The CV Book second edition by James Innes, pg 142. This is the second time i`ve glanced at the book, before you go presuming I think this book is the bees knees.

murphym7

davo10 wrote: »

I recently advertised a job, I got 28 applications, I had to sift through 28 CV's and pick 4 for interview. CV's with spelling mistakes automatically go in the bin, qualifications and experience are important when looking over the CVs, I also look at the referees and see what position they are in, for example manager or owner. Let's say an applicant works in a company for 3 years and does not provide the name of a referee there, that would catch my attention and I would then move on to the next CV.When employers receive CVs for a position, they don't know you, they don't know how good you might be at your job, they see a three page summary of your qualifications and experience and have to make a decision whether to bother even seeing you based in those three pages. If you make it harder by them having to request something they believe to be integral to their decision, then you may be surprised how much of a difference something as small as that can make.

You should assume that as you are applying for a job, the perspective employer will want to talk to a referee, your manager/employer, not your buddy who works in the same office.

I can’t believe you would actually do this???? There are many applicants I see who have been working for many years in many different companies. If they were to add a referee for every job over 3 years, there would be some long list of references!

Moving on from their CV because references are not detailed or because every job over 3 years does not have a reference is misguided at best and downright poor practice in reality. I can only imagine the number of really good candidates you have passed on by using this approach.

I see hundreds of CV’s each month and I can count the number who actually detail references on my finger and toe’s.

Stepping Stone

davo10 wrote: »

I'm not just considering people who have references, my point is that when bundles if CVs arrive in, you are not going to interview every one. It is difficult to whittle down the number based on a couple of pages. Two people have the same qualifications and roughly the same experience, something as small as this may be the difference between getting an interview and not. I understand people's reluctance but you have to take for granted that your new employer will want to make that call, having it on there saves asking for it.

My boss, who is the Managing Director has a thing about this and will bin a cv if he sees contact details on it for referees because of the personal experience that he has had as a result of people doing the same thing.

He is a busy man, he travels a lot, works very long hours, is extremely busy and has very little time to deal with unsolicited calls. He got one a few weeks ago asking for a reference for a girl who worked with us a few years ago. He had no time to prepare, look at her work history, even to familiarise himself with her work. He couldn't actually provide her with a reference at time. He has spoken to us all highlighting this issue and making it clear to us that he will be happy to provide us with a reference but a heads up is necessary. He won't go out of his way to do someone a favour if they haven't had the courtesy to warn him that there is a call coming.

Tarzana

sawfish wrote: »

Just saying what it says in the book pal. The CV Book second edition by James Innes, pg 142. This is the second time i`ve glanced at the book, before you go presuming I think this book is the bees knees.

Hope it's not a recent book because it's outdated.

davo10

Sorry, I'd like to qualify my statements. I don't use recruitment companies, and I understand why you would not give referees in this situation. I deal directly with the applicants, I accept the emails and paper cv's, only I view them, only me contacts the referee after I have contacted the successful applicant. But from the outset I need to refine my trawl through the cv's to pick the ones for interview and I want to see all the info then, not have to request it later. Like all employers, I have my quirks when sorting the applicants into those I choose and those I don't, there can be no other way because on paper, it is difficult to differentiate one applicant from another.

Tarzana

davo10 wrote: »

Sorry, I'd like to qualify my statements. I don't use recruitment companies, and I understand why you would not give referees in this situation. I deal directly with the applicants, I accept the emails and paper cv's, only I view them, only me contacts the referee after I have contacted the successful applicant. But from the outset I need to refine my trawl through the cv's to pick the ones for interview and I want to see all the info then, not have to request it later. Like all employers, I have my quirks when sorting the applicants into those I choose and those I don't, there can be no other way because on paper, it is difficult to differentiate one applicant from another.

Your system is filtering out good or great candidates.

enda1

Tarzana wrote: »

Your system is filtering out good or great candidates.

Exactly. If he wants to filter on this criteria he should do it in the exact opposite manner! Dump those with contact details of others on the CV.

davo10

Tarzana wrote: »

Your system is filtering out good or great candidates.

Probably, but short of interviewing everyone, (which I can't do), I'll never know. This is why CVs and what they contain (or not) is so important. The more applicants, the more picky you have to become and small things do make a difference. Put it this way, if you include referees, you will not be discounted because of that, omit them and there is a chance you will be.

davo10

enda1 wrote: »

! Dump those with contact details of others on the CV.

Why exactly should an employer do that?

Tarzana

davo10 wrote: »

I deal directly with the applicants, I accept the emails and paper cv's, only I view them, only me contacts the referee after I have contacted the successful applicant.

Just to add, YOU may do this, but others might farm it out to HR or whoever, who might not be so discreet and bull ahead contacting referees prior to interview. The applicant isn't going to know which is the case so will err on the side of caution.

Crazy, crazy reason to reject a CV.

davo10 wrote: »

Put it this way, if you include referees, you will not be discounted because of that

Not necessarily, a few people on this thread have said it would put them off or that it appears amateurish.

blindsider

There is no 'right' CV - there are lots of acceptable templates and formats.

However, there are a few Golden Rules:

- 2 pages max. (unless you a have a compelling reason e.g. a list of high-profile publications, or a long, and varied career with notable successes. Even then, I'd find it hard to justify, but I might excuse it.)

- No spelling/grammar mistakes. No excuses. Ever.

- No references. Not appropriate. Inconsiderate to your referee, and it creates Data Protection issues for the company you're applying to. (I realise that DP is over-used these days, but it's a complex issue. Don't go there.)
IMO you don't even need 'References available on request'. I take that as a given, and failure to provide referees when asked = Bye-bye.


Realistically, if you apply for a job, the recruiter will (discreetly) find someone they know from a company you've worked with - simple questions yield answers. All done over the phone - no records kept. LinkedIn is good for finding contacts also.

In my experience, there is an understanding between HR/Recruiters about discreet, confidential questions.

sawfish

Tarzana wrote: »

Hope it's not a recent book because it's outdated.

October 2012

Tar.Aldarion

davo10 wrote: »

Why exactly should an employer do that?

It's more valid than your reasons for dumping, because it is irresponsible and shows disregard for others by leaving them open to anybody ringing them at any time. If they are careless with others contact details, what else are they careless with?

davo10

Tarzana wrote: »

Just to add, YOU may do this, but others might farm it out to HR or whoever, who might not be so discreet and bull ahead contacting referees prior to interview. The applicant isn't going to know which is the case so will err on the side of caution.

Crazy, crazy reason to reject a CV.



Not necessarily, a few people on this thread have said it would put them off or that it appears amateurish.

A thought occurred to me, are we talking about references or referee contact details?. I don't want to see references included in the CV, I do want to see referee contact details and their position in the company.

Most people unhappy with providing this info are employees, as an employer, the person offering the position, it is our prerogative to decide what info we are looking for and on what criteria we make our decisions.

You may consider it crazy and on the surface it is, but honestly there has to be some way apart from interviewing every candidate, so narrow the field, for some employers this may be it. An applicant who includes their managers as referees shows confidence, it says to me that "if you offer me this job, you can phone anyone you like, all will say I'm the one for the job".

danthefan

My CV certainly doesn't have references on it anyway.

Having just been through a hiring process, the company didn't expect them to be on the CV either. They contacted me asking for their details, this gave me the chance to contact them to ask permission/give them a heads up, everyone is happy.

ancapailldorcha

blindsider wrote: »

- 2 pages max. (unless you a have a compelling reason e.g. a list of high-profile publications, or a long, and varied career with notable successes. Even then, I'd find it hard to justify, but I might excuse it.)

-...IMO you don't even need 'References available on request'. I take that as a given, and failure to provide referees when asked = Bye-bye.

I prefer to keep the "referees available on request" as it removes any ambiguity. I wouldn't worry too much about the 2 pages max either (depending on area of course). My CV is nearly 4 pages long as I need to be very specific when I'm detailing my experience.

Tarzana

davo10 wrote: »

A thought occurred to me, are we talking about references or referee contact details?. I don't want to see references included in the CV, I do want to see referee contact details and their position in the company.

I'm taking about contact details. I think everyone probably is.

All the stuff I said before is about expecting referee contact details on CVs.

Like I said, the applicant doesn't know what you will do with that information so to reject them for not including contact details is, as someone said, not best practice.

There are better ways to filter, ways that won't having you shooting yourself in the foot whilst searching for new employees.

Tarzana

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

My CV is nearly 4 pages long as I need to be very specific when I'm detailing my experience.

WAY too long, except maybe if you have publications. Even then, I'd just prepare the publication list as a separate appendix and refer to this in your CV.

blindsider

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

. My CV is nearly 4 pages long as I need to be very specific when I'm detailing my experience.

Disagree - but there you go - it's a discussion.:)

I'd suggest having a 2 page CV to compliment your long one.

the_syco

davo10 wrote: »

I also look at the referees and see what position they are in, for example manager or owner. Let's say an applicant works in a company for 3 years and does not provide the name of a referee there, that would catch my attention and I would then move on to the next CV.

In regards to the part I bolded; what happens if their current position is not even in the company? Most of my previous managers don't work in my current company, and none of my the managers from other jobs that I was in previously are still in the previous company. I work in IT support, and find that after a few years as manager in one company, they often move to another company. Thus very few would still be in the same position as when I left.

Which leads me to

davo10 wrote: »

I don't want to talk to a friend of the applicant who has been told what to say.

As all of my past managers are not in the company that I would be using them as a reference for, would you still see them as a "valid" reference?

I ask as I'm currently searching for a job. Manager from a previous job is in a totally different company, and any managers from current job (bar current one) are working in other companies. Thus my CV would read as manager from X company would actually be working for Y company.

Chattastrophe!

When I was very young, working in retail etc, I used to ask my employers for a written reference, and I'd include a copy of this with my CV. They'd have given me permission to do so, and were aware that they might be called to verify it (it was on company headed paper.)

I'm an adult professional now, not a chance would I include names and numbers of my managers/colleagues on my CV! I have more respect for their time than that. It's always "references available upon request", and this has never hindered me so far when looking for a job.

ancapailldorcha

Tarzana wrote: »

WAY too long, except maybe if you have publications. Even then, I just prepare the publication list as a separate appendix and refer to this in your CV.

blindsider wrote: »

Disagree - but there you go - it's a discussion.:)

I'd suggest having a 2 page CV to compliment your long one.

I've worked about 5 jobs in the last 3 years (not by choice) which is definitely a contributing factor. When I was applying for my current job, I was told to be as detailed as possible as my new boss would want to know as much as possible about what I've done in the past. I'm an academic by the way but I've no publications (yet, hopefully!) but a lot of people have said that the suggested 2 page limit is well and truly out the door when it comes to academic research.

davo10

Tarzana wrote: »

Like I said, the applicant doesn't know what you will do with that information so to reject them for not including contact details is, as someone said, not best practice.

There are better ways to filter, ways that won't having you shooting yourself in the foot whilst searching for new employees.

Tarzana, what you believe is best practice is subjective and until you are in a position to employ people, it is difficult for you to appreciate how fine the margins are between getting an interview and not getting one. No doubt there are better ways to filter but that is not your decision to make as you are the applicant not the employer. Each employer has a different way of recruiting, there is never a guarantee that we are employing the best person for the job, nor can you be sure that we are not.

Chattastrophe!

davo10 wrote: »

Tarzana, what you believe is best practice is subjective and until you are in a position to employ people, it is difficult for you to appreciate how fine the margins are between getting an interview and not getting one. No doubt there are better ways to filter but that is not your decision to make as you are the applicant not the employer. Each employer has a different way of recruiting, there is never a guarantee that we are employing the best person for the job, nor can you be sure that we are not.

I screen CVs as part of my job, I'd never filter out someone for not including their references with actual names and numbers. In fact I'd find it odd if they were included. It would definitely be the exception rather than the rule.

Tarzana

davo10 wrote: »

Tarzana, what you believe is best practice is subjective and until you are in a position to employ people, it is difficult for you to appreciate how fine the margins are between getting an interview and not getting one.

Other people here who screen CVs have disagreed with you.

And, as I said before, an applicant doesn't know you and doesn't know how you will use that information. One doesn't need to be in a position of screening CVs to know this.

Screen however you wish. People are allowed to tell you if they think it's a terrible system. If you're happy enough with it, what do you care? Every new hire is a risk, but there are things that lessen the risk. Screening out candidates for lack of referees contact details isn't one of them. But carry on.

davo10

Tarzana wrote: »

Screen however you wish. People are allowed to tell you if they think it's a terrible system. If you're happy enough with it, what do you care? Every new hire is a risk, but there are things that lessen the risk. Screening out candidates for lack of referees contact details isn't one of them. But carry on.

This is exactly my point, thank you. The employer can screen any way they like and it really matters not a jot if you are anyone else disagrees, the employer is the one offering the job and deciding who gets it. Putting referees on the cv may seem inconsequential but if your employer wants or expects them to be on it and you don't feel they should be on it, then that's that. You won't know, you just won't get called to interview.

It's your opinion that it is not best practice but that really isn't important to the employer, as an applicant unless you are selected for interview then you are just a piece of paper.

Last question, if you screen cvs, how do you know that the ones you reject were not the perfect ones for the job or is your system infallible?

Tarzana

davo10 wrote: »

This is exactly my point, thank you. The employer can screen any way they like and it really matters not a jot if you are anyone else disagrees

Indeed it doesn't.

And once again, no system is infallible but some are better than others.

Anyway, I've said enough on the subject, so I shall retire from this thread.

Martin567

Interesting discussion.

Pity the poor applicants in these situations. Apply in good faith for a position and get filtered out for not having something on their CV. However, apply for a different job with another company and get filtered out for including that information. Since there's no way of knowing what the person screening the CVs will be looking for, the applicants just can't win!

enda1

The clear consensus is to put available on request. It's as simple as that. Eventually nobody will put named references on a CV so it will no longer be a criteria.

davo10

enda1 wrote: »

The clear consensus is to put available on request. It's as simple as that. Eventually nobody will put named references on a CV so it will no longer be a criteria.

The "clear consensus" has been put forward by employees and those doing screening at the behest of their employer. The "eventually" part is nonsense, it is at the employers discretion whether they look for this or not, it will never be the applicant's nor will the applicant know if this is required, they just may not be interviewed. There can be no consensus on this because it is each employers decision, your post is like saying " the clear consensus is all employees should be paid X", it just doesn't work that way, it works the way the employer wants it to work.