What to expect from a reference

NomadicGray

I requested a reference from my previous employer which I received today.


I feel though its a bit lackluster, consisting of only 5 sentences which outlined the dates I worked, that I got on well with employees and customers and generally that i was a good employee who'll be missed.

Nice to things to say of course, but frankly there were a lot of things left out including new systems I implemented, all the IT work i did(which was not part of the job description) and pretty much anything I did of my own initiative. Never mind 6+years without missing a single day.


They also refer to themselves as a "small company", and while they have a small number of employees they do huge amounts of trade. But perhaps my definition of a small company is different than what prospective employers consider so maybe thats not something to get hung up on.

All this sent in a standard email too, so Ill have to copy and format it myself. But i dont think it'll look great once printed, no matter how much double spacing and font jiggery I attempt.



But am i expecting too much from them? Is this considered standard at the moment?

* i think i should mention this is a company supplying products to a particular trade, not a large company that have dedicated HR and so on

NomadicGray

NomadicGray wrote: »

I requested a reference from my previous employer which I received today.


I feel though its a bit lackluster, consisting of only 5 sentences which outlined the dates I worked, that I got on well with employees and customers and generally that i was a good employee who'll be missed.

Nice to things to say of course, but frankly there were a lot of things left out including new systems I implemented, all the IT work i did(which was not part of the job description) and pretty much anything I did of my own initiative. Never mind 6+years without missing a single day.


They also refer to themselves as a "small company", and while they have a small number of employees they do huge amounts of trade. But perhaps my definition of a small company is different than what prospective employers consider so maybe thats not something to get hung up on.

All this sent in a standard email too, so Ill have to copy and format it myself. But i dont think it'll look great once printed, no matter how much double spacing and font jiggery I attempt.



But am i expecting too much from them? Is this considered standard at the moment?

* i think i should mention this is a company supplying products to a particular trade, not a large company that have dedicated HR and so on

Actually you got more than most employers give nowadays. My last few references were simply my job title and the dates I worked.

The reason came from the US where litigation culture is rife. People had sued their former employers for putting something negative on a reference jeopardizing their new job.

NomadicGray

Yeah i did some googling there and seen a few mentions of legal action and such, it had crossed my mind. I dont think thats what they had in mind when writing mine, but if its not too far off what some employers give i'll feel less embarrassed presenting it

hmmm

Most larger employers these days will only say when you worked with them. 5 lines and saying you were a good employee is actually very good.

NomadicGray

hmmm wrote: »

Most larger employers these days will only say when you worked with them. 5 lines and saying you were a good employee is actually very good.

Christ. Im beginning to think I should get this thing framed.


Thanks for the input

NomadicGray

NomadicGray wrote: »

Christ. Im beginning to think I should get this thing framed.


Thanks for the input

Definitely make a copy of it.

Mrs OBumble

A reference would never have listed your achievements. That's for your CV to do.

And a small company has a small number of employees. Trade is irrelevant.

hmmm

Deleted User wrote: »

The reason came from the US where litigation culture is rife. People had sued their former employers for putting something negative on a reference jeopardizing their new job.

It's not just a negative, the absence of a positive can cause trouble

E.g. a company issues two references:
Reference #1
"John worked here from 2012 to 2019 and was a good employee."
Reference #2
"Mary worked here from 2012 to 2019."

The above employees go for the same job in a new company and submit the above reference - you can see the potential problem.

Stateofyou

hmmm wrote: »

It's not just a negative, the absence of a positive can cause trouble

E.g. a company issues two references:
Reference #1
"John worked here from 2012 to 2019 and was a good employee."
Reference #2
"Mary worked here from 2012 to 2019."

The above employees go for the same job in a new company and submit the above reference - you can see the potential problem.

That's why many employers don't do "references" any more, more often it's "employment verification." Just verifying the dates worked and job title.

Fccwontletmebe

Dates worked and job title is all you get now, count yourself lucky

Irish_peppa

Fccwontletmebe wrote: »

Dates worked and job title is all you get now, count yourself lucky

indeed i was near 2 decades with same company did so much to improve place over my tenure with multiple roles and was told i would receive a glowing reference. I had specifically asked if they wouldnt mind putting in some of my roles and things i had implemented.
I received the following::rolleyes:


To whom it may concern

We hereby confirm Peppa Pig worked at XXXXXX from 19XX to 19XX

Pig Sty Inc:p