If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact

Blacklist ?

  • 11-04-2022 2:13pm
    Registered Users Posts: 565 ✭✭✭

    Do companies and recruitment agencies blacklist potential employees?? Are they in contact with each other about lazy, troublesome or weird candidates??

    Anyone in recruitment know?



  • Registered Users Posts: 13,576 ✭✭✭✭Dial Hard

    It's certainly done within companies. Agencies sharing that kind of info, I wouldn't be so sure.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,084 ✭✭✭Trigger Happy

    There is no 'blacklist' that is shared collaboratively. That would be morally wrong and legally questionable. But individual companies/agencies will not work with you if you have sufficiently dirtied your bib with them in the past. And anecdotes get around in a small country.

    In very specialised roles your reputation is key as the key players all know each other. So any black mark against it will get around quickly

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,474 ✭✭✭bennyineire

    Nope and if they did it would be a breach of GDPR

  • Registered Users Posts: 20,558 ✭✭✭✭dreamers75

    How does GDPR work in a recruitment setting? You send in a CV they keep it on file and contact you if a job that matches comes up.

    Would a blacklist not just be that but you wouldnt be contacted.

    You have given the CV willingly.....

  • Registered Users Posts: 5,937 ✭✭✭DoctorEdgeWild

    One thing you'll find is that within certain industries, there will only be a certain amount of a skill in a location. (this isn't as applicable in office jobs/cities etc.) In my industry, steel working, there would be a group of companies within this county that would share information to some degree and give a 'heads up' about a potential 'trouble maker'. Operating like this has it's good points and bad points but I think more good than bad. Even though we are 'competitors' we do use each other's services to complete larger scale jobs so there can be common goals.

  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,164 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007

    Agencies ping you every so often asking if they can keep your details on file or not.

  • Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus

    Short answer in the OP is no. Long answer depends on a lot of factors.

    Companies won't maintain a file called "Blacklist.doc" with names of people. And they definitely do not share this info with recruitment companies.

    However, companies will keep details of previous candidates on file and whether they were accepted or rejected for a position. So internally if you've been rejected for red flags, then you're not going to get hired by that company.

    They cannot share that information with third parties. Not formally anyway. But Ireland is a small country, and if you've been in your industry long enough, you will get to know a lot of names circulating and you will get to know the recruiters in the space too.

    If someone with a bad reputation applies to a company, there's a decent chance that someone in that company will know their name and advise the company against hiring them. If a recruiter puts their name forward for a position, the company will often tell the recruiter verbally that the person has a reputation, and that can lead the recruiter to drop them.

    Lazy or weird candidates generally not such a big deal. People don't remember that. But someone who has a reputation for stirring up trouble, getting into disciplinary issues, or otherwise coming to everyone's attention in a negative way, will definitely be remembered wherever they go, and the more they change jobs the harder they'll find it to get a new one.

  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]

    In specialized roles where there's not many at it, folks will often know each other. In those cases I've been asked for my opinion on X, Y or Z who I worked with in previous places. I've found conversations like this carry a lot of weight but there would be no blacklist in operation more a case of trying to get the best person for the role.

    Its one of the reasons I believe strongly in "don't burn bridges" and all that

  • Registered Users Posts: 565 ✭✭✭frosty123

    Ok, but does GDPR mean anything in the cut throat world of recruitment??

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,846 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble

    However all a recruiter needs is suitably worded policies, and they can maintain "won't get hired" or "timewaster" lists while being 100% GDPR compliant.

  • Registered Users Posts: 93 ✭✭VanHalen

    There is already a discussion on this opened in April 2019 (I don’t know how to link) - do we really need another one?

  • Registered Users Posts: 565 ✭✭✭frosty123

    Do we need a backseat mod??

  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭Easten

    Blacklists don't officially exist but companies can still find out about you regardless. So if you were troublesome, a bad employee or had a face that didn't fit then it will get back to the new company. Any place I worked in it I always got in by referral from someone. Most companies nowadays like to get some form of referral. They'll ask you if you know anyone in there company who they will then ask about you. So if you are going to say you know some one make sure you give them the heads up or better still just say you don't think you know anyone there. You can always act surprised after if you get the job.

    I know a few people who have trouble getting employed and it's all down to there past work history.

  • Registered Users Posts: 6,740 ✭✭✭SuperBowserWorld

    Also, it's a Blocklist these days.

  • Registered Users Posts: 565 ✭✭✭frosty123

  • Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators Posts: 10,164 Mod ✭✭✭✭Jim2007

    Unless you work in some kind of job where there is a very high turnover and most of people have little pride in their job, the bad apples will become known one way or other. Most people take their work seriously and have pride in it, so when someone messes around of course they complain, gossip and remember those people and in a small country word gets around.

  • Registered Users Posts: 118 ✭✭Annascaul

    I'd say there is enough evidence to suggest that there is something like a blacklist, even though it's being denied several times, and even though it's most likely illegal. The reasons for ending up on a blacklist doesn't even mean you're not doing your job or stole something at the office, it could easily be a narcissist manager who's pride has been tarnished.


    As in, “do not hire, ever.” Employers may even recommend that other companies in the industry refrain from hiring you. If an employer blacklists you, you’re no longer on their list of consideration for any position.

    Also, I am wondering what's behind this website: It seems to be a global HR do not hire blacklist.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,353 ✭✭✭tinytobe

    Even though any HR blacklist is most likely illegal or some "grey area".

    However it might be possible, that they are hosted in another country where it is legal to keep them?

    And then there is the question on how "accurate" the data is in these lists? It could be full of lot's of disgruntled managers complaining about employees who are far more competent as well?

    I'd say classical HR blacklists are most likely kept within the organization or recruitment agency, not shared outside of the organization? Otherwise they'll be prone to any form of possible litigation issue and any serious HR department would shy away from that one.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭skallywag

    While not a 'blacklist' per se, the best way to gauge a potential employee's performance is to have that short five minute call with a previous employer, who you ask the candidate to nominate. The last question is always the classic 'would you employ this person again?'. Job done.

    Nothing will get written down in any form in my experience.

    I would never hire someone without doing the same, and have myself often received the same call.

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 2,353 ✭✭✭tinytobe

    The problem with the "would you hire this person again?" is a very tricky one in my view.

    Even a no doesn't mean one's performance wasn't right.

    I personally see it as the same question as "would you buy this particular property again" if you're selling a property, or "would you buy / recommend this car again", if you're selling a car.

    Doesn't mean, it's bad, it's mostly that your requirements have changed.

    Sadly HR is very shallow in these matters.

    People have a reason for changing jobs, for moving on.

    If I was asked the question "would you hire this person again", I'd say no, even though this person's performance was top. - but his/her sheer motivation to move on would prompt me not to hire this individual again.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,992 ✭✭✭skallywag

    It is pretty much a given that the final 'Would you hire this person again' question translates to and is widely understood to mean 'Am I going to regret hiring this person?'.

    I would say that out of all the times I have been asked, I have only answered 'No' a couple of times, and these cases were where the employee was a complete liability who should be kept well away from. I would also say that when I ask the same question, it is usually the case that the answer is 'Yes'. If the 'requirements have changed' then the 'No' can be followed up with a '... but having said that the requirements blah blah'.

    I would never hire someone who gets a 'No'.

  • Registered Users Posts: 2,353 ✭✭✭tinytobe

    It's say that's HR language and HR interpretation of things, - sadly.

    I once discussed this with a friend. He was not Irish, nor from the EU, and had to face the question: "Do you need a visa to work in Ireland?". Again a tricky one, which one can answer either way, depending on what side of the reality. If you answer with Yes, you won't be considered. However he was smart, and answered with No, even though he was neither Irish nor EU. - he had a indefinite visa for the country, meaning he doesn't need one anymore.

    Same as re-hiring. If one wants to leave, and has a reason for doing so I would never re-hire. The motivation for the job wouldn't be the same anymore.

    But I think, you're correct, if the question is in reality about the performance, not about re-hire.

  • Registered Users Posts: 118 ✭✭Annascaul

    I would imagine solutions like Beeline would work that way. It's entirely possible that they also do this for individual candidates, not only for contracting companies. After all it only takes a bit of analytical thinking, a few negative words and all that put into a software solution, and an applicant is blacklisted from the company or a certain line of industry.

    one just has to read here:

    Today’s direct sourcing strategies can: • Reduce the risk of “bad hires.” Most HR or human capital executives understand the real cost of a bad hire, aggregated across processes such as recruitment, interviewing, onboarding, etc., not to mention the immediate gap in productivity. Candidates in talent pools are not always fully-vetted, but the mark is close enough that businesses can feel secure in hiring workers directly from these channels and reducing the overall risk of bad hiring.

    Makes one think who or what criteria defines a "bad hire"?

  • Registered Users Posts: 28,846 ✭✭✭✭AndrewJRenko

    Companies can't keep your information indefinitely, just because they want to. They need a 'legal purpose' to retain any information, which could be your consent, if you agreed to that, or could be another specified purpose. They'd need to publish policies up front, and any policy that indicated that they're going to hold information for ever would be a red flag.

    That's not quite true. They need a legal purpose to retain that information. They also need to given that information to the data subject on request, which would be likely to kick up a storm. They would generally need to delete information if requested by the data subject.

  • Registered Users Posts: 22,366 ✭✭✭✭Akrasia

    They can only use that data for the purpose it was provided. If I provide a CV to apply to company X for role X. It would be dodgy practise to use the result of that application for that role to prejudge an application that I might make in the future for Job Y with Company Y.

    It would also be very illegal to use a disciplinary procedure in a different company to discriminate against that candidate applying for a future role. Verbal and written warnings should be deleted after a set period of time in accordance with the companies grievance policies. No company would state in those policies that such data would be shared externally

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,898 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997

    Who or what?

    In my limited experience they'll run people through a complex and convoluted process of many interviews. Then choose on their gut instinct.

  • Registered Users Posts: 11,898 ✭✭✭✭Flinty997

    Considering how inept most are I would seriously doubt it...

  • Registered Users Posts: 4,994 ✭✭✭c.p.w.g.w

    But if anyone no those lists were to request their data, they would become aware of such a list, could that be problematic for such an agency

  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 25,846 ✭✭✭✭Mrs OBumble

    They would generally need to delete information if requested by the data subject.

    The last bit is a common misunderstanding: if the data is wrong, the subject can request that it is corrected, which may include deletion.

    But you cannot get a fact deleted just because you dislike it: if an agency sent AndrewJRenko to a client job, and he did something which meant the client ordered him to leave the site immediately- then that is a fact and won't be deleted. At best you could get your side ofvthecstory added to the records.