Hiring and references

[JManInPhoenix]

Kiss of death?

I've heard my and other managers say that that's the only thing they're allowed to say to people calling for references.

That is true if the person in question has a negative history with that manager - saying bad things about someone can possibly come back to bite them in the ass later.

If the person in question was a good worker, most people will say positive things about him or her. Nothing positive said but only employment history is the kiss of death.

 

[jaedaliu]

That is true if the person in question has a negative history with that manager - saying bad things about someone can possibly come back to bite them in the ass.

If the person in question was a good worker, most people will give say positive things about. Nothing positive said but only employment history is the kiss of death.

Depends on the company. My old manager wasn't allowed to give a reference. Company policy dictated that she had to refer the caller to HR. Of course, she was allowed to give personal feedback, but she said most managers didn't because it was so frowned upon.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Hope you are either hiring for a financial institution, executive or management personnel, or for positions that work with contracts with defense, intelligence, national security, or space agencies of the federal government...otherwise what you are doing is illegal.

Wrong. Unless you live in a state that prohibits or limits credit checks, you can absolutely run the check and use it as part of your hiring decision as long as you follow the rules, which say nothing about the type of job. Nice try, though.

To the people saying they'd rather avoid issues by not giving a bad reference, I say you're lazy unless you're specifically instructed to give no information by your employer. I've had references save me a ton of hassle by giving me a real, honest assessment of a person who otherwise looked good on paper and/or during the first interview. As I said in another post, if you had a spat with someone who you think may give you an unfair reference, find another person to use. If you're too dumb to figure this out, then you deserve whatever the person says about you most likely. Yeah, some situations will break the mold, but use your brain and work around it. I've literally had people tell me why they weren't using seemingly important references from previous jobs and their explanations were logical enough to pass my sniff test. This leads me to my next point:

I don't understand references... you should be able to figure out if the person is hirable from your own judgement. If they end up sucking, then find someone new. References are unreliable, from people you don't know, and from circumstances/times you have no idea about.

You must not own a business or understand how much time it takes to hire someone for a professional job. Creating and running an ad can be expensive and very time consuming especially if you want to find an intelligent person because they don't always stick out in a massive pile of resumes. Also, people lie and put on a good face during interviews, so references help mitigate the risk that the person is really a dud. 'Finding someone new' is a ridiculously lazy and unacceptable approach if you care at all about your time. I paid a lot of money to a lawyer to know exactly what I could say and do to make this process as efficient and dependable as possible. Big businesses have dedicated people to do this, but that's way too expensive for a small business. I have to take time out of my incredibly busy schedule as well from some of my employees to interview prospective employees, so it needs to count. I would love if I could wave my hands at this and have it done correctly, but that's just not how it works.

Credit checks... also a little ridiculous. You don't know what the circumstances are. Yeah, thats 'not your problem' but I wouldn't put a lot of weight to that if they were otherwise good candidates.

If someone tells me up front why their credit score is low and it isn't a serious red flag, I'll consider it a minor issue. If I find it on my own after I specifically ask if I will find any surprises, they're out. Using it blindly would be stupid, but that's not the only way to use the information.

 

[Tommy2000GT]

My lack of references is keeping me from finding a new job. I don't to use anyone as a reference at my current job.

 

[MrDudeMan]

That is true if the person in question has a negative history with that manager - saying bad things about someone can possibly come back to bite them in the ass later.

If the person in question was a good worker, most people will say positive things about him or her. Nothing positive said but only employment history is the kiss of death.

It depends how the response is delivered. The person giving the reference could be a little less curt and explain the reference policy or you could simply ask. I've had references say "_____ worked here from ____ to ____" and nothing else, which prompted me to ask if they were allowed to say more or if they were choosing to limit their response. The answer to that question conveys the information you really need to know if they're choosing to limit their response or you're where you were before you asked if their hands are tied.

 

[sourceninja]

Who would use their current boss as a reference? I've had bosses that took my leaving very personally and I'm sure would say bad things out of spite. I'd never use a current boss as a reference.

 

[Mark R]

Who would use their current boss as a reference? I've had bosses that took my leaving very personally and I'm sure would say bad things out of spite. I'd never use a current boss as a reference.

It depends on the type of job. It also depends on when the references are asked for.

If you are hiring someone who is currently working as contractor and is finishing a project, then it's fair game to ask them for a reference from a current boss before they've finished.

If someone is in a "permanent" job, then it isn't always appropriate to ask the current boss prior to interview. In that case, you might interview and make a decision, on older references. For certain executive, or government jobs, where it is essential to have a reference from the current boss, you might give a provisional offer to the candidate (subject to references). The candidate would then ask their boss for a reference at the time of handing in their resignation.

 

[rudeguy]

References are important to verify what the candidate puts down on their resume as far as experience level. You would be amazed at how many people "spruce up" their resume by claiming they held a position higher than they really did.

If someone tells me they were a supervisor, I like to see at least one employee that worked for them. Not to find out if the employee liked him or thought he was a good supervisor, but to confirm that they were in fact reporting to my candidate.

Also I think some are confusing references with previous employer contact information. To verify someone was employed, you usually get connected to their HR. The "References" list usually contains names of former managers, co-workers, clients, etc.

More and more companies are using automated employment verification. You can't get a human if you sacrificed 3 virgins and a goat.

I have 5 references fully stockedhone number, address, email..just in case. They are mostly former managers who are very well spoken. In a pinch I could come up with another 10 but I can't promise email for all of them. My point is that references are important but people seem to think they can list a former boss from 10 years ago and their old work number and call it good.


PS: HR is the used car salesmen of the office world. Bunch of ego inflated morons who think they control the world.

 

[OCGuy]

More and more companies are using automated employment verification. You can't get a human if you sacrificed 3 virgins and a goat.

I have 5 references fully stockedhone number, address, email..just in case. They are mostly former managers who are very well spoken. In a pinch I could come up with another 10 but I can't promise email for all of them. My point is that references are important but people seem to think they can list a former boss from 10 years ago and their old work number and call it good.


PS: HR is the used car salesmen of the office world. Bunch of ego inflated morons who think they control the world.

I live in a world where Verification of Employment consumes my mornings and sometimes afternoons (Need to make sure you are employed when I approve your mortgage, and still employed before the final wire gets sent out Title).

Personal references are much more casual. You would be surprised though how many people I have spoken to that seem surprised that they were called. As if the applicant put their name down, hoping it would never be used.

 

[BarkingGhostar]

OP, this is about work history, right? I think of references as professional references, and not someone that hired me. Professional references are those I chose and they agree to provide a reference on my professional character, ability, etc.

Employment history is something completely different in my book. Skipping a period in which you were employed and didn't list it will ultimately draw questions. Also, if someone listed a current employer they should already know ahead of time how it will be, and thus inform the hiring company ahead of time.

 

[PenguinPower]

Wrong. Unless you live in a state that prohibits or limits credit checks, you can absolutely run the check and use it as part of your hiring decision as long as you follow the rules, which say nothing about the type of job. Nice try, though.

I was actually speaking to you directly as you live in such a state. What I said directly applies to Colorado. It was a nice try. :whiste:

Quite familiar with the FCRA, background checks, EEOC opinions and employment law in general for the 50 states, England, Australia, France, The Netherlands, Germany, and France. Currently studying India as we just started the acquisition process for a small company there.

 

[MrDudeMan]

I was actually speaking to you directly as you live in such a state. It was a nice try. :whiste:

Quite familiar with the FCRA, background checks, EEOC and employment law in general for the 50 states, England, Australia, France, The Netherlands, Germany, France. Currently studying India as we just started the acquisition process for a small company there.

I didn't know you had so much insight into my business based out of Texas. ^_^

Your statements were still too restrictive even for Colorado. I'm still able to ask (and have done so on multiple occasions), but the requirements are more stringent. It's for an engineering position, which wasn't on your list, but it's still perfectly legal given the requirements of the job.

 

[PenguinPower]

I didn't know you had so much insight into my business based out of Texas. ^_^

Your statements were still too restrictive even for Colorado. I'm still able to ask (and have done so on multiple occasions), but the requirements are more stringent. It's for an engineering position, which wasn't on your list, but it's still perfectly legal given the requirements of the job.

Fair enough...I did assume based on your location. However, my statements come directly from the law, which defines the only circumstances in which it is legal to conduct, so I am not sure why you think they are too restrictive.

Edit: I should say, even though states may vary on laws, the EEOC is generally very restrictive in opinion and investigation, and could easily pick up a claimants case should a federal discrimination charge be filed based on a rescinded offer due to a credit check. Even if you win, you'll be out money. As always, way the risk vs. benefit.

 

[MrDudeMan]

Fair enough...I did assume based on your location. However, my statements come directly from the law, which defines the only circumstances in which it is legal to conduct, so I am not sure why you think they are too restrictive.

Edit: I should say, even though states may vary on laws, the EEOC is generally very restrictive in opinion and investigation, and could easily pick up a claimants case should a federal discrimination charge be filed based on a rescinded offer due to a credit check. Even if you win, you'll be out money. As always, way the risk vs. benefit.

All I can say is I do what my lawyer tells me I can do. lol.

 

[PenguinPower]

All I can say is I do what my lawyer tells me I can do. lol.

"lol." That's cute. I've had two different, "top notch," nationally recognized firms tell me to do two completely different things in exactly the same situation, in exactly the same circuit court. One was conservative, one was aggressive. Again, risk v. reward.

Let other people do your thinking and you're bound to succeed.

 

[MrDudeMan]

"lol." That's cute. I've had two different, "top notch," nationally recognized firms tell me to do two completely different things in exactly the same situation, in exactly the same circuit court. One was conservative, one was aggressive. Again, risk v. reward.

Let other people do your thinking and you're bound to succeed.

You took that totally the wrong way. Calm down. I don't care to know more than what my lawyer explains to me so I have enough information to understand and I've been very successful doing that - thanks for the helpful recommendation, though.

I know of others in Colorado defending this practice and winning after being pulled into court. They're somewhat related to my particular field, which falls outside of your initial statements but well within the letter of the law. You left out a handful of important clauses.