The problem with references 7

[dozer]

The lawyers and HR people tell us to never give a bad employment reference. Is it because of some great moral compass these people possess? No, they're just afraid of getting sued.

OK, I get that nobody wants to get sued, but as engineers charged with protecting the public, should we really be passing poor performers from one company to the next because no one wants to risk a law suit? I'm not talking about people that show up late occasionally or don't hand in reports on time. I mean people that just don't have what it takes to be an engineer.

When we finally free ourselves of the offender and get a call from a potential employer asking if we would hire him or her again, we say, "Certainly." All the while thinking, "Yes as a janitor, but never as an engineer." So we've played our word game and haven't told a lie and feel good that we're so clever.

We wheel back over to the computer and continue pontificating on Eng-Tips how important it is as an engineer to have unimpeachable ethics.

 

[JAE]

There are ways you can...cough cough....give a reference that semantically is neutral but stylistically gets the message across.

 

[LHA]

When someone asks me about someone's performance, in-house (for performance reviews) or from without (reference), I always tell them straight-up, good and bad. I have the same experience when the roles are reversed. Who - and where - is giving glowing false references?

Last year, the AVP above me and I interviewed a guy with a resume to drool over. We all but made him an offer on the spot. But he was in a big hurry to "leave" one of our competitors. The AVP called him, careful not to break confidentiality, of course, just casual conversation. Our competitor told him the guy was fired that week, for his 2nd DUI.

Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve

 

[zdas04]

When I plan to use someone as a reference, I have a conversation with them first to make sure that they are comfortable with my work and will tell something favorable to anyone requesting information. If someone asks me to stand as a reference for them, I tell them exactly what I would tell someone requesting information and let them decide whether to use me as a reference or not. Finally if someone puts me down as a reference without asking first then caveat emptor. I'm going to start off from a position of it being impolite to list someone without asking first and generally go downhill from there.

Bottom line is that regardless of instructions from HR or management, the only way to balance your ethics with minimizing risk is to either answer truthfully or refuse to answer. If I was hiring and all the references refused to answer my questions then I'd be pretty sure that no one had anything good to say.

David

 

[RossABQ]

"There are ways you can...cough cough....give a reference that semantically is neutral but stylistically gets the message across."

Exactly. Our company "forbids" us to say anything other than the dates of employment and position the person had. In reality, there are ways to say those things that gets the message across clearly. No question, if the guy was a good player, I'd straight-out say so, policy be damned. I have had a few that were so bad I felt the ethical issues outweighed any risk of reprisal, and after carefully stating that this was my personal opinion, off the record, yadda yadda yadda, I let loose on the guy. (and one of them got hired in spite of that!)

 

[DaveVikingPE]

You might say something like "he's a great worker, despite the heroin addiction..."

Or maybe not...

Honesty is the best policy and, in my opinion, one is a fool to not ask first before using someone for a reference. If you rprevious boss says "no" or "I'm giogn to make sure you never work in this field again" it's a good idea to probably not list that person as a reference.

 

[BJC]

A bad reference is "He worked here from ##/#### to ##/####.
That's all your required to say by law. Just say that and nothing more. Most people will fgure it out.

 

[HgTX]

Unless you worked for a company that had that as a policy, and your references are policy-following kinda people. Is it fair to get tagged with "bad reference"?

Hg

Eng-Tips policies: faq731-376

 

[MikeHalloran]

Hardly anyone bothers to call the references that you list. I know, because I have their permission to list them, and we've spoken informally about what they might say. They get called so rarely that they call to let me know they were asked about me, and to ask how I'm doing, etc. I get a call like that for not more than five pct of the reference lists I send out.

Some recruiters and HR people try to find and call the people whom you'd prefer that they didn't call, and don't list. I guess the theory is that they'll get unvarnished truth. What they get is unvarnished, but it ain't truth, either.

I have no problem with "straight up". I've had major disagreements with some of my listed references, and I've told them to be truthful about that. I just have a problem with the lying weasels. (Apologies to actual weasels.)

Maybe if I put my references on a 'do not call' list, they'd get called...



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[atlas06]

One time a depatmnet head was telling that he was getting reference calls for so and so that he had just fired. So I asked: you burned him, right?
No, he says, he may not have worked out for us, but who knows, someone else might use him differently, may be more as a field engineer instead of a designer, or just do what he is told. Just because he did not work out for us does not mean he will not work out for someone else, although doubtful but let's remain hopeful.

I think the man was very wise. So, unless someone has done harm to you, I don't see any reason for giving out bad references.
Come to think of it, it may even be a good thing if he is going to the competition.

 

[MikeHalloran]

That's an excellent point. It's possible for anyone to end up in what is, for them, at the time, the wrong job. I've done it lots of times.

One place in recent memory was a faster, cheaper, better kind of place. I'm a better, cheaper, faster kind of guy. The boss called me "a damn perfectionist" because I wouldn't take his standard drawing details, scale them to sort of fit each other, override the dimensions, and paste them into a drawing that our customer would probably misinterpret as an accurate representation of what we proposed to build and install. I tried it, really I did, but for me it was faster and less error- prone to draw accurately and just dimension what was there.



Mike Halloran
Pembroke Pines, FL, USA

 

[LHA]

It is not an excellent point, if a person is worthless, say so. That will make The Market not hire him or her. That will make him or her either 1) get better at what they do, or 2) learn to do something else or 3) go on welfare.

I support all the above. What I don't support is pretending like those who still do things like we did 5 years ago are still relevant. They/you are not, you know it, I know it, so can we please get back to Laissee-faire (sp?) free marketing?

Engineering is the practice of the art of science - Steve

 

[JStephen]

"I let loose on the guy. (and one of them got hired in spite of that!"

I remember hearing of the guy that got hired BECAUSE Company A fired him- any guy they fired had to be good! And there can be some truth in that. If a lying-weasel company fires a guy, that's liable to be a point in his favor for those really familiar with the company.

 

[EddyC]

My last employer would have had to give the following truthful reference about me:

"He refused to rubber stamp projects"

"He hated to produce profitable low quality work"

"He objected to ripping off the customers"

"He cost me money because he insisted on having safety gear"

"Etc"

Sometimes its the employer who doesn't deserve to be in the engineering field rather than the employee. Some folks flounder in some work environments and thrive in others. If someone feels that someone else is a danger to society, then they should report it to the appropiate authorities (The state board). Reporting it to other prospective employers smacks of a personal attack. I also recall reading in the state rules & regulations that engineers shall not make statements that reflect badly upon the reputation of fellow engineers.

 

[Comcokid]

There is always this assumption that employers are infallible, truthful, and unbiased. But sometimes reality is quite different.

Frankly, I would not want some of my previous employers to be used for a reference - for the very reasons I don't work for them anymore. That's why they are past employers and part of my employment history. I left and moved on for reasons.

Some past workplaces were highly dysfunctional. Some past managers were very vindictive. One manager bragged how the conference room was bugged so he could listen in on clients discussions when meetings were recessed. One past small company owner ended up in the Federal Penn.

The last thing I would want is for some of these people to be contacted. I prefer to let the projects completed, patents acquired, and papers published speak for themselves.

Past employers should never do more than verify that a person worked there and the dates of employment - period! Fortunately, for me these particular places are in the far past now.

 

[corus]

It's very rare for an employer (other than in defence work) to check references before the employee takes up employment. Given the speed HR work it's usually long after you've started and that is usually to check employment history. These days HR use psychometric testing to see what you're like, mixed in with a bit of tea leaf reading I guess. Fat load of good it does. In my case a previous employer was contacted by phone for a 'chat' with a prospective manager, but that previous employer phoned me also to let me know what had gone on and to let me know what they thought of that person. It works both ways.

corus

 

[lz5pl]

It is a much easier in small countries as mine. Professional societies are not very big and when you employ somebody it is very easy to find somebody you trust who knows the guy. For me normally it is the best way. But of course for large countries like USA it cannot work.
The company I worked for almost disappeared last year - they fired all engineering division. A guy from my department (I left before that) apply for a position in local branch of reputable West European company. They simply called me and asked about my opinion. I told them the true: The guy is not bad, but he lacks of initiative. He could be good for routine office work, but please don't expect from him a leadership. These are the reasons why I didn't invite him in my company - we alternate design with field works, where the person must be able to take responsibility. They consider that for their needs he will be suitable and employed him. He works now for them almost six months and I think the both sides are happy.
Therefore I am agree that not everybody is suitable for each position - but it is possible that in other segment he would show himself from the better side.

------------------------
It may be like this in theory and practice, but in real life it is completely different.
The favourite sentence of my army sergeant

 

[SylvestreW]

I don't get this posting? A company policy stating you can't give a bad reference does not imply it must be a good reference?
Simply confirm dates of employment and refuse to provide any other comments.

What you should do is not blind-side the employee. Be frank with him/her and state you don't want to be a reference, and that your name should not be provided.

 

[greenone]

I am, frankly, shocked to hear that companies are not checking references (Is there also gambling in this establishment?) It takes maybe 20 minutes to make a few calls. That said, our company policy is to confirm dates of employment, and that's it. But if you're good, you don't need your employer as a reference-I have clients and peers in the industry that I would use as a reference.
We also run a background check-those DUIs or credit problems show up there.

 

[RossABQ]

Just to be clear, when I said I "let loose on him", I meant I gave an honest appraisal in depth, contrary to policy. I said the guy would probably do all right in a purely analytical position, but wouldn't know a piece of pipe if he tripped over it. He was in fact hired for a job that didn't require anything but number-crunching. (So I was told, FEA work). The ex-employee was clear on what I would say about his skills.