| Candidates Aren’t Always What They Appear - Improving Reference Checks |
|
|
| Written by Steve Moulton | |
The conventional wisdom about providing job references for former employees is that that reference should be limited to name rank and serial number. Hence, many employers figure it is a waste of time to check references. In 1996, the Wall Street Journal reported a very scary case about references. “Although the case was eventually settled, a state court judge in Florida ruled last year that the Allstate Corp. unit could be sued for punitive damages for concealing the violent nature of a former employee. The deception allegedly occurred when Allstate wrote a recommendation letter saying the employee who had been fired after coming to work with a gun, was let go as part of a corporate restructuring. The suit contended that Fireman’s Fund Insurance Co. relied on the letter when it hired the former Allstate employee – to disastrous effect. In January 1993, the employee, Paul Calden, shot five co-workers in a Fireman’s Fund cafeteria, killing three of them and injuring the others. He also fatally shot himself. The suit was filed by one survivor of the shooting and the families that were killed.” The topic of giving and getting references is often controversial to say the least. Over the last decade, more than half of the states across the country have passed some sort of laws that give some immunity from liability when companies give truthful job references for current and former employees. Most references that candidate’s provide are pre-selected to deliver positive references. Hence checking with former employers is a key aspect of verifying a candidate’s story. Whether or not you decide to give any information beyond name, rank, and serial number should be decided with council from legal advisors, depending on the laws in your state. The decision for seeking references should not be as difficult. Many of the laws that have been passed require job applicants to sign off on requests for references. Hence, every new employee should be required to sign a release for gathering reference information. (Attached to this newsletter are a couple of suggestions to work from. Be sure to have legal review and approve the release.) Many organizations have this statement incorporated into the employment application that candidates fill out, but a separate copy should also be created on your company’s letterhead and signed by all candidates. Why? It makes it easy to fax a copy to someone you are seeking a reference from. One approach would be to call the reference and ask if they could spend a few minutes talking about the candidate. If the hesitate or say no then offer to fax the release. Another approach that has been successful is to say something like: “As a manager yourself, you know how important it is to get references on new hires. I don’t want you to say anything that would make you feel uncomfortable. But when I hear a response like this, I immediately jump to the conclusion that there’s a problem. If that’s your intent, it is OK. But if it isn’t your intent, it’s really a disservice to the applicant.” Then if they are willing, tell them about a specific example of an event that the candidate shared in the interview process that the reference should be aware of, that they can elaborate on. This will provide a foundation for verifying past actions. Don’t be afraid to ask if there is anything in this person’s past that would lead them to believe that the candidate may have a violent nature. Moral: Whether seeking or giving references know your legal obligations and your rights. Don’t be afraid to seek references that are more than name, rank, and serial number. |