| Journal: TWUK | Section: |
| Title: | Issue Date: 01/05/00 |
| Author: | Page Number: 56 |
| Copyright: Other |
Blowing the whistle on bad referees
People who agree to act as referees for a former employee should not take the responsibility lightly as a poor reference can have severe consequences. Helen Conway reports
AT a recent travel industry function – no doubt his tongue loosened by the steady flow of free wine – a young man was overheard verbally abusing a former girlfriend who had also been a former employee.“I’ll get my own back. She put me on her CV as a referee so I can really stitch her up when anyone asks for references.”
If the scorned lover does go ahead with his nasty plan, he may find that he will have more to contend with than a broken heart and a bruised ego. He could end up facing a hefty bill for damages because of his vindictive act.
The courts look very unfavourably on employers who damage the job prospects of a former employee by being careless in the writing of references. And that is hardly surprising, anyone who has hunted for a job recently will know that getting a decent reference is crucial. It is true that some companies do not bother to ask for references, but often that is an omission they come to regret, particularly if they discover they have hired a candidate who appeared to have everything they wanted at the interview but then turns out to be more skillful talking about their skills than putting them into action.
One of the most important cases dealing with employers’ duties in relation to references was Spring v Guardian Assurance [1994] which concerned a candidate in the financial services industry. He had left the defendant company and planned to work for a rival firm, but his employment prospects were scuppered when his past employer provided a reference which accused him of dishonesty.
Lawyers for the company that had provided this damming reference warned of the impact it would have if the case went against them. They argued that employers would be so inhibited in the face of potential legal action that they would end up writing bland references or no references at all. The argument was not accepted by the majority in the House of Lords, the highest court in the land and the judgment went in favour of the plaintiff.
The approach the court took regarding the important issue of references can be summarised in the words of Lord Goff, one of the judges hearing the case.
For employers, the key words to note are “due skill and care”. Strict accuracy in every detail is not expected – the standard is reasonable care.
Employers also have to be careful about refusing to provide references, as a recent case involving Granada Hospitality revealed.
The complaint made by former Granada employee, Belinda Coote, was that the company had refused to give her a reference because she had previously taken them to an industrial tribunal for sex discrimination.
That particular claim had been settled and Coote had left Granada but was now finding it difficult to get work because of Granada’s refusal to provide a reference. The case, which was considered by the Employment Appeals Tribunal and the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg, went against Granada and Coote was awarded almost £200,000.
The outcome made it clear that employers cannot refuse to provide references as a retaliatory measure against employees who had taken discrimination cases against them.
Were they permitted to do so, employees would be afraid to pursue a claim where they feel they are the victims of discrimination because it could well jeopardise their future employment prospects.
If that was allowed to happen, it would make a mockery of having discrimination laws to protect employees.
Play fair: companies who give bad references as a means of retaliation may regret the decision
Redress: a bad reference can lead to a legal battle