Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Unfortunately, on the contrary ; if you are negative, it's illegal if your previous employer gives positive reference ( if you're positive, then it's illegal if your previous employer gives negative reference )
You're negative, but your former boss tells your new boss you're positive, what if you're negative again in your new job , what if you cause loss , cause trouble to your new boss, then your former boss will be liable for lying
Unfortunately, on the contrary ; if you are negative, it's illegal if your previous employer gives positive reference ( if you're positive, then it's illegal if your previous employer gives negative reference )
You're negative, but your former boss tells your new boss you're positive, what if you're negative again in your new job , what if you cause loss , cause trouble to your new boss, then your former boss will be liable for lying
BINGO!
That is the essence of the way the courts have been ruling. Its not just acceptable to just tell the truth, you must be balance when providing information. Truth and Balance is the good and the bad. There is a retalitory provision, but that's for the judges to decipher.
Yes, but that information is subjective and how is the potential employer going to know if that person is telling the truth? There are cases of people thinking that they have left on good terms and then comes to find out that their former employer is giving out a subjective bad reference that may or may not be true.
I guess you feel okay keeping these people up on welfare then since you prefer someone to be blacklisted.
Do you feel this way when the prospective employers call on the references you provided them?
Do you feel this way when the prospective employers call on the references you provided them?
I am speaking of "some" employers that are hell bent on giving negative reviews about a former employee all because they are mad because said employee left. The fact of the matter is you can never be sure what former employers are going to say even if you "think" you left on good terms. You can't always leave that employer off your resume especially if you were there for a long time. This is why I am seeing people talk about services that will call your former employer and see exactly what is being said. Apparently there is a need for such services.
I am speaking of "some" employers that are hell bent on giving negative reviews about a former employee all because they are mad because said employee left. The fact of the matter is you can never be sure what former employers are going to say even if you "think" you left on good terms. You can't always leave that employer off your resume especially if you were there for a long time. This is why I am seeing people talk about services that will call your former employer and see exactly what is being said. Apparently there is a need for such services.
So you're ok if your references give you glowing positive reviews even though that may be far from the truth?
How is the prospective employer is going to know who is telling the truth?
Is that up to the employer asking the questions to decide whose opinion has more veracity?
If you want to bar employers from giving negative reviews about former employees because it's potentially untrue, should you bar employers from giving positive reviews about former employees for the same reason? (It's essentially the practice right now in most companies)
It's very simple, really. If you suspect that someone is vindictive and giving out a negative reference, call them yourself or have someone else call to see if that person is in fact maligning you! It's a no brainer. Send them a cease and desist letter and threaten to sue. Then give the company lots of negative reviews all over the Internet. Give them a dose of their own medicine. Some people are vindictive in this life and that is that.Fact of life! Unless you are a HARDENED lowlife scum mass murderer criminal and actually deserve a negative reference, nobody has any business giving out bad references. People do make mistakes on the job. People deserve a second chance. I see businesses screw over employees all the time. I see it in the papers or on tv constantly. The elaborate ways in which big and sometimes small companies just do all kinds of nasty, selfish things to hardworking loyal people just because they can. So absolutely no, it is NOT allright to give negative references. Even if the reference is true, the poor victim has a right to sue. People have a right to reboot their lives and start with a clean slate. Now someone evil like Jeffrey Dahmer or Bernard Madoff, ok I can see giving them bad references.
So you think an employer has no right to be honest when asked about a prospective employee? If your neighbor hired a plumber and he was a terrible plumber wouldn't you like to know so you don't hire him?
If a person was a bad employee, stole, started problems, gossiped, or was annoying to be around maybe they should be blacklisted.
I guess you are of the belief an employer is always in the right. And no, unless the person has been charged with a crime, that employer has NO right whatsoever to blackball an individual from earning a living.
It's very simple, really. If you suspect that someone is vindictive and giving out a negative reference, call them yourself or have someone else call to see if that person is in fact maligning you! It's a no brainer. Send them a cease and desist letter and threaten to sue. Then give the company lots of negative reviews all over the Internet. Give them a dose of their own medicine. Some people are vindictive in this life and that is that.Fact of life! Unless you are a HARDENED lowlife scum mass murderer criminal and actually deserve a negative reference, nobody has any business giving out bad references. People do make mistakes on the job. People deserve a second chance. I see businesses screw over employees all the time. I see it in the papers or on tv constantly. The elaborate ways in which big and sometimes small companies just do all kinds of nasty, selfish things to hardworking loyal people just because they can. So absolutely no, it is NOT allright to give negative references. Even if the reference is true, the poor victim has a right to sue. People have a right to reboot their lives and start with a clean slate. Now someone evil like Jeffrey Dahmer or Bernard Madoff, ok I can see giving them bad references.
A lot of supervisors are just plain awful and vindictive. Just because they give a bad reference doesn't mean it is true.
Others, like the last one I had, simply wanted to cover her backside to protect her own job. She couldn't be trusted with being truthful as far as one could throw her. She lied in my bogus hearing.
This moron keeps being moved from job to job to job in the school district where I worked. She was the one who should have been fired.
So you're ok if your references give you glowing positive reviews even though that may be far from the truth?
How is the prospective employer is going to know who is telling the truth?
Is that up to the employer asking the questions to decide whose opinion has more veracity?
If you want to bar employers from giving negative reviews about former employees because it's potentially untrue, should you bar employers from giving positive reviews about former employees for the same reason? (It's essentially the practice right now in most companies)
They should be legally barred from disclosing to other employers whether a former employee is eligible for rehire. It is blackballing and can be truly devastating in certain fields, like teaching. Employers don't even have to go into details; it is assumed by prospective employers a "do not rehire" means the person is a bad employee.
I don't know if after all of this time I am still DNR; I need to check it out and take action against the school district if this "black mark" is still there. It might not be since the school district has been recently sued by two different plaintiffs over it.
That is the essence of the way the courts have been ruling. Its not just acceptable to just tell the truth, you must be balance when providing information. Truth and Balance is the good and the bad. There is a retalitory provision, but that's for the judges to decipher.
The problem, of course, is deciphering what is "true." Smart employers don't talk about employees, period, because of liability reasons.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
