Employer discussing why I was let go

[justalayman]

The law says that they are required if I ask for it. If they say that they aren't required and will not do so, then I'll have to consider whether I want to pursue legal action against them. They were somewhat sketchy towards me at the end of my employment so it is definitely something I might proceed with.

Telling you they don’t have to report to you is not violating the law. You can try to sue to demand they disclose IF they have communicated with another company and to demand they release such communications if they had


But how much money are you willing to spend and how often are you willlig to spend it to get them admit they had or had not had any germane communications with another employer?

 

[quincy]

The law says that they are required if I ask for it. If they say that they aren't required and will not do so, then I'll have to consider whether I want to pursue legal action against them. They were somewhat sketchy towards me at the end of my employment so it is definitely something I might proceed with.

What gives rise to your question? Did you apply for a job and didn't get it - and you believe it is because of something said by your former employer to the prospective employer?

You can have someone you know pose as a prospective employer to see what your former employer might be saying about you.

Did you leave your employer on less-than-favorable terms?

 

[cbg]

I'm going to go out on a limb and make a guess here.

OP, my guess is that you've been applying for jobs, are not getting called in to interviews and you're thinking it's because of what the employer is saying. Or, alternately, you're getting interviews but then not getting the job. Am I right? And if I am, is it Door A or Door B?

 

[justalayman]

And to head off what I think the op may be wanting to do if the statements are less than flatterin

Former employer can be honest about why you left the company. They can’t tell untruths but they can be completely truthful and they can express their opinion as well.

 

[quincy]

If this is the direction the thread is going to take, cbg and I can probably link to dozens of threads on this forum where we have discussed what an employer can and cannot safely say.

 

[commentator]

This prior job wouldn't happen to have been substitute teaching, would it?

 

[FlyingRon]

My favorite "recommendation" was the employee who managed to quit the morning I was going in to fire him for cause. About two months later I get a phone call from some HR departments somewhere else....

HR: Mr. Lee has used you as a reference.
ME: Oh, he did, did he?
HR: You were unaware of this?
ME: Yes.
HR: Would you like to give him a reference?
ME: It would be better for him if I didn't.
HR: I understand.

 

[quincy]

This prior job wouldn't happen to have been substitute teaching, would it?

I think someone might be flashing back to a recent thread.

 

[ConspiracyTheory]

I'm going to go out on a limb and make a guess here.

OP, my guess is that you've been applying for jobs, are not getting called in to interviews and you're thinking it's because of what the employer is saying. Or, alternately, you're getting interviews but then not getting the job. Am I right? And if I am, is it Door A or Door B?

It's been a little of both. I fully understand that my previous employer can say what they wish as long as it is true. I just don't know if it is actually the case that they are doing this. All I've been wanting to find out is what they are saying to potential future employers.

 

[Zigner]

It's been a little of both. I fully understand that my previous employer can say what they wish as long as it is true. I just don't know if it is actually the case that they are doing this. All I've been wanting to find out is what they are saying to potential future employers.

You have no particular right to such information at this time.

 

[ConspiracyTheory]

You have no particular right to such information at this time.

Why is that exactly? It seems the law is pretty clear that if my former employee is giving information out to prospective employers then they are required to share that information with me if I request it.

 

[Zigner]

Why is that exactly? It seems the law is pretty clear that if my former employee is giving information out to prospective employers then they are required to share that information with me if I request it.

You haven't told us that you requested it. If you haven't requested it (as all the information you have given us indicates), then you have no particular right to such information at this time. In other words, you have to request it before you are entitled to it.


ETA: Also, even if they don't provide it, you'd have to convince the state to take this on as a criminal matter. Based on that section of code, you don't appear to have any civil remedy. Speak to an employment law attorney for more clarification.

 

[cbg]

If you're not being called in for interviews, then I will 100% guarantee you that your former employer(s) have nothing to do with it. Employers do not call for references until after they have called you in for interviews, gone through the entire interview process, and chosen their top candidates. Then and only then they will do reference checks on their top candidates; sometimes only their top candidate, singular.

 

[Pinkie39]

This will probably be an unpopular opinion. Unless the employee stole from the employer or committed some other egregious act, why give a bad reference to a potential employer? Why not just verify the employee worked there, and only give out their position and dates of employment?

It just seems spiteful to me to try to sabotage a former employee's ability to find another job to support themself, by giving a negative reference over say, the previous job just not being a good fit for the employee, or the employee and boss just having clashing personalities.

 

[Taxing Matters]

This will probably be an unpopular opinion. Unless the employee stole from the employer or committed some other egregious act, why give a bad reference to a potential employer? Why not just verify the employee worked there, and only give out their position and dates of employment?

If the company policy is to only give out that information regardless of how bad or good the employee was then that's certainly not objectionable. By telling persons seeking references about the policy it should not leave any particular impression about what the person was like. But of course by doing that the really good employees are deprived of a really positive recommendation that might make the difference in getting a job, especially if it's a close call with some other candidate. It has the advantage, though, of ensuring the employer won't get caught up in a defamation claim, which is why this kind of policy is popular with some companies.

But if the company does give out positive references for the good employees and just says nothing about the bad ones, that may be even worse for those that were fired over some perceived problem. That's because the employer seeking the reference will know the employee was not considered good, but won't know just how bad the person was. In that circumstance, human nature will tend to think the worst might have been involved. That then may be turn out to tar the ex employee more badly than if the ex-employer just said what the real issue was.

In the end, I don't see a really perfect way to deal with this that is good for everyone.