A few years ago, we were looking for an extra accountant for our practice. Applicants were in relatively short supply, but we were approached by an accountant living in Tauranga. He was qualified, had about 5 years experience, seemed nice enough and he was happy to relocate to Wellington. Also, his anticipated salary was well within our expected range – a bit on the low side, if anything. All in all, we thought we had found our new employee. We brought him down, interviewed him, introduced him to everyone, and the deal seemed to be done. There was just one more thing to do.
I always check references. If I get one good reference that confirms my own judgment of the person, I will usually leave it at that. This person provided 3 referees’ details. I tried the first one and couldn’t get hold of anyone. Ditto the second one. I almost didn’t bother, but then decided to try the third one, just in case. This time, I spoke to someone in the office where my prospective employee had previously worked. I didn’t get the named referee, who no longer worked there, but I spoke to the practice manager, who had worked with my candidate.
What I was told was quite shocking. Apparently, he was quite capable, but lazy, spent all day playing on his computer, could be snarly with other staff and clients and was considered very difficult to work with. He had left this firm of his own accord, but they had breathed a huge sigh of relief once he had gone. I was told that this person would never be employed by that particular practice again.
It was not what I had expected at all. Yes, he was a bit of a nerd (many accountants are) but he had come across as friendly and pleasant. It did answer one or two questions about him though. I couldn’t understand how someone with his qualifications and experience came so… cheap. He was desperate, obviously, and while it might have worked out, we were not prepared to take the risk.
We didn’t tell our candidate the reason for turning him down. Instead, we simply said we were concerned at the risk we would be taking if, after forcing him to relocate to Wellington, the whole thing didn’t work out. And we left it at that.
Just as well. Because these days, it seems that acting appropriately on a bad reference could have costed us a payout.
A childcare centre must pay a former employee $3000 in damages for breaching her privacy by giving her a bad job reference which saw her miss out on a job.
The Human Rights Review Tribunal ordered Katui Early Childhood Learning Centre in Northland to pay Dana Gin-Cowan $3000 for humiliation, loss of dignity and injury to feelings, according to a decision released last week.
Just as in my case, the person named as a referee was not available, so another person who had worked with the candidate provided a reference. Never would I have thought that this could lead to a privacy issue.
When the Mangere centre staff rang Katui, the manager Gin-Cowan had selected as her referee was on sick leave.
The acting manager answered the phone and said she and Gin-Cowan did not get on, she would not provide a reference for her, and she would not re-employ her. She then gave out a phone number for the Matthews.
The Mangere staff member rang Mrs Matthews, who said Gin-Cowan was often late to work, was unreliable and had unsatisfactory work habits, according to the staff member’s evidence.
But it happens all the time. If you cannot get hold of the actual person named, you are not allowed to talk to anyone else, including other people who had worked with the candidate? How ridiculous is that?
The tribunal found Katui’s bad reference stopped Gin-Cowan’s employment with MUMA and she lost the ability to provide a referee of her choice for the job. It concluding this constituted a loss under the Privacy Act.
Stuff
The interesting thing is that no one is disputing the fact that Gin-Cowan was a poor employee. The issue seems to be that she was allowed to keep her bad behaviour private from any prospective employers. She received a payout for hurt feelings, not because the reference given was in any way incorrect.
What an absolute disgrace.
I would never tell the candidates the reason why they are not getting the job, to protect the referee involved. It is usually not difficult to figure out who has spoken against someone, and it would be unfair to do that to an employer or employee who is simply telling the truth.
There is, of course, nothing stopping a prospective employer from simply cold calling a previous employer, even if they are not named as a referee, but beware. That would obviously be a privacy issue as well.
Employing people can be a real headache. I freely admit we employed some really fantastic people, but we made some mistakes too. Those mistakes can be costly and damaging to your business. Taking up references is a way of reducing the risk.
However, that is another thing that is going by the wayside. Landlords and employers have little protection these days against people who have no intention of doing the right thing and respecting the property, or business, belonging to others.
I am glad I am not an employer nowadays. Having said that though, $3,000 to get rid of someone with that sort of work history is probably an absolute bargain.