Requiring Technical References...

[FIERCE TANK BATTLE]

Until recently if a recruiter asked for technical references, it was just them fishing and they had a fake job and were desperate for new people.

But recently I've been required to supply technical references to pass on to the client. They spend enough time discussing the role in depth and answering questions that I believe the role is real.

They say that it is required as part of sending the application to the client. When I refuse to give references prior to an interview, they pretty much hang up on me.

Since this has happened a few times I'm concerned about losing out on opportunities, as the market is not exactly desperate right now.

It's stupid that they would need a reference that early but I wonder if it's just like the opt-out recruiter regs, sure you don't have to but your CV goes straight in the bin if you don't.

I caved on one and threw the worst client I ever had under the bus as a reference. But if this is a growing trend it won't help me if my references are getting hammered with calls from evil pimps.

Wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this?

[LondonManc]

Until recently if a recruiter asked for technical references, it was just them fishing and they had a fake job and were desperate for new people.

But recently I've been required to supply technical references to pass on to the client. They spend enough time discussing the role in depth and answering questions that I believe the role is real.

They say that it is required as part of sending the application to the client. When I refuse to give references prior to an interview, they pretty much hang up on me.

Since this has happened a few times I'm concerned about losing out on opportunities, as the market is not exactly desperate right now.

It's stupid that they would need a reference that early but I wonder if it's just like the opt-out recruiter regs, sure you don't have to but your CV goes straight in the bin if you don't.

I caved on one and threw the worst client I ever had under the bus as a reference. But if this is a growing trend it won't help me if my references are getting hammered with calls from evil pimps.

Wondering if anyone has any thoughts on this?

It's a standard Venn Group tactic, along with other firms.

Clients aren't legally allowed to give these sort of references any more and haven't been for many years.

That's why you should give previous agencies as your references - they will confirm that you worked at such a place from May 2016 to October 2017 as a Database Administrator for example.

[SueEllen]

Any technical references have to come people you personally know and may have worked with. This is because as LondonManc said if someone in a company gives you a technical reference and it is untrue, you can sue them and the company for deflamation.

[LondonManc]

Any technical references have to come people you personally know and may have worked with. This is because as LondonManc said if someone in a company gives you a technical reference and it is untrue, you can sue them and the company for defamation.

Not only that but there has been anecdotal evidence of bad references given because Bill rates highly and doesn't want Dave to leave. Dave therefore fails to get the job he's applied for.

[1manshow]

Not only that but there has been anecdotal evidence of bad references given because Bill rates highly and doesn't want Dave to leave. Dave therefore fails to get the job he's applied for.

How would Bill give a bad reference for Dave and make sense of the fact that he hasn't fired Dave for his poor work?

[LondonManc]

How would Bill give a bad reference for Dave and make sense of the fact that he hasn't fired Dave for his poor work?

Dave hasn't quit yet and Bill doesn't want him to.
It's very difficult to get rid of permies these days because they're "a bit crap". If they really suck, it still takes a performance review or two, so potentially 18 months.

That's partly why the who subjective references thing was banned - you never know how valid the reference was; "oh yeah, he's great" could mean what it says, or "please take him, it will save us getting rid"

[gables]

Dave hasn't quit yet and Bill doesn't want him to.
It's very difficult to get rid of permies these days because they're "a bit crap". If they really suck, it still takes a performance review or two, so potentially 18 months.

That's partly why the who subjective references thing was banned - you never know how valid the reference was; "oh yeah, he's great" could mean what it says, or "please take him, it will save us getting rid"

Is it actually banned by law or just bad idea, so most don't?

[northernladuk]

Is it actually banned by law or just bad idea, so most don't?

It's not banned by law. It opens whoever gave the bad reference to potential legal issues. If I lost a gig because someone said I was crap with absolutely no evidence I'd be able to sue them. There is no benefit for anyone to open themselves to that level of risk so it's a bad idea to give anything but the basic facts.

[LondonManc]

Is it actually banned by law or just bad idea, so most don't?

Apologies - I was at a place at the time where they decreed them as banned, presumably for the protection from litigation:
https://www.gov.uk/work-reference <-- here's the full details of the rules.

[GreenMirror]

Any reputable agent(oxymoron?) will understand you can only give your last agent as a reference. Anything else is fishing.