Screening process

[Lance]

Yeah, nothing in the forms is untrue or anything. I was just concerned that they might get a question like “how do you feel about the guy” where they would be able to flame me if they felt like it. Although I acknowledge that I might just be being paranoid!

"would you work with this person again?" is the offer to the referee to apply the shafting stick.

When I have done referrals I would vary between "absolutely I would not hesitate to work with JBloggs again, in fact I am sad to see him go and would take him on again at the drop of a hat".... and "yes if I had no other choice, I would work with this person again". Both are positive

[JustKeepSwimming]

myth or not, it's believed by most HR and most managers. So it stands.
If you have a citation for it being a myth then please provide as it would be interesting for many on here

IANAL and neither are you...

Don't be lazy. You could google it in 2 seconds if you actually cared.

[northernladuk]

That's a myth. It's not that they can't give a bad reference, it's that they can't give a false reference.

And any reference above basic start and end times is open to interpretation and argument. If a client manager makes it person and complains but the work was demonstrably good a reference based on that client managers say will be false. It's just not worth it.

It's not a myth. It's standard practice not to get involved and just state start and finish.

[dsc]

Well it’s finally happened - I have an unhappy client.

Took a contract with a new client but did not have the skills they thought I did (they, apparently, assumed I was also a front end expert).

Spent some time doing the required back-end work and upskilling their world (they knew I hadn’t worked in it before and assured me it wasn’t an issue and that I would be given time to learn the industry).

Fast forward a couple of months and i noticed I was really struggling to fill 40 hours a week with proper work so I suggested that rather than billing for that we changed my contract to just bill by the hour for any hours worked. They agreed and my contract was changed to hourly only, no fixed hours or minimums etc and I could work whichever hours I liked.

Apparently they were not expecting me to pick up other clients to make up the shortfall. They assumed I would still be available 9-6 every week day when they wanted to phone me etc. We had a brief chat when they found out this wasn’t the case and I asked how they had expected me to pay the mortgage etc with a zero hour contract? It seemed to obvious that I would look for other clients I hadn’t even thought to explicitly draw their attention to it.

They are now arguing the toss on hours claimed etc. and are voicing concern about previous deliverables etc.

Normally I would apologise for my part in any confusion, prepare some handover docs etc and terminate the contract but my other client is an investment bank and I am still going through screening.

Could this cause an issue with the screening process? They already have a reference and info from my accountant etc but they asked about previous clients so I put these guys down as well as I was not anticipating any issues (lesson learned there!).

Everything I have said and done is within contract etc but they could probably still flame me if they wanted to!

Wouldn't it make more sense to simply carry on, maybe revert back to 40hrs / week for the next 1-2 weeks until the screening is done and then bin them? I mean why cause a stir now when the screening with your other client is in progress? or are you simply worried that the current situation with them is going to potentially cause issues, even if you stay?

[JustKeepSwimming]

And any reference above basic start and end times is open to interpretation and argument. If a client manager makes it person and complains but the work was demonstrably good a reference based on that client managers say will be false. It's just not worth it.

It's not a myth. It's standard practice not to get involved and just state start and finish.

Now now, we are in business, you said technicalities matter in here. It is not illegal to give a bad reference so we shouldn't be saying it is.

[MyUserName]

Wouldn't it make more sense to simply carry on, maybe revert back to 40hrs / week for the next 1-2 weeks until the screening is done and then bin them? I mean why cause a stir now when the screening with your other client is in progress? or are you simply worried that the current situation with them is going to potentially cause issues, even if you stay?

It’s already happening. I have already started with my new client, the screening process is completed with 30 days of the start date. Maybe I was being naive but I really wasn’t expecting any kind of issue.

[SussexSeagull]

Admittedly over twenty years ago now when I was still permanent but one of my, shall we say, less competent colleagues somehow found another company willing to pay him so resigned and left. A few weeks into his new job I imagine things aren't going well because his new employer phone up my (and formerly his) boss to ask if he was really as bad as he seemed of which my boss was only too happy to confirm.

You can put what you like in a reference so long as you are happy to defend it, although the usual drill always used to be start date, end date and reason for leaving.

[Paralytic]

Assuming the gig is outside IR35, it could be argued that the client is not (legally) giving a reference on the person, but on the ability of their Ltd company to deliver the service. So, any employment laws/regulations would not apply.

However, if one client gives a factually incorrect reference on a contractor (ie, their ltd company) to another, then the contractor's ltd company could sue the client for defamation/libel.

[dsc]

It’s already happening. I have already started with my new client, the screening process is completed with 30 days of the start date. Maybe I was being naive but I really wasn’t expecting any kind of issue.

Sorry, just went and re-read the original post.

No idea how "deep" the screening is, but typically all they want to do is check if you are no lying re previous clients / employment, so it's more of a "confirm this bloke worked there from X to Y as per his CV". Besides I always assumed this is all a previous client / employer can do, ie. confirm you were there and what position it was.

No way to know I'm afraid.

[TheGreenBastard]

I'm guessing it's an inside gig if you're so naive and open about having other "clients", and justifying it with paying the mortgage. Why would a business expose itself like that, you moved to hourly and that's when your mouth should have shut. A great example of power imbalance to boot.