Huxley admission

[Denny]

Received a contract e-mail description the other day from this outfit.

In with the job description as bold as brass,
"Please note that all applicants will be reference-checked prior to CV-submission."

This actually is quite useful. 'Cos now they're advertising the fact they're just trawling for contact names and that the contract is bogus.

Too true. Pre-hire refs should only come after the job is in the bag or will be subject to refs being satisfactory. By that time they would have sent you a contract with 'subject to satisfactory refs' in the Works Schedule.

Nothing else will do.

[lukemg]

Had experience of this shower, phoned up after I responded to a job. Never mentioned the job, blatant discussion of current and previous roles. 'I know some people there, what is the managers name again' ? Don't touch 'em with a barge pole, expect them to mess up current role and annoy previous companies. Realise leads have to come from somewhere but not like this. Can only think it works for them or they would stop !

[wendigo100]

My experiences are the same as lukemg. They are time-wasters.

[The Lone Gunman]

<shout>Incoming</shout>

Huxley are only doing what the Conduct of Employment Agencies act tells them to do. All agents should be doing the same.

Agents are required BY LAW to be sure that the candidate is who they say they are and are qualified BEFORE forwarding their details to the client.

<TLG ducks>

[cojak]

All that's required for that is a statement from your own LTD company "To whom it may concern - I vouch that xxx is who he states he is..."*

*unless, you're not, of course...

[BobTheCrate]

Agents are required BY LAW to be sure that the candidate is who they say they are ...

Hmmm, sounds a tad tenuous to me that in the context of references..

Previous client names is not even evidence of identity let alone proof of identity.

I agree with the consensus. Requests for references up front is pretty much confirmation the job or contract is bogus.

[AttitudeAdjuster]

But I can add my experience....

Just to add to the debate here, I have had experience of this where it was a genuine expectation of the client company (SLAs between them and the agency and so forth) and so I did provide, very reluctantly I must say, the references (plural as in '2'). So anyway, I went along to the interview but at the end of the day I did not get the gig due to lack of experience on the specific IDE version they were using (not the IDE itself but the actual version FFS!).

So, it can happen that pre-referenced candidates are required but as someone said further back, if we all follow this to its logic conclusion everyone would be on the phone the whole day long providing references! I hate to say it but the PCG scheme of holding a central repository of these checks makes some kind of sense.

[vetran]

sale of names?

Is it possible to supply references for that purpose only, if they use them for another purpose then they are purchasing them?

i.e. these references are supplied for the sole purpose of acting as referees, use of these names for the purposes of harvesting leads becomes a contract to purchase these leads at the commercial rate of pre qualified premium leads at a cost of £5000 a name. obviously IANAL but something like that.

Alternatively just supply the previous agent. I normally find if they glaze over when I do that then they are just after leads.

[Mailman]

<shout>Incoming</shout>
Agents are required BY LAW to be sure that the candidate is who they say they are and are qualified BEFORE forwarding their details to the client.
<TLG ducks>

This is incorrect LG.

While agents are required by law to ensure you are who you say you are, this can only be achieved through the use of formal, government issued identification (oh how handy is that ID card now! ).

Checking qualifications can only be done by checking with the relevant issueing authority (degree from Mickey Mouse University, then check with Oxford its real!).

All a reference is going to confirm is whether what you said you did there is what really went on.

Mailman

[The Lone Gunman]

Are you guys sure of your facts. Here is an extract from the DTI web site.

Regulation 19 – Confirmation to be obtained about a work-seeker
Provides that an employment agency or employment business must not
introduce or supply a work-seeker to a hirer unless it has obtained
confirmation:
(a) of the identity of the work-seeker. This will mean seeing any
document which provides evidence of the work-seeker’s identity,
such as his/her passport, driving licence, birth certificate.By virtue
of regulation 32(6) this will extend to those persons provided
through limited company contractors, where the notice under
regulation 32(9) to opt out of the scope of the Regulations has not
been given;
(b) that the work-seeker has the experience, training, qualifications
and any authorisation which the hirer considers are necessary, or
which the worker needs to have by law or by the requirements of
any professional body, in order to carry out the work. This
obligation can be properly discharged by the agency or
employment business when registering a work-seeker. During the
registration process it should request sight of evidence of training
received, qualifications and authorisations such as certificates,
and registrations with professional bodies. Again by virtue of the
provisions of regulation 32(6), the requirements here must be
extended to those persons supplied through limited company
contractors, which have not given notice to opt out of the
Regulations; and
(c) that the work-seeker is willing to work in this position.

Postman Prat: Do you still need to be spoon fed, why cant you extrapolate an argument? ID = Passport, Quals = Degree certificate, Experience = referees.

There is nothing in the regs that allows the agent to accept affirmation from your Ltd. either though it does seem to be accepted practice, particularly if that affirmation contains an indemnity.