No one will hire me....

Post Reply New Topic

It'seems to be a myth that former employers cannot give you a bad reference, they can. It just has to be documented, for instance: how was the said employees work ethic? He was late several times, etc.
People think they are protected by law not to get a bad reference they are not. The former employer cannot say untruthful stuff that is libel.
Many companies discourage managers to say negative stuff to avoid legal issues, but on the face of it, it is not illegal.

There is one question that is legal to both ask and answer, and that does not risk libel.

"If you could hire this person back, would you?"

All I'd have to say is "No" to ruin someone's chances at another job, and no court in the land would entertain a lawsuit against me.

??????? The tradition, since I've been in the workforce, is that previous employees employment histories are considered a matter of record and freely available to the next prospective employer. This has been moderated by privacy lawsuits, etc. but (as of my retirement in 2005) things had not changed much, instead information is couched in other ways (as someone has already described).

But in the interview I described I felt it was justified. The interviewee, while being successful in his present job, was dissatisfied with his future prospects. He was applying for a technical position in service/maintenance that required special training. His complaint about his present position specifically was management was unwilling to provide the training promised for his position, but the company (perhaps because it had fallen on hard times????) declined, instead putting all employees with customer exposure through rigorous and aggressive sales training to increase sales (which the prospective employee was not interested in).

The prospective employee was trying to ensure he would be able to advance technically in his chosen profession, should we hire him. I didn't think this was out of line, because a standard question we'd ask during an interview concerned the reason for leaving his former position.

Which of these two would you hire, if all other considerations were equal?

A. "My supervisor was an a-hole! He promoted his friends, not me!"

B. "The corporate structure provided limited growth potential."

There are ways to word things. Although it may make logical sense that you would want anothing employee to increase their technical knowledge, after all it is value added and can increase that employees value to the company. But companies are not always logical and therefore prone to look at short sighted gains in lieu of long term investment. Although it is good that you loon at the candidate for potential and in that instance telling a prospective employer that he left his former employer that he was provided with the training promised worked, it may not always. Wording it like: I would like to expand my technical expertise and growth potential, etc without mention specifics about how the former employer did not provide follow through may work better. Because after all, employers are not going to give employees the training the employees wants but what the employer thinks the employee needs, that goes for ALL employers.

"A": I've seen this scenario played out many times in the "working world."

"B": The last company I worked for was structured so it was relatively easy to move laterally, but there was little opportunity for upward growth.

If I found both statements were "statements of truth" then I could overlook a lack of sophistication (depending on the position applied for) in either case.

"Although it is good that you loon (sic) at the candidate for potential and in that instance telling a prospective employer that he left his former employer that he was provided with the training promised worked, it may not always. Wording it like: I would like to expand my technical expertise and growth potential, etc without mention specifics about how the former employer did not provide follow through may work better."

Giving me exact information in the hope I would respond favorably did not upset me at all. I feel he was trying to be as honest as he could. Softening (and therefor somewhat "masking") his statement would have been a disservice to me. I do not feel lack of sophistication is as important as truthfulness; one can easily be improved, the other not so readily.

And I guess it just bugged me that when the other company the applicant mentioned were contacted by people (they called their customers) who depended on them for their technical and business expertise were now about to receive some high pressured sales pitch, the efficacy of which is based on previous common trust. This was something our company was careful not to do. We believed "Trust" was an award bestowed by customers because of our many years of careful service.

"Because after all, employers are not going to give employees the training the employees wants but what the employer thinks the employee needs, that goes for ALL employers." I don't think this is necessarily true of all situations....I believe many (here) may have had a dissimilar experience. And because this training had been promised and previously approved, the applicant felt he was being led from his chosen career path and hoped to find an organization that would follow through on it's promises.

If you want my two bits, here you go...

I'm a writer. I had one job after another most all my life. I have never kept a job--not once.

Years ago, I worked as an assistant manager at a cinema. I kept that job 19 months; other than the cinema job, the longest I kept a job was about 2.5 months.

I realized (many years later) that the only way I could climb out of perpetual-poverty was if I created my own work. I ran this idea by a brother of mine (who is an attorney) and he was surprised I didn't know already that self-employment was the way to go in matters of financial stability.

Today, I'm a writer. I write well (when I'm in the mood). As I just started-out as a freelance copywriter not too long ago, I haven't made much money just yet; however, I have made some super-awesome connections.

Things are starting to line-up in my favor financially. Opportunities are coming to me that I hadn't foreseen before and appear to be going very well.

Furthermore, Vocational Rehabilitation is paying for me to go through a Professional Bookkeeper and Professional Tax Preparer's program.

Solutions are just appearing right in front of me. I expect only good things will come in the business I am building.

Self-employment it would seem is the only way to be financially secure in this life. It is true of neuro-typical people and neuro-diverse people alike.

In my early twenties I was self-employed and had a little money; then years of striving for better income saw me trying to work for others. Working for other businesses always failed for me.

Now, things are looking-up!

~Cheers!