zlacker

I disagree with his point about references. They tell you nothing and are a hundred percent of the time only going to tell you positive things about the employee, regardless of reality. No one with half a brain would ever give a reference out that wasn't going to be positive. Even if you don't have one positive reference, asking a friend to pretend to be one is easy and I don't doubt it happens even when people have qualified references. I'd much rather interview a potential employee than have to use references. The mere thought of references making any difference whatsoever in a hiring decision is rather angering in its stupidity.

>>joesmo+(OP)
Perhaps there's a middle ground? Interviews have a series of notorious problems. References can easily be shills, although note his recommendation to looks for references that didn't come from the candidate. Seems to me that the whole hiring process is a logically-flawed nightmare, so why not include multiple approaches?

I read the comments about only references with no interview to be jocular, not necessarily implying that he is against interviews.

>>joesmo+(OP)
You may be thinking of references from HR. Those won't tell you anything insightful about the candidate. But if I know someone I trust who has worked with the candidate and can give me a strong recommendation, that's a huge factor in my decision.

In other words, my ex-coworkers's co-workers make for a great filter.

>>joesmo+(OP)
The article specifically says to check references other than the ones given by the candidate. I wish Reid would expand on that. If I interview at LinkedIn, is he going to blab to my boss and the world that I'm looking for a new job?

I've been cold-called to give references on people I found weak. Frankly, I'm not going to blurt out a lot of negative data to a stranger. It's either a legal or ethical liability, and what's in it for me to trash a colleague?

>>sgusta+M2
I've also gotten those calls, and I don't think it's nearly the legal minefield that people claim. I'll make my point clear enough if it's warranted.

I've also gotten a reference call for someone I terminated and gave them a positive reference, conditioned on the fact that the new company wanted someone with exactly the skills my ex-employee had. I was very clear about why it didn't work out with us, but thought that that it was a very good fit for the new place, given how they described the role and responsibilities. Ex-employee was hired and is (as far as I know) doing very well and happy there.

I think the "I'm only allowed to confirm dates of employment" is a terrible drain on the mobility of good employees and allows higher mobility than should be the case of poor employees, so I don't participate.