How professional referencing should work

The following is an example of how I believe professional referencing should work. It should be open to the employee who has a right of reply. It should be contained on a government website that any prospective employer can see with the job candidates approval. It should also be the only referencing an employer can obtain from a previous employer.

The key is to provide a right of reply, so employees can defend themselves against a potentially unfair or mistaken reference. I believe this is a much better way to create an honest and fair referencing system, and probably much more accurate.

-Andrew Atkin

---------------------------------------------

REFERENCE: 8077643

Company: Stained Glass Manufacturing NZ: 

Employee: Michael McWilly, June 2016 - April 2017

Appraisal from Personnel department:

Basics: 

Punctuality: Good. Michael was only occasionally late, and never by more than 5 minutes.

Adaptivity: Fair. Michael liked to stick with what he knew. Only with pressure from management did he expand his skill base.

Reply - Michael McWilly: I accept this. I was not comfortable with the company and my enthusiasm to grow with it was weak. I accept I need to find a new employer that is a better match for me, going forward.

Conduct: Excellent. Michael was faultlessly pleasant to everyone at our workshop.

Reply - Michael McWilly: I appreciate this. I always take care to be decent to others in all conditions.

Efficiency: Average. Michael always got on with the job at hand, but could be lethargic when not in the mood.

Reply- Michael McWilly: Again, the job was not what I expected and my enthusiasm was dampened. I did my best to persevere.

Sociability: Acceptable. Though Michael was always personable he did not appear to fit in.

Reply - Michael McWilly: There were a handful of workmates in the company that were both vulgar and intimidating. I could not feel comfortable around them, which led to a withdrawn temperament from myself. I have not been this way in other workplaces as you will see from my other included references.

General:

Michael had a strong sense of responsibility. He has been the kind of worker we always knew we could depend on. However he was never overtly keen on his work, and always gave us the feeling he was prepared to leave at any moment. He was not at home with us. We were disappointed by his apparent lack of desire to expand himself. He is an intelligent worker who largely withheld his talent.

Reply - Michael McWilly: I am somewhat disappointed by this appraisal, but I can understand where my employer is coming from. All I can say is that Stained Glass Manufacturing did not turn out to be my comfort zone which dampened my energy. Normally I am much more enthusiastic and progressive than what my previous employer was accustomed to witness from me. 

In future I will take more care to review the conditions--especially the social conditions--of my prospective workplace. There has been a lot I have liked about Stained Glass Manufacturing, but I have to conclude that my employment there was a mistake.

Ends.

Contrasting, there should also be a referencing system for employers, written by employees, similar to this one. This way prospective employees can know what they might be getting into, before they commit to an employer. Referencing should go both ways, should it not?

I write about this here.