Fired fraudster sues over reference check
March 12, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Background checks, In This Week's E-Newsletter, Latest News & Views, References
What should companies say when they get reference calls about a former employee who was fired for misconduct? A recent court ruling offers some help:
An employee’s boss caught him tampering with the company payroll system to lower his federal tax withholding. His actions were against company policy, and he was fired.
Eventually, the manager got a call from another employer asking for a reference for the former employee. He told the caller the man had been fired for misconduct.
The prospective employer asked the employee to sign a release so it could get more information about his termination. He refused and didn’t get the job.
He sued his former employer for interfering with his job search.
The company argued it was simply telling the truth and couldn’t be held liable. The court agreed.
Companies can’t be held liable for giving truthful information, even if it causes harm to a former employee.
Note: Not all courts follow the same standards when former employees sue over negative references, so companies should always proceed cautiously and follow their own established policies. But rulings like this offer some reassurance to HR pros.
Cite: Luttmann v. Tiffany and Co.
Tags: former employee, fraud, refence
March 12th, 2009 at 8:07 am
Sam,
As always great post. We linked to it and wrote a similar story, check it out:
http://blog.employeescreen.com/2009/03/12/its-alwasy-ok-to-tell-the-truth/
March 12th, 2009 at 8:10 am
[...] Read the full blog here! [...]
March 13th, 2009 at 9:55 am
[...] Fired fraudster sues over reference check | HRRecruitingAlert.com … By Sam Narisi Employee Free Choice Act introduced to Congress · Documentation not enough: Mouthy manager lands company in court · Supervisor asked for evidence of harassment — alleged victim sues · Employees on FMLA claim they’re owed more paid sick … HRRecruitingAlert.com – http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com/ [...]
March 16th, 2009 at 11:56 am
I always require the release up front before giving out this kind of information. All we give without a release is hire date, termination date and title. Cautious, I know, but it seems wise in today’s lawsuit-happy environment.
March 16th, 2009 at 2:07 pm
If R.B. is “cautious” I’m ultra cautious. I don’t give out ANY information without a release (signed or verbal direct from the individual; former or current employee). This includes responding to the question “Does _____ work there?” Unless I know that the employee wants me to provide any information, I don’t. Those seemingly innocent calls asking to verify if someone is an employee can have less-than-innocent purposes. Employers expect their employees to guard their confidential information. I believe employees should receive the same consideration. I don’t feel it is appropriate for me to decide what is and isn’t an employee’s CI. Once a reference check release is obtained, I’m comfortable providing useful information; knowing that I’m protected by (WI) law that states I’m presumed to be acting in good faith and therefore immune from all civil liability unless a lack of good faith can be shown by clear and convincing evidence that I: 1) knowingly gave false information, 2) made the reference maliciously, 3) violated an employment law.
March 16th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
When we are asked about references and it involves an employee leaving on less than positive reasons I inform the caller that we recommend they ask the employee for copies of their previous reviews but then go on to only verify name, hire dates, pay and title.
May 4th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
Why didn’t the employee just change file a new W-4 to change his withholding ? Seems like the employee went to extreme measures, unless there is more to the story.