INDUSTRY NEWS
Fraudster Sues Over Reference Check, Loses
Fears of lawsuits and pricey settlements have caused many companies to refuse to provide anything but the most basic information - dates of employment and position held - when asked for references on former employees. The ruling in the recent case of Luttman v. Tiffany and Co., highlights how the truth shall, in some cases, set employers free. Here are the facts of the case:
An employee was caught tampering with his employer's payroll system to lower his federal income tax withholding. Since his actions were against company policy, he was fired.
After he fired the employee, the manager eventually got a call from another employer asking for a reference for the former employee. The manager told the caller that the former employee in question had been fired for misconduct.
The prospective employer asked the employee to sign a release so it could obtain the details of his termination. The employee refused to sign the release and didn't get the job. He then sued his former employer for interfering with his job search.
In court, the company argued that it was simply telling the truth about the former employee and that they couldn't be held liable for telling the truth. The court agreed and ruled that companies can't be held liable for providing truthful information, even if it causes harm to a former employee.
Keep in mind that not all courts follow the same standards when former employees sue over negative references. While employers should proceed cautiously and follow their established policies regarding references, rulings like these certainly offer a measure of reassurance to HR pros.
(Source: http://www.hrrecruitingalert.com)
| 
