Hacker News Reader

I was always told that in the UK it's illegal to give a negative recommendation (in itself an oxymoron, and who gets to define 'negative'?).

The way around it is that employers can decline to make any statement at all, which is then taken as a negative.

The good news is this advice is completely incorrect. According to the government website advice: “a reference must be fair and accurate” and can be challenged.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/work-reference

I was always told it's perfectly legal, but writing anything negative opens the path for future legal headaches. It's less hassle to only confirm the dates worked.

Interesting - I'll file that under 'common misconception'

From the former employer's point of view not giving a reference is probably a better use of time, unless they especially wanted to torpedo someone

> in the UK it's illegal to give a negative recommendation

This is not true.

Can you give us some examples of recommendations that would translate favorably?

Sure. The ones that come to my mind are little bit harder to translate though, because they rely on nuances in German grammar, but I'll give it a try.

To give a person grade A in their performance evaluation you would write:

Er erledigte seine Aufgaben stets zu unserer vollsten Zufriedenheit.

To give grade B you would just change one word slightly:

Er erledigte seine Aufgaben stets zu unserer vollen Zufriedenheit.

Both translate into English as:

He always completed his tasks to our complete satisfaction.

The difference is that in the first sentence the word complete (vollsten) is the superlative which makes as little sense in German as it makes in English and is grammatically incorrect.

Grade C would be expressed like this:

He completed the tasks assigned to him to our complete satisfaction.

Here the word always is missing.

Another positive example would be:

His behaviour towards superiors, colleagues and customers always set an example.

Here the order of superiors, then colleagues and then customers is vital.

EDIT: I guess the first example could be translated literally like: "He always completed his tasks to our completest satisfaction." I didn't write that above because I think vollsten in German doesn't sound nearly as bad as completest sounds in English, at least to my ESL ear.

"most complete" instead of completest sounds fine.

I like the examples to illustrate both sides. I think if you had to always be positive in American you would say:

A: "He always completed his tasks to our complete satisfaction" ("complete" being the superlative)

B: "He always completed his tasks to our satisfaction" ("always" emphasizing the consistency of our satisfaction)

C: "His work was satisfactory"

F: <something that omits any mention his work>

Although B sounds a little awkward to me.

Alternatively,

F: "He makes an effort at completing his tasks."

“He strives to complete his tasks to our satisfaction”

full and fullest serve for quite natural substitutes for vollen und vollsten i.e. full satisfaction

Those are some very subtle hints, would anyone reading these letters really analyze and interpret them in such detail? I do understand the German, even if it's not my first tongue, and i can tell the superlative is obviously stronger in the first version, but couldn't that difference equally be attributed to personal writing style? Compared side by side it's easy but if given just one how would you know?

From my experience a CV is usually skimmed through very quickly because you have a huge stack to process, so picking up on these hints would require significant effort and understanding of who wrote it.

Most of those phrases and their associated "translations" are common knowledge, so it's really just a hidden rating system with bad reviews embedded in everyday positive language.

>In Germany (and Austria AFAIK) employers are legally obliged to write letters of recommendation for their employees. These letters must be true, complete and favorably. So we have a similar situation where employers want to express their opinion but are required to be benevolent.

Does it actually even happen often that people who leave jobs under hostile or negative circumstances ask for recommendations?

Personally, i'd never even think to ask for a recommendation from the few jobs i've left or lost under bad circumstances. I only ever use references from jobs where i've parted amicably anyway. Do other people actually try and get recommendations from places they were fired from or left because of not so good reasons?

I may be wrong but I think here (BC, Canada), employers aren't allowed to give negative recommendations, I don't think they're required to give one though. I've never checked, but this is what i've been told over the years, so I might be wrong about this part.

Afaik a recommendation letter from your previous employer is practically mandatory to provide in any application in Germany.

> Does it actually even happen often that people who leave jobs under hostile or negative circumstances ask for recommendations?

It's not called a "recommendation". It's "Arbeitszeugnis" which translates to more of a testimonial or certificate making it a kind of must have. Not having it would be like finishing school without having grades. So yes, it's especially a big topic in hostile or negative circumstances as it's (even the wording) usually part of an agreement at the labour court.

To the extent this is accurate, it has to lead to misunderstandings and accidents.

In your examples, it sounds plausible, but if you are suspicious (and surely everybody reading such a thing is) you could interpret any statement as expressing something negative in a positive way. Ultimately it's more like a Rorschach test for the reader.

Why is there a law that legally obliges employers to write positive reviews? How is such a law implemented and what must be the reasons for supporting such a legislature?

The judgement (Urteil vom 26.11.1963 VI ZR 221/62) which dates back to 1963 says that the employer needs to show general "good will" in issuing the work certificate.

It doesn't say that you are always entitled to get the best one though because another judgement says that the certificate needs to be the truth.

There are thousands of lawsuits every year because of that. In the end the employer needs to bring up solid proof for wrongdoing to justify a bad certificate. So usually, if you get an job applicant with a bad work certificate, you can be sure that he REALLY messed up on his last job. Unusually it would probably be better for the applicant to say he/she has been unemployed than show up with a bad certificate.

My favorite of this ilk: “His attendance is good.”

Meaning?

The person shows up to work. If that’s the only nice thing you have to say about an employee, that says something :)

I always asked for an English version of the letter in addition to the German one. It then loses all the nuances and just looks nice.

So much for freedom of speech, I guess. That sounds awful.

Germany doesn't have free speech, at least not by American standards.

Not even America has free speech by American standards. E.g. you can't say "fuck" on TV and you can only create and sell pornography under certain circumstances.

> E.g. you can't say "fuck" on TV

Broadcast TV, and it gets messy when it's a fleeting expletive. And you can wear a shirt saying "Fuck the Draft" in a courthouse[1].

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cohen_v._California

America has a lot of problems, major ones. But there are glimpses of hope, truth, justice and fairness that still resonate in the ethos of America - thanks for sharing.

Pretty much my point (I lived in Germany some years ago, although born and lived most of my life in the US).