-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Trainee Train Driver Pre-Employment Referencing
- Thread starter miyagi
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Before you are employed.
"I see what you did there"
Asking as I've been told by current driver that employment referencing does not begin until after training has started?
Well I'm a driver, I can tell you that my references weren't completed prior to starting on the railway and that was only 2 years ago.
I know this as my previous employer told me.
References not being completed is not the same thing as pre employment checks not being carried out. As an example, the TOC might have received one or two references from previous employers although the policy is to have two or three.
Pre employment checks also cover other things, such as health checks, identity checks, and right to work checks. Although the second and last of these were normally combined where I worked.
Pre employment checks also cover other things, such as health checks, identity checks, and right to work checks. Although the second and last of these were normally combined where I worked.
Would seem a bit odd to employ someone then bin them once they've started if the references don't add up. At the least it's surely a place on a training course wasted from the employers point of view.
Nontheless I did read a case on here about a fellow who started with a rail employer before references were done and came close to losing his job because a previous employer simply didn't provide a reference.
I work for a large corporation and they simply do the basic job title, sickness record and dates. I've passed a medical, been given a start date and my new (railway) employer would not appear to have asked for references yet.
Nontheless I did read a case on here about a fellow who started with a rail employer before references were done and came close to losing his job because a previous employer simply didn't provide a reference.
I work for a large corporation and they simply do the basic job title, sickness record and dates. I've passed a medical, been given a start date and my new (railway) employer would not appear to have asked for references yet.
I know of at least 3 that were dismissed because their references didn't check out. There was a quite infamous one on my TOC where a Driver had an altercation and he mentioned something that didn't add up and his application was pulled out and there was a discrepancy and he was summarily dismissed. That was after a few years of driving.
An employer needs to satisfy themselves that there is nothing lurking in the background of an applicant that would make them unsuitable for the role. References are far less important than might once have been the case, since most employers now will simply confirm that someone did indeed work for them between particular dates, and won;t go much further than that for fear of litigation.
Each employer is likely to have their own policies, though I'd expect them to be in line with that is currently considered best practice. They will also, hopefully at least, conform to any statutory requirements.
Within those, there will be freedom to make decisions as to whether a successful applicant can start if every single check has not yet been completed. There is likely to be some risk in doing this, but it might be that the risk is outweighed by the cost to the business of not starting someone, particularly where it is something minor that is being waited for. One example might be a verbal reference has been given on the phone, but the written reference has not yet been received.
Each employer is likely to have their own policies, though I'd expect them to be in line with that is currently considered best practice. They will also, hopefully at least, conform to any statutory requirements.
Within those, there will be freedom to make decisions as to whether a successful applicant can start if every single check has not yet been completed. There is likely to be some risk in doing this, but it might be that the risk is outweighed by the cost to the business of not starting someone, particularly where it is something minor that is being waited for. One example might be a verbal reference has been given on the phone, but the written reference has not yet been received.
Not everyone is honest.
I have just been offered role as signaller - I have been with current employer for 6 years so have the HR team as a reference, then 2 previous employers have both gone, 1 being ford's transit van company which was sold to turkey so only 1 work reference, then 1 personal reference from a shift manager at work, and 1 reference from some voluntary work I carried out during summer.....can anyone see this as an issue?
Where I worked, and my job included carrying out pre employment checks, we would have asked for your reference from your last job, and if other work references weren't available, we would have accepted a personal reference.
Things may have changed now, and I didn't do this in the railway industry.
Things may have changed now, and I didn't do this in the railway industry.
No you should be fine. They have to work with what they can get. There are many companies (mainly US owned) who have a policy of not giving references at all. Given their little use for the reasons Greenback mentioned, the real reason they are still used as a little building block for the 'bigger picture'.
I do personally know of a couple of incidents where people lied about something, and checks found them out so that they never started work. I'm also aware of one or two incidents where deception only came to light after the person concerned had commenced employment. These were considered to be gross misconduct and the employee was dismissed.
Honesty is always the best policy.
Honesty is always the best policy.
Bromley boy
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Jun 2015
- Messages
- 4,611
My TOC definitely checked after training had begun.
A few weeks after starting I was hauled into a meeting with my manager to explain a discrepancy. It turned out the referencing company had mistakenly contacted a company I had never worked for, with the same name of one of my previous employers. Surprise surprise they'd replied to say they'd never heard of me.
It was a simple mistake, easily resolved, but I was left in no uncertain terms that it would have been "goodnight Vienna" if it didn't check out.
Apologies I should have been more clear with my question.
Basically my partner is due to start training with a toc pretty soon and has previously left employment 'pending investigation' the reason was due to a disagreement and fallout with a manager a couple years ago...however this falls within the required referencing period for the toc that they are due to start with...
That being said this was not mentioned on the initial application in fear of not being shortlisted. He does not mind coming clean but he is in fear that if this is found out. it could mean his dismissal.
During the same time as the earlier mention employment he had a part-time job which he used instead however this job was cash in hand and is no longer in business making it somewhat difficult to get hold of a credible reference or any sort of HR.
what are your thoughts on the best way to handle this?
Where I worked in this area, the final decision would have been taken by the recruiting manager. We would have offered advice and guidance, but that was predominantly on the legal side of things.
I recall one instance where the applicant did not mention anywhere on the application, nor in the interview, that there had been a disagreement with their former line manager. They did not even mention this after they had been informed that they had been successful at interview, or at the point when we started requesting references.
This annoyed the manager far more than if they had mentioned the issue. Anyone can have a disagreement with a manager, and it's far better to be open and honest about it. In this case, the manager told me that they felt that the applicant in question had been dishonest in not mentioning anything, and so could not be trusted.
I was informed that had they spoken up before references were received, there was a decent chance that they would have been given the benefit of the doubt.
Naturally, there are no guarantees that all managers will behave in a similar manner, but I'm convinced that honesty is always the best way to proceed.
I think this is a bit of an 'urban myth'.
As far as I am aware, in this country you can say or write anything you like as long as it is not false, libelous, or against any law.
I know for a fact that the company I currently work for, although it won't go in to a chapter and verse or a War and Peace reply, will give the following reference information if asked: -
1) Start and finish dates
2) Position and any promotions or demotions
3) Discipline history
4) The reason for leaving: -FTC ending, resignation or dismissal and will state if the person resigned before any disciplinary hearings were held.
Last edited:
Agreed, my old Boss at the time had to get rid of an administrator as she was not honest about her reasons for leaving her last job. Apparently she was prone to prolonged bouts of illness without Doctors notes to cover her. After a warning by her Boss she walked out of her job.
Her application asked how many days she had been off work sick and she only put down something like 10 days when, in fact, it was closer to 95 days!
AnonymousUser1
Member
- Joined
- 10 Mar 2013
- Messages
- 1,010
indeed especially considering outside of certain industries 'in industry' references references tend to consist of confirmation of roles, dates of employment / roles and the reason for leaving ( in one/ two word form)...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
the ' you can't give a bad reference' is a myth - reasons for leaving is a very good way of telling the truth in a defencible way especially when 'resigned with unresolved allegations / unfinished discip ' comes up...
sikness record used to common but in the light of the Equality act etc it;s not any more ... but someone whose sickness absence is so poor you can't keep them can legitimately be dismissed by using the capability processes
- Status