What on earth is this new trend about? Plenty of empoyers are asking for two references now. I was offered a job when I was already in the field with another unit. How am I supposed to sort two references out when on the circuit? What sort of employer regards references as a guaruntee anyway? Does`nt an archaeologists c.v say it all anyway? Since when do employers need references when they`re only offering temporary/casual contracts? Surely, if a new employee is a dick, references will not reflect this-totally the opposite probably. You only know you have employed a dick when you`ve worked with them. Thatcher and Blair no doubt had exquisite references....On another related issue...what does "degree or equivalent" mean? Are we so awash with willing workers that potential employers can make up the rules as they go along? I would`nt dare ask my boss for a reference-far too much to do and my c.v has all the data a potntial employer needs. What next? Three stage interviews for a weeks work? c`mon.....
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2005
I think it's because proper professions require them, and it's a totally superficial attempt to make a unit appear professional. I've given references for loads of arch jobs, and they are very seldom taken up even for the good posts.
As I see it a good project manager/unit director can read between the lines of a CV and know the worth of an archaeologist, the ones who can't, who rely on references, you don't really want to work for anyway! 
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Feb 2005
It is quite a common practice to ask for two references in most industries, I can understand this if they are offering you a fulltime position, but how many times do we get fulltime jobs?
Generally most of us are employed on a short term contract until the end of the job!!
Bloody HR people make me mad!!
deep
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jul 2004
You want to know why? Strangely, and I know this may be hard to take, not all CVs are what they seem. Embellishment and enhancement, economy with the truth and even downright lying are not unknown.
'Reading between the lines of a CV' - what does that mean? eg do people change employer regularly beaucse they are keen to experience lots of different types of archaeology, or because they are found out as being useless and are moved on? Which view do you take, without finding out directly from someone who has employed them?
Why two? - because it is not unknown for people to put down their mate as a single referee, and on the other side of the coin, also to give balance to protect the interests of the employee by not just taking one assessment of people's abilities. Putting down your university tutor is no use by the way if they have no experience of your fieldwork abilities.
The reason for referees is to get verification of details on a CV and for confirmation via personal experience of the skills and character of the person who may be employed. I would rather know before someone is entrusted with excavation and recording of archaeological remains whether they have any idea about what they are doing and whether they are going to fit into the team. And at a fundamental level, are they honest?
Painful as it for the idealists out there, the issue of money is also an issue. Why waste staff and admin time (which equals very real money) employing someone who you then immediately have to get rid of?
Or maybe we should just give a job to every muppet who send us a CV as seems to be the implication?
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
What Voice of Reason said.
Since the early 90s I have always included two referees on my CV when cold-calling because that was what I was taught to do as good practice. I cannot recall any job adverts that did not ask for two referees from that time onwards. Admittedly, I got my first couple of jobs without referees but that was about a gazillion years ago. As was said in an earlier post, a CV does not tell you everything and it is safest for the employer to take up references. Of course, as someone who has had to do recruitment, I have received glowing references for some real tossers and I would not trust a reference from certain people now. This is just annoying and can be cause for legal action against the referee. On the other hand, a poor reference can be cause for legal action against the referee by the applicant. So you can't win. Some companies now have a policy of refusing to give references for any of their staff and get around it that way.
Anyway, two referees is not a new trend. References are not considered a guarantee; they are an indicator. If you need referees, ask your previous employer if you can use them as a referee before you leave them. The new employer has every right to approach your current employer anyway so you might as well use them as a referee. All it takes is a phone call to the relevant people. Regarding interviews, I actually had an interview for a digging job back in 1994 so they are not out of the question.
On a side note, if you do not get a job that you have applied for, you can query this and the company must prove that you have been given a fair chance at getting the job. By this I mean that they must prove that the person(s) they employed scored better against the job specification than you. Employment law is fun.
Eggbasket
There's nothing like a Dane ...
Posts: 1
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2005
Belgium! Is there anything that you lot can't find to moan about. It has been standard practice to ask for two references for most jobs from dustman to MP (allegedly) for decades, and certainly from high school onwards, I was always told to put the names of two referees on any CV I sent out. So what's the problem? Everybody uses the same ones over and over again and they usually don't mind, provided you let them know to expect a request or ten.
As for requesting them only to make the employer/unit appear professional? Zark off! Don't you think we've got better things to do with our time than to request more totally pointless (in your opinion) bits of paper (no, don't answer that but you would be surprised how much work rather than tea drinking is required while you lot are out of the office having a whinge break). Bizarrely, we ask for them (and all the other stuff), so that we can make an informed decision on you likely suitability, in a way that can be demonstrated to be fair and to give you as many opportunities as possible to prove your fitness for the job.
I'm not interested in reading between the lines. I need to be able to prove that I took on the best candidate for the job based on the EVIDENCE. If I don't, then I can be taken to an industrial tribunal by a disgruntled applicant, or take the person who wrote the b*ll*cks reference to one myself. Incidentally, the tribunal route would also be open to anyone who felt that their referee(s) had painted an inaccurate picture of their capabilities. 
Rant mode = OFF
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2004
I've always written the names of the directors I worked with and company beside my experience details on my cv. Then I put contact details at the end for the two I have worked with the most, I have never been asked for a written reference but I know full well that all the directors phone each other about prospective employees and certain people are put on the unofficial "never employ again" list
Lucy
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Dec 2004
Is there any other profession that asks for a degree, lots of experience, multi skills and a willingness to take home 2oo squid a week? On top of that, two references and application packs? We are an itinerent casual/temporary work force on short term contracts. Most of which have formed the masse of work I have found in the past 8 years. I work nation/worldwide sometimes on extremely short contracts, if potential employers interpret this as being "unemployable/incompetent" then we have a bit of a problem. Would you agree- if the IFA system of accreditation is clearly inadequate as a means of validation and, rafts of references are now required-where do we go next? Am I to approach my boss for a reference after completing only a short term of service with him or her simply to satisfy the needs of a potential employer? On this basis, units would have to employ full-time reference writers. Since when does a reference after a month or so` work constitute a valid reflection of a workers abilities? And yes indeedy! We moan about everything!!! Especially the see-through toilet paper that spreads it up yer back...... 
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2005
Quote:quote:As for requesting them only to make the employer/unit appear professional? Zark off! Don't you think we've got better things to do with our time than to request more totally pointless (in your opinion) bits of paper (no, don't answer that but you would be surprised how much work rather than tea drinking is required while you lot are out of the office having a whinge break).
I'm sure you'd rather believe that I'm a clueless moaning site monkey, but I stand by my only slightly flippant comments. I have recruited staff myself and am well aware that even a truthful CV can be very misleading. It's called spin, and we all do it. References only partly mitigate against it. I've seen good references given to bad employees to get rid of them! Not recently admittedly, so I'd be very interested to see if the referee would be taken to a tribunal.
I've also seen a litany of bad recruitment practice that should end up in tribunals, but never does. The archaeological industry is very very bad in this respect. I recently argued with my boss about the new statutory dismissal procedure; he flat out denied that it had anything to do with him. Look it up if anyone doesn't know, it's a very interesting change in employment law with regard to archaeologists.
So reading between the lines is essential. Things like; did the employee return to an employer or has he/she had a string of different employers? Did said employee get incrementally longer contracts or were they all short? Were all the sites rural, or is there a good mix of rural, urban, surveying, fieldwalking, research, commercial? That sort of stuff. All common sense, and probably more useful than a "yeah, he's a good bloke" reference.
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
When digging, I always kept my CV up to date with four references, pretty much for exactly the reasons Lucy outlines. I knew that recruitment practices were dodgy, but I also knew that project mangers & unit directors would talk in the pub and over the 'phone, the same as the site workers do. The whole area of whether or not to employ someone can be answered, and often is answered (rightly or wrongly) by one question - "is he/she any good"? Quite important I suppose - especially when it's a Wednesday, and you're trying to get someone for the following Monday. It isn't good practice, and I suspect it's dubious legally, but I'm sure many of us have got jobs this way in the past, and will probably do so again. I doubt that it's a practice which is unknown in other industries either - the construction industry is probably similar, and it's not that far removed from the well-known practice of "headhunting", which I'm sure we've all heard of. Personally, I wasn't that bothered about sticking a whole bunch of referees on to be honest, and always asked employers when I moved on if it was ok to add them to the list.
I'm interested in the statutory dismissal proceedure Mercenary - any chance of a link so we can all have a look?
|
