[amagasaki]

Well, at least in reference letters, former employees can be criticised quite well. Mostly by omitting certain words. I believe most employers have practice in reading between the lines.

edit: I always thought this is just culturally. I have no idea, but I don't believe there are any laws that forbid telling the truth about former employees.

[captainmuon]

Yeah, there are formal reference letters in Germany. According to law, you can write anything truthful, but according to court descisions, you have to do it "benevolently" and without "creating obstacles" for the employee to find a new job. There are frequently lawsuits about this.

One way to say something negative is to omit certain words, as you said. If your praise is less than exuberant, it is also a warning sign. Some years ago, employers used to mark that someone is in a union by ending their signature with a hook to the left. If you wrote someone is sociable, that was code for being alcoholic.

The funny thing is, the law states explicitly that the letter of reference must be unambiguous, and must not contain any hidden meaning.

I think this whole system is ridiculous and ripe for reform, but I don't think this will happen.

[walshemj]

I wonder why Germany hasn't been taken to court over this yet

[dom0]

Data protection laws set quite tight boundaries on chatting between former and prospective employers, without the employee's consent. Further, I think the general consensus is that such chats are thought to be subject to the same rules as formal references (since otherwise these rules would be entirely pointless).

[fapjacks]

Can you give an example of what you're talking about here by omitting certain words?

[dom0]

A good formal reference uses way-over-the-top wording, a bad formal reference basically just says "ok". This is due to German law not allowing for "the employee sucks", nor allows it to use "code-speak" (it was often used in the past, but a bunch of lawsuits pretty much removed it and most HR people don't even try to push for it any more).

Good: "Mr. X's technical competence is excellent. He solved difficult technical challenges quickly and correctly. His performance at our company exceeded our expectations."

Bad: "Mr. X handled assigned tasks adequately."

A long reference almost always means it is good. If it's longer than two pages, it's almost certainly excellent.

In Germany, employees can request a "simple" reference, which basically just certifies employment and does not contain any judgement. What I described above is a "qualified" reference; usually it is seen as a bad sign to produce just a "simple" reference and not a "qualified" reference.