i quit one firm where i was doing well, for a better situation. however my former boss tells people i was fired and a bad worker, though a paper trail proves otherwise - i was given a 10% raise shortly before submitting my letter of resignation and i even stayed on longer to help the transition. is there any recourse? i am worried that he'll talk to a future employer or client, which would be a threat to my livelihood. any help would be great. also, doesn't that constitute an ethics violation (besides being a totally dick move - i didn't go about town talking about your strange habits and other illegal shit. get over it already)
If you can prove that these actions have lost you jobs, clients, whatever, then you have a solid legal case if you can get someone they've talked to to testify on your behalf. On the other hand, who wants to go that far? I'm interested to see whether anyone can suggest a good in-between solution.
i am not sure how to find out if it affected lost jobs, unless i go back and talk to the people i interviewed with. it's a fairly tight-knit city, and everyone pretty much knows everyone. it is highly possible it affected my job search shortly after i left. if i was a crap employee, that'd be understandable, i wouldn't be upset. i'd probably throw a flaming shit-covered brick through his car window. but i worked my ass off, and stayed on top of everything - i was a good employee. i really just want to get on with my life and shouldn't have to deal with this crap-ola. and yeah, i'd like to avoid bringing in a lawsuit.
nice. i know a bit on this one. there are a few options...
1. ignore - be the bigger person, hope it hasn't affected your professional life.
2. move to deutschland. ja, genau!
3. take a bat to the guy's head. classy. might get caught.
4. file a lawsuit - have fun with that.
5. (can be done concurrent w/ 4) contact the nat'l ethics committee of the AIA (i'm assuming as your employer he's a member)
it seems to violate rule 4.103:
Members speaking in their professional capacity shall not knowingly make false statements of material fact.
[AIA defines statement of material fact as "a statement which is essential to a consequence or outcome that impacts one of the parties to the Complaint."]
and Rule 5.201 Members shall recognize and respect the professional contributions of their employees, employers, professional colleagues, and business associates.
it also goes against E.S. 5.1:
Professional Environment: Members should provide their associates and employees with a suitable working environment, compensate them fairly, and facilitate their professional development.
holz...A wood bat could break and shatter, leaving the risk of splinters and just more mess to account for in the getaway. Aluminum allows for greater bat speed and cleaner contact...and clean up is a breeze with baby wipes.
Your best bet is to forget him. Leave the firm off your resume. Or leave him off your references. Be prepared to tell potential employers why you do not want them to contact him. You're human after all.
the simple and easy thing to do is ask an attorney to write a letter, and if it's an amercian architect, cite the rules of professional conduct noted above and that should scare the shit of that architect enough that they will come to your house and apologize. if they are a member of the aia then write them as well.
In a tight knit community, any action could make an ugly situation even uglier.
you need to evaluate who gave you this information - that your former boss is spreading rumors - can this person be trusted, or is this a rumor itself (was it multiple sources?)
do you have any friends that you can contact at this former firm? if they are talking shit, most likely the current employees would know of it (depending on firm size)
one way to handle is to invite former employer for drinks... and in a polite manner, state that you have heard these rumors but DO NOT make any threats... this will only put them on the offensive
ahhhh f-it! - that advise sucks
my suggestion for you is to forget all about it, like others have mentioned...
do your fighting with your architecture - as in - be a better architect then them, win more commissions, gain the respect of clients in your community, if they are a rumor spreading type then the rage they will have from constantly losing to you will be far more rewarding (to you) then any lawsuit would be
I would agree that being the bigger person would be your best move...
Now, if you can produce physical evidence (e-mails, letters, etc.) that your former boss is spreading false information regarding your employment with his/her firm AND you can show that this has had a direct negative effect on your career you *might* have a case....
If this is the case than you could most likely juice the guy for a good chunk of cash in an out-of-court settlement and then place a gag order on him.....Keep in mind though that most laywers are going to take 1/2 of your settlement...So, lets say you get this person to settle for $15,000...After legal fees, taxes's and court costs, not to mention time off work from your new job, you might walk home with $5,000...
In the end, would it be worth it? Chances are, your not the first person he's spoken ill about and in the end, it will come back around on him....
You left for a better situation. So you found another job before you left this guy's firm. So in that job search you probably didn't use that guy as a reference, right? So it would be hard to say that he affected that job search.
Have you gone through another job search since then? If so, and if you do have evidence that he lied about the circumstances of your departure from that firm, then as others have suggested you could pursue legal action.
It's more difficult to disprove his statements that you were "a bad worker" - even assuming you can document that he has said this - unless you could provide things like written performance reviews that were dated very close to the date that you left...
I tend to agree with those who are telling you it's not worth your time and mental energy to pursue any action against him. Obviously you aren't going to want to use him as a reference in the future. But I think that if you just move on he's not likely to have much impact on your future, whereas if you pursue this in your close-knit community it could result in more backlash than benefit.
I'm curious as to how you know that he is telling people these things? If you've heard this from former coworkers then you might just chalk it up to in-house venting on his part (maybe he is annoyed that you left, or has a bruised ego about it...) - and there's also the possibility that whoever told you this is exaggerating or embellishing whatever he actually said - whereas if you heard it from current colleagues or others outside the firm, and you feel that these people are honestly/accurately reporting what was said then it's a bigger problem.
I don't think you need to sue him... just spend $200 and get an attorney to write a cease and desist letter. One bad reference could easily cost you that much, and a nice note from a lawyer on letterhead should scare him straight. Dude needs to learn to be a grown up, you can help him on his way.
janosh and i are correct, this is a matter of professional conduct, and we are constantly demanding that we should get respect in this wacky ass profession, well the first step is not letting some douche bag architect have his/her way in fucking your career. suing is not the answer, but a polite and strongly worded letter will remind that a-hole of the particular code of ethical conduct required by all of us when we become so "lucky" as to be called architects.
don't spend a lot of time on it, just the letter is enough.
Formerly brings up a good point. Where did you find out that your former boss is defaming you? My concern with sending attorneys' letters, filing lawsuits, etc. is that you may create a bigger problem for yourself in terms of your reputation if you drag other people into this. If a client or potential employer told you about this that's one thing. But if it was anybody who still has a connection to that other firm, whose own career could be hurt, then think carefully about dragging them into it.
I think cln1 has a very good point. You say "my former boss tells people i was fired and a bad worker" and I don't doubt you have this from trustworthy sources, but can you prove it?
Secondly, can you prove the damage it's caused?
If you can do either or both, it looks like you could sue.
But do you want to be known, in your 'tight-knit' community, as the kind of guy who sues? Do you want to be known as 'trouble'?
A couple of years ago, I was in the job market. I had a couple of instances where the interview was mine and where the job was more or less offered, then they were 'inexplicably' retracted. I know pretty much that some aspect of my past must have been circulating to get these guys suddenly back-tracking. Thing is, the rumour I suspect they'd become aware of *was* true but its implications were not. The proof of the latter is that I'm doing very well indeed at the company that has taken me on.
I choose to move on and up by my own merits and enjoy good relationships with those who are sincere and open with me. Together we create a win-win upwards spiral.
The others? They can circle around their own pools of paranoid shit as long as they like...
no one is suggesting a law suit, and i think the idea of that was not a serious consideration, but a letter is just that, a letter stating what has been said, and to remind someone that there are codes of professional conduct that must be adhered to by all of us. if anyone thinks the aia or ncarb does not take this shit seriously, perhaps a check of your state aia meeting minutes of actions recommendations regarding unethical conduct by some in the community. it's remarkable. people that have been denied work product for portfolio usage have been cited, it gets to that level, so this i think is a bit more important. your livelihood depends on the ethical treatment of others and many times you can't depend on someone to do right by you, so we either say lesson learned or bring that person to account for their actions. a letter is a good middle ground.
how can we expect others to take us seriously when we don't even treat each with respect?
i second those who advise caution: how can you substantiate that your former boss is talking shit about you? if you heard it from your former colleagues...yeah, it's probably true, but it also means that it's probably not going much beyond your former colleagues. maybe his wife or boyfriend is hearing about you, too...who knows.
frankly, he shouldn't affect your getting a job at a GOOD firm. i personally believe that checking references implies distrust...period...and you don't want to work for anyone who assumes from the get-go that you are lying to them or that you are misrepresenting yourself.
people are gonna talk, and sure, people are gonna remember (did louis sullivan fire FLLW or did FLLW quit? hmmm) but when you're in an interview, what matters is what your portfolio, your resume (sans references except upon request), and your personality say about you.
that being said, if you a.) hear from a prospective employer that your former employer has been "talking you up" or b.) he's been writing stuff about you, then you may need to proceed down some of the roads mentioned above.
probably you'll experience neither. don't dignify his petulance with any kind of response or action whatsoever -- he might be a (oh yes) passive agressive and a response from you (no matter what kind) is just what he may want.
: have you given any thought to taking your old boss to lunch, tell him what you've heard is being said about you, and - given the facts of your situation and infomation in your personnel file there - that you're pretty sure what you're hearing can't be right. Then, ask him whether there's any truth to the rumor ?
That way, you don't really have to acuse him directly and, in a conversational manner, he'll get the message that you a) know about his comments; and b) have concerns.
While he'll probably deny having ever said anything of the sort, I'm pretty sure that if he has been spreading rumors about you, he'll stop.
betadinesutures is right -- we need to stand up for ourselves -- but, I tend to believe we ought to do it directly, not through the legal professsion.
i disagree with those that said you should do nothing..
leaving this firm off your resume leaves a gap in your career
that you'll have to explain...which may be worth a conversation
anyway in an interview. at the very least you may want to
explain why you left the jobs you had if you're still in the
same city.
the fact is is that if indeed true this person should be taught
a lesson..messing around with someone else's career is at
best immature and at worst illegal. i don't think there is any
harm in reminding this person that ethic violations can be
very serious.
i also disagree that any firm that checks references aren't worth
working for..MANY firms check references in the hiring process..
some people trust their instincts..but especially small firms can't
afford to hire bad employees.. so they have to go on the word
of others.
bottom line..the guy needs to move on..why are architects like
spurned lovers when it comes to employees that quit...the
architecture community is too small to burn any bridges either
way...
There's something I don't understand: in the first post you said that you left the first firm in order to move on to a better position. But in the second post you said that your former employer's comments potentially might have affected your job search shortly after you left the firm that firm. Did you quit the first firm without already having a second job in place? Or did you quickly leave the second job too, thus were searching again soon afterward? If the former, is there any possibility that there was any confusion about the terms of your departure?
I'm sure that the answer is that there probably was no confusion about this, and that you did submit a resignation letter of your own free will and were not terminated. I'm just asking because I once encountered somewhat the reverse of this situation: an employee who quit of his own accord but then filed for unemployment on the basis that he was terminated. We submitted his resignation letter and his unemployment claim was denied. He claimed at first that we demanded that he resign - which we did not - and later (when the state threatened him with fraud charges) that he was "confused" about the circumstances of his leaving...
I don't think you need to leave the job off your resume, regardless of what action you do or don't take. As an employer, I usualy do ask for references and do check at least one of those provided - but I don't call firms listed on the resume unless the person has indicated that they're one of their references. The gap on your resume would be more problematic than the chance that this previous employer may be contacted by a potential employer.
to clarify"a better situation": i quit without having a job lined up. the mental anguish was out of hand, and i needed a break, so i took a sabbatical, traveled for 2 weeks, and then came back and continued my job search. i interviewed at several firms, and am now working for a great firm. a few of the firms i interviewed with have employees that are very good friends with former employer. i slammed all my interviews - all but one where he had close ties never returned my calls. the one that did made an offer, and later rescinded.
i found out about all of this through a contractor that i am friends with that was working on a remodel with former employer. it was also verified through several friends that still work there, but no one seems to think he talked to other architects about it. leaving a gap in my resume would be problematic indeed.
there was no confusion, he never saw the resignation coming. there is a paper trail. after all this, i think it is in my best interest to move to germany (though i don't speak any german) and at the least contact the ethics committee.
thanks for the responses. and no, i won't be needing a bat. coincidentally, is this somewhat common? what is with the need to sooth egos in this profession. it's probably my biggest pet peeve. that and the need to slam every other architect that is doing better buildings.
people talk in this profession, to each other and about each other. it's just gonna happen, especially if you're in a small city. get over your old boss, especially since you found a new place. he won't even give a shit about you in six months, so get over it.
however: i will not back down from stating that reference-checking is a bad idea, for both the potential employer and the potential employee.
for the potential employer: here you go. you call a reference. keep this thread in mind. is the guy or gal on the other end of the line telling the truth? are they defaming your candidate unjustly out of pique? or are they inflating their praises of the potential employee so that they can see you get stuck with a no-good slacker? or are they being honest?
(the smart firm, when CALLED for a reference, gives out only the dates when a candidate started and ended employment and job titles. it should be a stated policy that qualitative references are not given.)
for the potential employee: that potential employer said he likes you, but he wants your references. (NEVER list references on your resume. ALWAYS provide them upon request.) hmmm. does he think you're lying?
my compromise solution would be to have your references write recommendation letters and give you copies. then you can distribute them upon request.
I used to list them on my resume (before it got too full). My current firm called before even interviewing me, and had pretty much made up their mind before I ever showed up at the office. I've got no problem with that. = )
I actually get annoyed at offices with the 'no recommendations' policy, just because once you work somewhere for a certain period of time, well, where ELSE are your references supposed to come from?! I understand that the whole reference thing isn't a perfect system, but I believe that any employer who asks for/calls references of potential hires, but won't provide qualitative references for former employees, is hypocritical and doing their employees a disservice.
ochona's comment on the 'smart firm' is right on. if I remember correctly, there is a fed or state (CA) guideline - that the only information that can be provided by a past employee is verification of employement & dates. Anything else - inadvertant or intentional can come back to bite the transmittor in the hiney. however, small minded people are everywhere........ the longer your professional career - the more human frailty you will see.
People live and die by word of mouth referrals - both positive & negative. What you have heard is heresay. There is little you can prove if a witness is dependent on this same person for employment, collaborative work, etc. People have 'convenient amnesia'........... and generallly will not come forward or get involved. That is something to keep in mind.
If someone asks about it again - comment - 'oh, he just misses me alot & is blowing smoke & wasting his wind. I guess I did a better job for him than I thought!
& with luck, maybe someday - you will run across him at a holiday party
my favorite quote is 'management doesn't lie, the truth changes..."
It isn't a law that a firm can only give dates of employment. But many companies are advised by their insurance companies and attorneys not to give any additional information beyond dates of employment, position title, and documented type of separation (terminated vs. layoff vs. voluntary vs. retired, etc.) - particularly negative information - because it can come back to hurt them.
But these same insurance companies and attorneys advise companies to always check references. This is because companies have been successfully sued for NOT finding out things about employees (criminal records, violence toward/harassment of former colleagues, etc.
The catch here of course is that if I call an employee's previous firm and all they give me is dates of employment and job title then I'm not going to find out anything potentially dangerous or criminal that way anyway. But from the attorneys' and insurance companies' viewpoints at least I can document having attempted to find out...
Beyond the above, I check references because not all applicants are honest and I found that out the hard way. It would be nice to trust everything everyone puts on a resume, but there can be a lot of expensive consequences if you mis-judge someone and they don't turn out to be who they say they are.
checking references is NOT just about finding out whether the candidate is being honest or not ... at our firm, we rarely base the actual hiring decision on what we learn during the reference check process ... if you hire the caliber of people we hire, then the candidates we're interested in hiring are going to use good judgement and only (usually) provide the names of references who are going to speak highly of their abilities and personalities.
we use the reference check process mostly to learn more about people we're going to hire anyway ... we want to know how they interact with others; what their blind spots may be; where they have developmental needs; what their work ethic is like; do they bring a lit of 'attitude' to the office every day. This information is invaluable to us when the person actually arrives at our firm ... it helps us know how to place them in a project team and it helps us know how to deal with them.
i find that most people we call during the reference check process are more than willing to speak candidly about former employees if you approach them honestly. most people (outside of HR departments) understand why this part of the hiring process is important and willingly share what they can about candidates.
often, because I'm reasonably well connected in our community, I will call people I know at firms where a candidate previously worked - many times these people are not listed by the candidate as references. these can be the most useful calls because these references haven't been vetted already by the candidate. this sort of call can be very useful when we're otherwise unsure about how interested we are in a particular candidate.
strangely enough, i'm all about the background check. check their degrees, make sure they haven't killed anybody. especially check their degrees.
but when it comes to the nebulous aspects of how an employer will work with a potential employee, i just don't see how reference-checking will communicate this. architects are very disparate in their working styles, and a person who works well with one employer may be a burnout for another. and firms have such different cultures.
i would say that longer, more involved interviews with many, many more questions would do just as well.
seems like there's a gut reaction that has to be present and if there's not, there's just not.
no matter how bad you need warm bodies, slow down and really get to know the people who interview with you. then you won't need to call jim poloshirt AIA from acronym associates in schaumburg IL to find out that candidate X never listened when jim told him to use the firm's CAD standard.
basler:
I think you've gotten some quality advice on here...I especially love the wood bat vs the alum bat discussions.
But truthfully, whether in a small architectural community or a large one (as in NYC, LA, or San Fran) inevitably, people will hear about 'things'. This became quite apparent to me when I experienced something along similar lines. Bottom line is that I let it go. Did nothing. However the worst part was having the a-hole call me 6 mos later and threaten that I had stolen money from his firm, beyond initially talking to me like I was his f**cking child.
The only way I responded to that was being the more professional individual, and just called him on his ethical and professional mannerisms (or lack thereof), then went on to find out what steps needed to be taken to rectify this clear blatant misunderstanding on his part (if I was even involved or at fault).
Needless to say, as some have stated on here, eventually other people in the community will hear about such acts of disregard from your previous employer and soon enough his actions be called into question. I know my former mates in that particular office found out and called me and asked what happened, to which I just explained my side and all that was said was "...yeah, I could see that he was like that!"
Ultimately, if you are just and true, I say don't worry because it will come back to him. That f**cker will pay in some way, someday!
Karma!!
when i bailed, i was accused of stealing my ownzumthor book. i bought it for $40 @ stout books (waaaay back before they pumped the price to $500) and it's pretty much my bible.
my boss had been using it for reference, and the day i turned in my resignation, it suddenly disappeared. i eventually found it when the boss-man was at a 3 hour lunch n munch session with some Craigslist tweaker. 2 weeks after i left, i got a call accusing me of stealing it. so i produced my sales receipt, and the marks i place in all my books, and he grumbled and shut up.
i'm looking to purchase another since he got his greasy fingerprints all over my nice bible.
by definition, a donkey punch is to the back of the head.
that was pretty shitty holz.box. I must say as long as you had your receipt that was your smoking gun.
for me, the a-hole basically had f'ed up/mismanaged his accounting and (through no unusual activity on my part or bank account) had paid me double. Someone told me that once he gave me the money, that legally I could have kept it. however I decided that the right thing to do was to give it back. yeah I might have been stupid, but my mother didn't raise a dishonest person -not that Im a saint, mind you!
and in the end, karma does come back to get ya.
........or to donkey punch your ass! haha
then you won't need to call jim poloshirt AIA from acronym associates in schaumburg IL to find out that candidate X never listened when jim told him to use the firm's CAD standard.
i glanced at that domus set.
it's amazing how little is actually in most of the architecture rags once they take out the adverts and fluff. i remember the domus archives taking up several shelves @ uni.
If you think donkey punch is bad, look up "pink sock" or "manhattan transfer"
I was once at a bar with a bunch of girls (I'm a guy) and they got all curious about what a Donkey Punch was (there is this bar in Denver called the Donkey Den and it was being boycotted by some feminazi group for having a "Donkey Punch Burger" on the menu, it was all over the local news). Being at least somewhat of a gentleman I refrained. They begged and begged. So I finally told them. It was somewhat amusing to see the look on all of their faces. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
Oh and on the ex-boss thing. Revenge is a dish best served cold. (And anonymously.)
Jan 8, 07 8:08 pm ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
defamation by former employer
i quit one firm where i was doing well, for a better situation. however my former boss tells people i was fired and a bad worker, though a paper trail proves otherwise - i was given a 10% raise shortly before submitting my letter of resignation and i even stayed on longer to help the transition. is there any recourse? i am worried that he'll talk to a future employer or client, which would be a threat to my livelihood. any help would be great. also, doesn't that constitute an ethics violation (besides being a totally dick move - i didn't go about town talking about your strange habits and other illegal shit. get over it already)
If you can prove that these actions have lost you jobs, clients, whatever, then you have a solid legal case if you can get someone they've talked to to testify on your behalf. On the other hand, who wants to go that far? I'm interested to see whether anyone can suggest a good in-between solution.
i am not sure how to find out if it affected lost jobs, unless i go back and talk to the people i interviewed with. it's a fairly tight-knit city, and everyone pretty much knows everyone. it is highly possible it affected my job search shortly after i left. if i was a crap employee, that'd be understandable, i wouldn't be upset. i'd probably throw a flaming shit-covered brick through his car window. but i worked my ass off, and stayed on top of everything - i was a good employee. i really just want to get on with my life and shouldn't have to deal with this crap-ola. and yeah, i'd like to avoid bringing in a lawsuit.
nice. i know a bit on this one. there are a few options...
1. ignore - be the bigger person, hope it hasn't affected your professional life.
2. move to deutschland. ja, genau!
3. take a bat to the guy's head. classy. might get caught.
4. file a lawsuit - have fun with that.
5. (can be done concurrent w/ 4) contact the nat'l ethics committee of the AIA (i'm assuming as your employer he's a member)
it seems to violate rule 4.103:
Members speaking in their professional capacity shall not knowingly make false statements of material fact.
[AIA defines statement of material fact as "a statement which is essential to a consequence or outcome that impacts one of the parties to the Complaint."]
and Rule 5.201 Members shall recognize and respect the professional contributions of their employees, employers, professional colleagues, and business associates.
it also goes against E.S. 5.1:
Professional Environment: Members should provide their associates and employees with a suitable working environment, compensate them fairly, and facilitate their professional development.
address and format of letter can be found here
good luck, and if you need a bat... wood is best
holz...A wood bat could break and shatter, leaving the risk of splinters and just more mess to account for in the getaway. Aluminum allows for greater bat speed and cleaner contact...and clean up is a breeze with baby wipes.
yeah, but the thud w/ alum is really sickening.
basler (are you swiss?) you should out that tool. but you might want to wait until after you contact the NEC, if you choose to do so.
Actually, there is no thud...more like a "ping".
Your best bet is to forget him. Leave the firm off your resume. Or leave him off your references. Be prepared to tell potential employers why you do not want them to contact him. You're human after all.
the simple and easy thing to do is ask an attorney to write a letter, and if it's an amercian architect, cite the rules of professional conduct noted above and that should scare the shit of that architect enough that they will come to your house and apologize. if they are a member of the aia then write them as well.
In a tight knit community, any action could make an ugly situation even uglier.
you need to evaluate who gave you this information - that your former boss is spreading rumors - can this person be trusted, or is this a rumor itself (was it multiple sources?)
do you have any friends that you can contact at this former firm? if they are talking shit, most likely the current employees would know of it (depending on firm size)
one way to handle is to invite former employer for drinks... and in a polite manner, state that you have heard these rumors but DO NOT make any threats... this will only put them on the offensive
ahhhh f-it! - that advise sucks
my suggestion for you is to forget all about it, like others have mentioned...
do your fighting with your architecture - as in - be a better architect then them, win more commissions, gain the respect of clients in your community, if they are a rumor spreading type then the rage they will have from constantly losing to you will be far more rewarding (to you) then any lawsuit would be
I would agree that being the bigger person would be your best move...
Now, if you can produce physical evidence (e-mails, letters, etc.) that your former boss is spreading false information regarding your employment with his/her firm AND you can show that this has had a direct negative effect on your career you *might* have a case....
If this is the case than you could most likely juice the guy for a good chunk of cash in an out-of-court settlement and then place a gag order on him.....Keep in mind though that most laywers are going to take 1/2 of your settlement...So, lets say you get this person to settle for $15,000...After legal fees, taxes's and court costs, not to mention time off work from your new job, you might walk home with $5,000...
In the end, would it be worth it? Chances are, your not the first person he's spoken ill about and in the end, it will come back around on him....
You left for a better situation. So you found another job before you left this guy's firm. So in that job search you probably didn't use that guy as a reference, right? So it would be hard to say that he affected that job search.
Have you gone through another job search since then? If so, and if you do have evidence that he lied about the circumstances of your departure from that firm, then as others have suggested you could pursue legal action.
It's more difficult to disprove his statements that you were "a bad worker" - even assuming you can document that he has said this - unless you could provide things like written performance reviews that were dated very close to the date that you left...
I tend to agree with those who are telling you it's not worth your time and mental energy to pursue any action against him. Obviously you aren't going to want to use him as a reference in the future. But I think that if you just move on he's not likely to have much impact on your future, whereas if you pursue this in your close-knit community it could result in more backlash than benefit.
I'm curious as to how you know that he is telling people these things? If you've heard this from former coworkers then you might just chalk it up to in-house venting on his part (maybe he is annoyed that you left, or has a bruised ego about it...) - and there's also the possibility that whoever told you this is exaggerating or embellishing whatever he actually said - whereas if you heard it from current colleagues or others outside the firm, and you feel that these people are honestly/accurately reporting what was said then it's a bigger problem.
I don't think you need to sue him... just spend $200 and get an attorney to write a cease and desist letter. One bad reference could easily cost you that much, and a nice note from a lawyer on letterhead should scare him straight. Dude needs to learn to be a grown up, you can help him on his way.
janosh and i are correct, this is a matter of professional conduct, and we are constantly demanding that we should get respect in this wacky ass profession, well the first step is not letting some douche bag architect have his/her way in fucking your career. suing is not the answer, but a polite and strongly worded letter will remind that a-hole of the particular code of ethical conduct required by all of us when we become so "lucky" as to be called architects.
don't spend a lot of time on it, just the letter is enough.
Formerly brings up a good point. Where did you find out that your former boss is defaming you? My concern with sending attorneys' letters, filing lawsuits, etc. is that you may create a bigger problem for yourself in terms of your reputation if you drag other people into this. If a client or potential employer told you about this that's one thing. But if it was anybody who still has a connection to that other firm, whose own career could be hurt, then think carefully about dragging them into it.
I think cln1 has a very good point. You say "my former boss tells people i was fired and a bad worker" and I don't doubt you have this from trustworthy sources, but can you prove it?
Secondly, can you prove the damage it's caused?
If you can do either or both, it looks like you could sue.
But do you want to be known, in your 'tight-knit' community, as the kind of guy who sues? Do you want to be known as 'trouble'?
A couple of years ago, I was in the job market. I had a couple of instances where the interview was mine and where the job was more or less offered, then they were 'inexplicably' retracted. I know pretty much that some aspect of my past must have been circulating to get these guys suddenly back-tracking. Thing is, the rumour I suspect they'd become aware of *was* true but its implications were not. The proof of the latter is that I'm doing very well indeed at the company that has taken me on.
I choose to move on and up by my own merits and enjoy good relationships with those who are sincere and open with me. Together we create a win-win upwards spiral.
The others? They can circle around their own pools of paranoid shit as long as they like...
no one is suggesting a law suit, and i think the idea of that was not a serious consideration, but a letter is just that, a letter stating what has been said, and to remind someone that there are codes of professional conduct that must be adhered to by all of us. if anyone thinks the aia or ncarb does not take this shit seriously, perhaps a check of your state aia meeting minutes of actions recommendations regarding unethical conduct by some in the community. it's remarkable. people that have been denied work product for portfolio usage have been cited, it gets to that level, so this i think is a bit more important. your livelihood depends on the ethical treatment of others and many times you can't depend on someone to do right by you, so we either say lesson learned or bring that person to account for their actions. a letter is a good middle ground.
how can we expect others to take us seriously when we don't even treat each with respect?
i second those who advise caution: how can you substantiate that your former boss is talking shit about you? if you heard it from your former colleagues...yeah, it's probably true, but it also means that it's probably not going much beyond your former colleagues. maybe his wife or boyfriend is hearing about you, too...who knows.
frankly, he shouldn't affect your getting a job at a GOOD firm. i personally believe that checking references implies distrust...period...and you don't want to work for anyone who assumes from the get-go that you are lying to them or that you are misrepresenting yourself.
people are gonna talk, and sure, people are gonna remember (did louis sullivan fire FLLW or did FLLW quit? hmmm) but when you're in an interview, what matters is what your portfolio, your resume (sans references except upon request), and your personality say about you.
that being said, if you a.) hear from a prospective employer that your former employer has been "talking you up" or b.) he's been writing stuff about you, then you may need to proceed down some of the roads mentioned above.
probably you'll experience neither. don't dignify his petulance with any kind of response or action whatsoever -- he might be a (oh yes) passive agressive and a response from you (no matter what kind) is just what he may want.
: have you given any thought to taking your old boss to lunch, tell him what you've heard is being said about you, and - given the facts of your situation and infomation in your personnel file there - that you're pretty sure what you're hearing can't be right. Then, ask him whether there's any truth to the rumor ?
That way, you don't really have to acuse him directly and, in a conversational manner, he'll get the message that you a) know about his comments; and b) have concerns.
While he'll probably deny having ever said anything of the sort, I'm pretty sure that if he has been spreading rumors about you, he'll stop.
betadinesutures is right -- we need to stand up for ourselves -- but, I tend to believe we ought to do it directly, not through the legal professsion.
i disagree with those that said you should do nothing..
leaving this firm off your resume leaves a gap in your career
that you'll have to explain...which may be worth a conversation
anyway in an interview. at the very least you may want to
explain why you left the jobs you had if you're still in the
same city.
the fact is is that if indeed true this person should be taught
a lesson..messing around with someone else's career is at
best immature and at worst illegal. i don't think there is any
harm in reminding this person that ethic violations can be
very serious.
i also disagree that any firm that checks references aren't worth
working for..MANY firms check references in the hiring process..
some people trust their instincts..but especially small firms can't
afford to hire bad employees.. so they have to go on the word
of others.
bottom line..the guy needs to move on..why are architects like
spurned lovers when it comes to employees that quit...the
architecture community is too small to burn any bridges either
way...
There's something I don't understand: in the first post you said that you left the first firm in order to move on to a better position. But in the second post you said that your former employer's comments potentially might have affected your job search shortly after you left the firm that firm. Did you quit the first firm without already having a second job in place? Or did you quickly leave the second job too, thus were searching again soon afterward? If the former, is there any possibility that there was any confusion about the terms of your departure?
I'm sure that the answer is that there probably was no confusion about this, and that you did submit a resignation letter of your own free will and were not terminated. I'm just asking because I once encountered somewhat the reverse of this situation: an employee who quit of his own accord but then filed for unemployment on the basis that he was terminated. We submitted his resignation letter and his unemployment claim was denied. He claimed at first that we demanded that he resign - which we did not - and later (when the state threatened him with fraud charges) that he was "confused" about the circumstances of his leaving...
I don't think you need to leave the job off your resume, regardless of what action you do or don't take. As an employer, I usualy do ask for references and do check at least one of those provided - but I don't call firms listed on the resume unless the person has indicated that they're one of their references. The gap on your resume would be more problematic than the chance that this previous employer may be contacted by a potential employer.
to clarify"a better situation": i quit without having a job lined up. the mental anguish was out of hand, and i needed a break, so i took a sabbatical, traveled for 2 weeks, and then came back and continued my job search. i interviewed at several firms, and am now working for a great firm. a few of the firms i interviewed with have employees that are very good friends with former employer. i slammed all my interviews - all but one where he had close ties never returned my calls. the one that did made an offer, and later rescinded.
i found out about all of this through a contractor that i am friends with that was working on a remodel with former employer. it was also verified through several friends that still work there, but no one seems to think he talked to other architects about it. leaving a gap in my resume would be problematic indeed.
there was no confusion, he never saw the resignation coming. there is a paper trail. after all this, i think it is in my best interest to move to germany (though i don't speak any german) and at the least contact the ethics committee.
thanks for the responses. and no, i won't be needing a bat. coincidentally, is this somewhat common? what is with the need to sooth egos in this profession. it's probably my biggest pet peeve. that and the need to slam every other architect that is doing better buildings.
people talk in this profession, to each other and about each other. it's just gonna happen, especially if you're in a small city. get over your old boss, especially since you found a new place. he won't even give a shit about you in six months, so get over it.
however: i will not back down from stating that reference-checking is a bad idea, for both the potential employer and the potential employee.
for the potential employer: here you go. you call a reference. keep this thread in mind. is the guy or gal on the other end of the line telling the truth? are they defaming your candidate unjustly out of pique? or are they inflating their praises of the potential employee so that they can see you get stuck with a no-good slacker? or are they being honest?
(the smart firm, when CALLED for a reference, gives out only the dates when a candidate started and ended employment and job titles. it should be a stated policy that qualitative references are not given.)
for the potential employee: that potential employer said he likes you, but he wants your references. (NEVER list references on your resume. ALWAYS provide them upon request.) hmmm. does he think you're lying?
my compromise solution would be to have your references write recommendation letters and give you copies. then you can distribute them upon request.
I used to list them on my resume (before it got too full). My current firm called before even interviewing me, and had pretty much made up their mind before I ever showed up at the office. I've got no problem with that. = )
I actually get annoyed at offices with the 'no recommendations' policy, just because once you work somewhere for a certain period of time, well, where ELSE are your references supposed to come from?! I understand that the whole reference thing isn't a perfect system, but I believe that any employer who asks for/calls references of potential hires, but won't provide qualitative references for former employees, is hypocritical and doing their employees a disservice.
ochona's comment on the 'smart firm' is right on. if I remember correctly, there is a fed or state (CA) guideline - that the only information that can be provided by a past employee is verification of employement & dates. Anything else - inadvertant or intentional can come back to bite the transmittor in the hiney. however, small minded people are everywhere........ the longer your professional career - the more human frailty you will see.
People live and die by word of mouth referrals - both positive & negative. What you have heard is heresay. There is little you can prove if a witness is dependent on this same person for employment, collaborative work, etc. People have 'convenient amnesia'........... and generallly will not come forward or get involved. That is something to keep in mind.
If someone asks about it again - comment - 'oh, he just misses me alot & is blowing smoke & wasting his wind. I guess I did a better job for him than I thought!
& with luck, maybe someday - you will run across him at a holiday party
my favorite quote is 'management doesn't lie, the truth changes..."
]->
It isn't a law that a firm can only give dates of employment. But many companies are advised by their insurance companies and attorneys not to give any additional information beyond dates of employment, position title, and documented type of separation (terminated vs. layoff vs. voluntary vs. retired, etc.) - particularly negative information - because it can come back to hurt them.
But these same insurance companies and attorneys advise companies to always check references. This is because companies have been successfully sued for NOT finding out things about employees (criminal records, violence toward/harassment of former colleagues, etc.
The catch here of course is that if I call an employee's previous firm and all they give me is dates of employment and job title then I'm not going to find out anything potentially dangerous or criminal that way anyway. But from the attorneys' and insurance companies' viewpoints at least I can document having attempted to find out...
Beyond the above, I check references because not all applicants are honest and I found that out the hard way. It would be nice to trust everything everyone puts on a resume, but there can be a lot of expensive consequences if you mis-judge someone and they don't turn out to be who they say they are.
checking references is NOT just about finding out whether the candidate is being honest or not ... at our firm, we rarely base the actual hiring decision on what we learn during the reference check process ... if you hire the caliber of people we hire, then the candidates we're interested in hiring are going to use good judgement and only (usually) provide the names of references who are going to speak highly of their abilities and personalities.
we use the reference check process mostly to learn more about people we're going to hire anyway ... we want to know how they interact with others; what their blind spots may be; where they have developmental needs; what their work ethic is like; do they bring a lit of 'attitude' to the office every day. This information is invaluable to us when the person actually arrives at our firm ... it helps us know how to place them in a project team and it helps us know how to deal with them.
i find that most people we call during the reference check process are more than willing to speak candidly about former employees if you approach them honestly. most people (outside of HR departments) understand why this part of the hiring process is important and willingly share what they can about candidates.
often, because I'm reasonably well connected in our community, I will call people I know at firms where a candidate previously worked - many times these people are not listed by the candidate as references. these can be the most useful calls because these references haven't been vetted already by the candidate. this sort of call can be very useful when we're otherwise unsure about how interested we are in a particular candidate.
strangely enough, i'm all about the background check. check their degrees, make sure they haven't killed anybody. especially check their degrees.
but when it comes to the nebulous aspects of how an employer will work with a potential employee, i just don't see how reference-checking will communicate this. architects are very disparate in their working styles, and a person who works well with one employer may be a burnout for another. and firms have such different cultures.
i would say that longer, more involved interviews with many, many more questions would do just as well.
seems like there's a gut reaction that has to be present and if there's not, there's just not.
no matter how bad you need warm bodies, slow down and really get to know the people who interview with you. then you won't need to call jim poloshirt AIA from acronym associates in schaumburg IL to find out that candidate X never listened when jim told him to use the firm's CAD standard.
basler:
I think you've gotten some quality advice on here...I especially love the wood bat vs the alum bat discussions.
But truthfully, whether in a small architectural community or a large one (as in NYC, LA, or San Fran) inevitably, people will hear about 'things'. This became quite apparent to me when I experienced something along similar lines. Bottom line is that I let it go. Did nothing. However the worst part was having the a-hole call me 6 mos later and threaten that I had stolen money from his firm, beyond initially talking to me like I was his f**cking child.
The only way I responded to that was being the more professional individual, and just called him on his ethical and professional mannerisms (or lack thereof), then went on to find out what steps needed to be taken to rectify this clear blatant misunderstanding on his part (if I was even involved or at fault).
Needless to say, as some have stated on here, eventually other people in the community will hear about such acts of disregard from your previous employer and soon enough his actions be called into question. I know my former mates in that particular office found out and called me and asked what happened, to which I just explained my side and all that was said was "...yeah, I could see that he was like that!"
Ultimately, if you are just and true, I say don't worry because it will come back to him. That f**cker will pay in some way, someday!
Karma!!
since all advice is given already....
two words:
donkey + punch
instant karma's gonna get him
gonna donkey-punch him right in the face
you better get yourself together, basler
don't need a legal case
i'm going to hell for this parody, i just know it...
by definition...isn't a donkey punch not in the face?
squirrely -
when i bailed, i was accused of stealing my ownzumthor book. i bought it for $40 @ stout books (waaaay back before they pumped the price to $500) and it's pretty much my bible.
my boss had been using it for reference, and the day i turned in my resignation, it suddenly disappeared. i eventually found it when the boss-man was at a 3 hour lunch n munch session with some Craigslist tweaker. 2 weeks after i left, i got a call accusing me of stealing it. so i produced my sales receipt, and the marks i place in all my books, and he grumbled and shut up.
i'm looking to purchase another since he got his greasy fingerprints all over my nice bible.
by definition, a donkey punch is to the back of the head.
jesus christ, i should never use terms i don't really know about...
i thought a donkey punch was like getting kicked or something
i feel dirty
HAHAHA that'll teach you ochona!
that was pretty shitty holz.box. I must say as long as you had your receipt that was your smoking gun.
for me, the a-hole basically had f'ed up/mismanaged his accounting and (through no unusual activity on my part or bank account) had paid me double. Someone told me that once he gave me the money, that legally I could have kept it. however I decided that the right thing to do was to give it back. yeah I might have been stupid, but my mother didn't raise a dishonest person -not that Im a saint, mind you!
and in the end, karma does come back to get ya.
........or to donkey punch your ass! haha
HAHAHAHAHAHA that made my morning, thanks ochona!
Just in case karma takes a bit too long, I hear an egg can take the paint right off a car hood if left overnight.
So I hear.
and here I thought DP was an Afghan party drink. well you learn something new every day.
stout has some damn expensive books http://www.stoutbooks.com/cgi-bin/stoutbooks.cgi/71088.html
cameron,
i glanced at that domus set.
it's amazing how little is actually in most of the architecture rags once they take out the adverts and fluff. i remember the domus archives taking up several shelves @ uni.
If you think donkey punch is bad, look up "pink sock" or "manhattan transfer"
I was once at a bar with a bunch of girls (I'm a guy) and they got all curious about what a Donkey Punch was (there is this bar in Denver called the Donkey Den and it was being boycotted by some feminazi group for having a "Donkey Punch Burger" on the menu, it was all over the local news). Being at least somewhat of a gentleman I refrained. They begged and begged. So I finally told them. It was somewhat amusing to see the look on all of their faces. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.
Oh and on the ex-boss thing. Revenge is a dish best served cold. (And anonymously.)
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.