Former Teacher Wins £370K After Boss Gave Damning References

A tribunal has awarded £370,563 to Carmen Wood-Hope, a former teacher, after ruling she was unfairly dismissed and given damaging references in retaliation for challenging the headteacher’s classroom observation rules.

Wood-Hope, who served as the trade union official for the National Education Union (NEU) at The Friars Primary School in Salford, confronted headteacher Michael Earnshaw over his decision to stop giving teachers advance notice of classroom observations. She argued this change violated long-standing agreements.

The tribunal found that Earnshaw's actions were driven by "revenge" for Wood-Hope's challenge. Not only was she unfairly dismissed, but Earnshaw also provided misleading references when she sought future employment, describing her as "not at all suitable" for teaching roles despite her excellent track record.

Wood-Hope’s claims of unfair dismissal, trade union detriment, and disability discrimination were upheld. The decision was published on May 12.

Expert Insights on Giving References

While negative references are sometimes given, they must be backed by documented evidence, says Chloe Dickenson, compliance manager at recruitment firm Sellick Partnership.

"Negative references must be supported by documented evidence such as formal performance reviews, written warnings, or training analysis," Dickenson explained to HR Magazine. "They should always be factual, fair, and free from opinion or bias."

She further suggested that organizations implement a reference policy that is accessible and consistently followed, with clear guidelines for handling concerns in sectors like education or healthcare. Only substantiated concerns meeting legal harm thresholds should be included in references.

Eyal Ben Cohen, CEO of Verifile, an employment checks provider, added that all references should be processed through HR. He recommended that HR leaders establish a mandatory policy requiring references to be factual, evidence-based, and non-discriminatory.

"Managers should have a single reference template for dates, roles, and final salary (if allowed), with an optional narrative box that HR signs off before it’s sent," he said. "This would prevent informal, 'off-piste' emails like the ones involved in the Wood-Hope case."

Unfounded Performance Plan and Dismissal

In October 2019, Earnshaw placed Wood-Hope on a performance plan, which the tribunal found had no real justification. The evidence presented against her was described as "selective" and designed to be critical.

Wood-Hope refused to sign the performance plan and eventually took long-term sick leave due to anxiety and panic attacks. She was dismissed in September 2020 due to ongoing sickness absence.

Charlie O’Brien, Head of People at Breathe HR, emphasized the importance of clear performance management guidelines to avoid unjustified negative references. She advised that any performance-related feedback, whether from a manager or the employee, should be supported by specific examples. This applies not only to performance reviews but also to references.

"A well-documented history of an employee's behavior helps protect the organization if a reference is ever challenged," O'Brien explained.

What the Information Commisioners Office Says About the Confidentiality of References

In their guidance Subject access request Q and As for employers the ICO states:

You may receive a SAR from a worker for references. These could cover references that you either provided to other organisations or that you received at the start of their employment.

However, under UK GDPR, confidential references are exempt, when provided for the purposes of:

• education, training, or employment of someone;

• someone working as a volunteer;

• appointing someone to office; or

• provision of any service by someone.

The exemption applies regardless of whether you give or receive the reference.

It is important to note that this only applies to references that you give in confidence. You should make it clear to workers and those providing references whether you treat them as confidential. You should do this in your privacy statement, staff handbook or policies. If these measures are in place, it’s likely you are complying with data protection legislation.

However, if it is unclear whether you are treating references as confidential, you should consider requests on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the following:

• any clearly-stated assurance of confidentiality that you give to the referee;

• any reasons the referee may give for withholding consent;

• the likely impact of the reference on the requester;

• any risk that disclosure may pose to the referee; and

• the requester’s interest in being able to satisfy the accuracy and truthfulness of the reference.