United States

Littler Mendelson logo

As the largest labor and employment law firm in the United States—with more than 750 attorneys, 49 locations, and a practice that extends into every area and sub-area of workplace law—Littler Mendelson has the ability to provide rapid, integrated solutions for any labor, employment, benefits or global migration issue.

Littler’s international experience is long-standing and diverse, positioning us to effectively assist employers with the significant challenges of managing employees in multiple countries. Our international employment law practice consists of 100+ lawyers who have worked on projects involving the employment laws of nations across the globe. Our attorneys are fluent in 20+ languages and are actively involved in various international associations, such as the U.S. Council on International Business and the International Bar Association.

Supporting Littler's international employment law practice is a well-established network of working relationships with pre-eminent employment lawyers around the world. Littler is the U.S. member of the Ius Laboris global alliance of leading human resources law practitioners, with member firms in 45 countries and coverage in more than 100 countries.

Visit Website

To Recommend or Not To Recommend: The LinkedIn Conundrum

Several employment lawyers recently have debated whether employers should permit their employees to "recommend" a former employee on LinkedIn. The debate began after a National Law Journal article quoted two management-side attorneys who counseled against permitting such recommendations. According to these lawyers, a positive recommendation arguably could provide evidence of pretext in a discrimination lawsuit if the former employee who is the subject of  the recommendation had been terminated for poor performance. The contrarians in the debate contend that this scenario is unlikely to occur and even if it did, the LinkedIn recommendation would not be particularly persuasive evidence of pretext.

Both sides have their points, but, in my view, neither side has the answer. Experienced employment litigators know that in the "wrong case" a positive LinkedIn recommendation could result in the denial of summary judgment -- or worse, an adverse jury verdict -- and accompanying recriminations for not having advised the defendant to prohibit such recommendations. At the same time, implementing a policy to avoid the unusual case where a manager is willing to make positive public proclamations about a litigious poor performer denies the employer the benefit of whatever good will might result from these LinkedIn recommendations.
The answer, however, does not have to be a Manichean one. Rather, employers can choose from a range of options, depending upon corporate culture and risk tolerance. Some policy options, ranging from most to least restrictive, include the following:

  • Prohibit all LinkedIn recommendations;
  • Prohibit LinkedIn recommendations by anyone who has formally evaluated the performance of the person making the request;
  • Permit LinkedIn recommendations only of former employees who voluntarily left the organization;
  • Permit all LinkedIn recommendations by anyone of anyone but subject to the following guidelines: (a) If you have anything negative to say about the person, reject the recommendation request; (b) If you have something positive to say, be accurate, complete, and truthful; and (c) Do not exaggerate or overstate.
More options most likely will be developed over time. Employers should not be shoehorned into a one-size-fits-all solution.

This entry was written by Philip L. Gordon.
Trackbacks (0) Links to blogs that reference this article Trackback URL
http://www.globalemploymentlaw.com/mtc/mt-tb.cgi/274
Comments (0) Read through and enter the discussion with the form at the end
Post A Comment / Question Use this form to add a comment to this entry.

Send To A Friend Use this form to send this entry to a friend via email.