References and what you can legally say in the United States
Reviewed by Mellow Editorial Team, HR & payroll content team
Employers can share factual, job-related information when giving a reference in the United States — but what you say, and how you say it, carries real legal risk. Most employers land somewhere between two unhelpful extremes: saying nothing at all, or saying too much carelessly.
What the law actually says
There is no single federal law that governs employment references. The legal risk comes mainly from two directions: defamation claims from former employees, and negligent hiring claims from the businesses you are giving references to.
Defamation exposure arises when a reference contains false statements of fact that damage someone's reputation. Truth is an absolute defense — but only if you can demonstrate the statement is factually accurate and documented. Opinion stated clearly as opinion ("in my view, he struggled with deadlines") generally carries less risk than presenting an opinion as a fact ("she is untrustworthy").
Negligent hiring exposure runs the other direction. If you know a former employee posed a genuine safety risk — for example, a pattern of workplace violence — and you say nothing, a future employer could potentially hold you liable if that person harms someone. This is less common than defamation claims but not theoretical.
Many states have enacted reference immunity statutes that protect employers who provide good-faith, factual references. The scope of protection varies by state, so what applies in Texas differs from what applies in California or New York. This is one area where a quick check with employment counsel is worth it.
The "confirm only" policy: useful but not bulletproof
Many HR teams default to confirming only dates of employment and job title. This approach reduces defamation risk significantly and is a reasonable baseline. But it is not legally required, and it does not eliminate all risk. If you confirm employment dates knowing the person was terminated for cause, and that information is relevant to a future employer's decision, silence can sometimes still create exposure in extreme circumstances.
A consistent written policy matters more than the specific approach you choose. Whatever your policy is — confirm-only, full reference, or something in between — apply it uniformly across all former employees. Inconsistent treatment creates its own legal and discrimination risk.
What you can safely say
Stick to objective, documented facts:
- Job title and dates of employment
- Whether the person is eligible for rehire (and if not, that fact alone without embellishment)
- Responsibilities the role carried
- Performance relative to measurable targets, if documented in writing
Avoid speculation, characterizations that are not documented, and anything touching protected characteristics — race, age, disability, pregnancy, religion, national origin, sex. A passing comment linking performance to a protected characteristic can turn a routine reference into a discrimination claim.
If you received a formal complaint or HR investigation involving the person, speak with counsel before disclosing it. The fact of an investigation versus its findings versus an unsubstantiated allegation are legally distinct.
Written versus verbal references
Verbal references feel informal but create the same liability as written ones. In fact, they can be harder to defend because there is no record of exactly what was said. If your policy allows substantive references, consider asking the requestor to send questions in writing and responding in writing. That creates a record on both sides.
When you are on the receiving end — checking references for a candidate — document what the reference said. Date-stamp it, note who gave it, and keep it in the hiring file. If a candidate is not hired and later claims discrimination, your contemporaneous notes show the decision was based on documented information, not protected characteristics.
Authorizing the candidate to release their own records
A common and low-risk alternative to the traditional reference process is asking former employees to sign a release that authorizes you to share specific information, or allows them to share their own personnel file selectively. This does not eliminate all risk but demonstrates consent, which strengthens a defamation defense considerably.
Many background check vendors use a model where the candidate authorizes disclosure as part of the process. If you work with a third-party background screening company, the Fair Credit Reporting Act adds another layer of compliance obligations — including specific authorization forms and adverse action procedures — that apply regardless of how informal the reference exchange feels.
When a former employee asks what you will say
A former employee sometimes contacts HR before listing you as a reference. Being transparent about your policy is reasonable. If your policy is confirm-only, say so. If you would give a positive reference, say so. If you cannot give a positive reference and the person asks you directly, it is fair — and often kinder — to tell them you may not be the best reference for their purposes, without explaining further.
This is general information, not legal advice. Employment reference law varies by state and specific facts matter. When in doubt, consult qualified employment counsel.
---
Run HR and payroll in United States with Mellow
Mellow brings HR, payroll and 12 AI agents into one platform — built to handle United States properly, with payroll included, from £4 per employee per month. The AI agents don't just answer questions; they generate contracts, run cost estimates and draft letters for you.
- United States payroll software
[Start a free trial →](/register)