Should a Job Referee's Opinions Be Exempt from Defamation Laws?

Lisa Johnson • September 14, 2015

In this article from HC online, Phillip Holloway, a lawyer with CNN, suggests that the unwillingness of employers to provide negative references for former employees places people at risk when the employee has a history of violence or mental instability.

In other words, employers quietly let other organisations unwittingly employ potentially dangerous people when they choose not to detail any problems in a reference. Most people probably feel similarly and that the good of the many outweighs the good of the individual. But this is a dangerous path to tread and likely to lead to people making hiring decisions based on opinion and not fact, as Mr Holloway specifically suggests that opinion should be exempt from defamation suits.

I think he is being incredibly naïve about how a person's 'opinion' can be damaging. I will talk more about this in a moment, but first I want to ponder on his inclusion of mental instability in his suggestions as to why the law should change.

1 in 5 Australians will experience some form of mental illness in their lifetime. The majority will recover and go on to lead balanced, productive lives with no ongoing side effects (if given appropriate support and treatment). The most common mental illnesses are anxiety based disorders. My daughter suffered anxiety attacks at primary school and had to learn coping mechanisms to help manage them. Her anxiety is classified as a mental illness. Imagine if employers had the right to bring that up in her future job references – regardless of whether or not her anxiety had any effect on her work. Imagine if people were allowed to eliminate her for consideration for a job because she once experienced a period of anxiety attacks. Just because a person may experience a period of time where they have a mental illness, this does not mean that they are inherently dangerous or a bad employee.

Untreated mental illnesses can affect a person's ability to do their job – I accept that – but you are NOT allowed to discriminate against a person because of mental illness.

You cannot refuse to employ someone because they might experience episodes of mental instability. If that were the case, nobody would get a job, because the perfectly healthy person right now could very well develop a disorder next week – so there is always the potential for mental instability. Let's move onto opinion. In my opinion, Candidate A was a hopeless employee because I just didn't like his political views. I didn't like the way he looked or spoke, and, although his work was fine, I just didn't want to work with him anymore. THAT is opinion.

Opinion is where you use your OWN personal bias and judgement to assess a situation or a person. It doesn't make what you are saying the truth. And if you use your opinion to say something that is fundamentally untrue about a person because this is how you felt about them, then YES, you should be liable for defamation.

If what you say to someone else is not true and likely to make them think less of the potential employee as a result, then that is bread and butter defamation right there. References are important. But I have said before that they are loaded with angst at every turn.

The people who say too much or gossip risk defaming the employee, and those who say nothing add no value at all. But I would rather have a policy of NO references given than a situation where people can spout opinion and discuss a person's mental stability as fact.

Find the job you love I Find the right talent
Get in touch with people2people

Australia   I   United Kingdom

In business since 2002 in Australia, NZ, and the United Kingdom, people2people is an award-winning recruitment agency with people at our heart. With over 12 offices, we specialise in accounting and finance, business support, education, executive, government, HR, legal, marketing and digital, property, sales, supply chain, and technology sectors. As the proud recipients of the 2024 Outstanding Large Agency and Excellence in Candidate Care Awards, we are dedicated to helping businesses achieve success through a people-first approach.



Share insights

Recent articles

By Sharna Bryant June 18, 2025
Discover the latest developments in Australia’s sales sector, where AI integration and talent acquisition are reshaping the industry. With expansion plans underway and evolving skills in demand, this update explores how companies are navigating recruitment challenges and preparing for 2025. Learn which roles are most in demand, what benefits are attracting top talent, and how businesses are responding to ongoing turnover.
By Colleen Deere June 11, 2025
Australia has made intentional wage theft a criminal offence, with tough new penalties now in force. In this blog, we break down what the changes mean, common employer mistakes, and how to stay compliant in 2025. Featuring expert insights from Antonino Meduri of AM Law & Partners, it's essential reading for business owners, HR professionals, and payroll teams navigating the new Fair Work landscape.
Explore the legal and ethical essentials of managing redundancies in Australia. Featuring expert ins
By Leanne Lazarus June 10, 2025
Explore the legal and ethical essentials of managing redundancies in Australia. Featuring expert insights from employment law and HR specialists, this blog outlines the key obligations, common pitfalls, and practical steps for handling role changes with compliance and care. Ideal for HR leaders and employers navigating workforce change.
By Suhini Wijayasinghe May 29, 2025
AI is rapidly transforming industries around the globe, and the human resources sector in Australia and New Zealand is no exception. With 54% of HR teams already investing in AI tools, according to people2people's Employment and Salary Report, it's clear that automation and predictive technologies are no longer futuristic concepts—they're part of today's evolving workforce strategy. Though nearly half of these organisations report no significant impact yet, the momentum is undeniable. From talent acquisition to onboarding and learning development, AI is starting to reshape how HR teams operate. Yet the journey is not without its complexities. "AI isn't a buzzword—it's a business advantage" Juma Mrisho, Talent Acquisition Business Partner, highlights the tangible gains AI can offer. "In terms of speed, efficiency, and decision-making accuracy, it’s definitely not just a buzzword," he explains. AI is already being used to streamline admin-heavy tasks, improve candidate matching, and personalise employee training pathways. However, barriers to broader adoption remain. As Mrisho points out, "The idea of inertia and resistance to change is something embedded in all of us." Concerns about return on investment, high costs, and the complexity of new systems are slowing uptake. Many traditional organisations are hesitant, needing time and guidance to adapt. Kaajal Khelawan, HR Manager and Operations Lead, addresses a common myth: "The biggest misconception is that AI will replace HR jobs. But the reality is it’s there to support them." She notes that AI tools require proper oversight, customisation, and human input to be effective—far from being plug-and-play solutions. Khelawan also warns against rushing implementation. "We’ve seen people adopt AI without fully understanding it, feeling pressured to innovate quickly," she says. For AI to work meaningfully, organisations must invest in education, planning, and change management. Looking ahead, both experts believe this is only the beginning. Mrisho envisions AI becoming a core part of HR over the next three to five years, powering everything from workforce planning to performance management. "The rapid growth of AI in just six to twelve months has been enormous. Thinking about where we’ll be in five years is genuinely exciting," he says. While AI opens the door to new possibilities, it also demands thoughtful integration. For HR teams in Australia and New Zealand, the focus must now shift from hype to strategy. As Khelawan concludes, "It’s best to approach it with an open mind. There are pros and cons, but with the right attitude, organisations can meaningfully assess how to adopt and benefit from it." In 2025 and beyond, HR professionals who balance innovation with insight will be best positioned to lead their teams into a smarter, more agile future.
By Colleen Deere May 22, 2025
In a major step to protect Australian workers, the federal government criminalised wage theft under the Fair Work Legislation Amendment Act 2023. From 1 January 2025, employers who knowingly underpay employees face penalties including fines up to $7.825 million or three times the amount underpaid. Individuals could also face up to 10 years in prison. This crackdown, driven by the growing concern that wage theft costs workers up to $1.5 billion annually, aims to create a culture of fairness and accountability in Australian workplaces. To explore how these changes are playing out, Colleen Deere, Acting Branch Manager at people2people in Perth, spoke with Antonino Meduri, Principal at AM Law & Partners. Their discussion shed light on what the new laws mean for businesses, the common pitfalls that still occur, and how organisations can proactively ensure compliance. "Employers now face serious criminal penalties for deliberate underpayments" Antonino explained the law's key shift: intentional wage theft is now a criminal offence. This applies to both direct entitlements like wages and leave, and indirect ones such as superannuation. Crucially, the law distinguishes between unintentional errors and knowing breaches. "Criminal conduct doesn’t happen when an employer is careless or even reckless. It happens when they knowingly underpay while being aware of their legal obligation to pay more," Antonino clarified. The legislation introduces four major components: criminalisation of wage theft, significant financial penalties, a self-reporting pathway that may prevent prosecution, and a voluntary code for small businesses. The self-reporting mechanism, in particular, offers a pathway for businesses that uncover underpayments and cooperate with the Fair Work Ombudsman to avoid criminal charges. Common Mistakes That Still Lead to Underpayment Claims While intentional wage theft garners the most attention, Antonino noted that most underpayments stem from avoidable errors rather than malice. He highlighted several frequent mistakes: Misclassifying employees : Many errors begin with incorrect award classification, especially in sectors like hospitality and aged care. "Failing to properly consider the legal obligations under the Fair Work Act can snowball into significant liabilities," Antonino warned. Incorrect penalty rates : Employers sometimes overlook weekend or holiday rates or fail to include casual loading during leave. Assuming salaried employees are always compliant : Even when a salary appears generous, if the employee's entitlements under the award are higher, the employer must make up the difference. Unpaid work : Trials or internships where the worker performs productive tasks must be paid, regardless of how the arrangement is labelled. What Good Compliance Looks Like in 2025 Antonino stressed the importance of prevention over reaction. "Good compliance is preventative and not reactive. It's about systems, transparency, and leadership," he said. Here are the key elements he advised businesses to adopt: Accurate classification and regular reviews : Ensure employees are correctly classified under the appropriate award and reassess annually. Pay audits : Regularly verify that pay matches the hours worked and entitlements due, especially for salaried staff. Strong record-keeping : Maintain detailed wage and time records for at least seven years. These not only ensure legal compliance but also serve as vital defence documents in case of claims. Training and accountability : Keep HR and payroll teams updated on legislative changes. Define clear roles for compliance oversight. Early response : If an error is discovered, fix it promptly, pay interest, and engage the Fair Work Ombudsman where necessary. Protecting Legal and Reputational Interests  Beyond compliance, Antonino offered advice on safeguarding a company’s legal and reputational standing: Embed compliance in governance : Treat wage compliance as a leadership issue, not just a payroll task. Independent audits : An external payroll or classification audit can uncover hidden risks before they escalate. Document everything : From employee classification to wage audits, detailed documentation forms the cornerstone of a legal defence. Clear response plans : Have strategies in place for backpay, media management, and engagement with regulators. Foster a culture of integrity : Encourage staff to raise concerns, protect whistleblowers, and promote wage compliance as a shared responsibility. Antonino concluded with a warning: non-compliance can not only invite legal consequences but also drain a business's time and resources. "Being proactive and transparent isn’t just about law—it’s good business." In summary, the new wage theft laws signal a strong shift towards accountability and fairness in Australia’s labour market. Businesses that embrace this change, investing in robust systems and a culture of compliance, will not only avoid legal trouble but build trust and resilience for the future.

Latest Media Features


Get in touch

Find out more by contacting one of our specialisat recruitment consultants across Australia, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.

Contact us