A lively debate has raged in recent years about how to regulate employment reference practices. According to the conventional account, employers refuse to provide candid references because they fear defamation liability and perceive only the most speculative benefits from exposing themselves to the risk of suit. As a result, almost everyone appears to agree that employers are getting too little information about prospective employees. An intuitively appealing response to this problem would be to impose on the former employer a duty to disclose. Another obvious possibility is to reform defamation law so as to reduce the threat of liability that employers face when they provide candid references. Although these are plausible policy options, prior commentators have seriously underestimated the difficulty of designing appropriate legal reforms. The framework that I develop in this Article highlights the unique problems associated with regulating information flows and reveals complex interactions among the various legal and economic forces that influence employment reference practices. In particular, I examine three potential inefficiencies arising from employee turnover -- mismatching, churning, and scarring. Contrary to the conventional wisdom, I conclude that defamation law functions reasonably well in its present form, that disclosure obligations might well produce more harm than good, and finally that the most promising legal reforms are those that focus on the problems associated with hiring for high-risk occupations. I also explore how the law might facilitate both preexisting and innovative market mechanisms for information sharing.
For the over half-million people currently homeless in the United States, the U.S. Constitution has historically provided little help: it is strongly...
Who has the legal right to challenge decisions by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration? And should the moral umbrage of a group of anti-abortion...
President Joe Biden promised during his State of the Union address on March 7, 2024, that he would make the right to get an abortion a federal law.
“If...
Gradualism should have won out in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, exerting gravitational influence on the majority and dissenters alike. In general...
Hot Flash: How Understanding Menopause Can Improve Life and Law for Everyone dissolves the silence and stigma surrounding menopause. The book frames...
During times of crisis, governments often consider policies that may promote safety, but that would require overstepping constitutionally protected...
This essay explores the regulation of sperm donation from a reproductive justice perspective. It compares formal sperm donation, which involves...
The SEC mandates that public companies assess new information that changes the risks that they face and disclose these if there has been a “material”...
In an era defined by partisan rifts and government gridlock, many celebrate the rare issues that prompt bipartisan consensus. But extreme consensus...
Working hand-in-hand with the private sector, largely in a regulatory vacuum, policing agencies at the federal, state, and local level are acquiring...
The decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. President and Fellows of Harvard [SFFA], invalidating the use of race in college admissions, reignites...
In the aftermath of Dobbs, as barriers to accessing fertility care increase, one area of growing interest is informal (“DIY”) sperm donation, which...
Medication abortion now accounts for more than half of all abortions in the United States. Typically, patients take a two different pills: first...
This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in San Antonio Independent School District v. Rodriguez that our Constitution...