Reference letters are one of the most unfair, outdated and damaging requirements in job and academic applications. They weaponise fake courtesy and power games instead of sticking to facts. The system doesn’t reward skill or effort, it rewards connections, flattery, luck and personal agendas.
The biggest headache is the constant pressure to produce a reference from a former employer. Many companies demand it, assuming it proves someone was a ‘good employee’. But what if the company itself was toxic? What if the boss was abusive or unfair? A toxic workplace will never write a fair letter for someone who stood up for themselves or dared to walk away. In fact, they might purposely block that person’s future by writing negatively or refusing to respond at all.
People leave companies for a reason, and those reasons are often tied to poor leadership, burnout, or mistreatment. Yet the system forces you to rely on them. Expecting a glowing letter from such a place is not only unrealistic — it’s insulting.
Reference letters also feed inequality. People with rich networks, fancy titles or powerful mentors get great letters, even if they’re average. They reward privilege, not talent. Applicants are forced to chase old bosses, professors or managers, like desperate beggars, sometimes years after leaving. People spend hours asking for, reminding about, and then waiting for letters. This only holds up job offers and admissions — adding pointless stress and pressure.
Most letters are filled with generic praise: ‘team player’, ‘fast learner’, ‘great attitude.’ These words don’t prove skills or achievements. Forcing people to beg for approval from those who don’t care is unfair and degrading.
Yumna Zahid Ali
Karach
