The employee was highly diligent, hardworking, and showed great commitment to their tasks. He consistently demonstrated a proactive work ethic and put maximum effort into achieving company goals.
The employee made an effort but was ultimately unsuccessful, incompetent, and overwhelmed by the tasks. Despite his diligence, he failed to deliver the required results. See also the social conduct exclusion code under Your behavior was always correct.
According to Art. 330a para. 1 CO, the employee is entitled to a reference letter that evaluates their performance objectively and benevolently. Coded formulations that invert the performance rating into a negative signal are legally inadmissible under Swiss contract law. This provision is designed to protect the employee's economic livelihood by ensuring the certificate facilitates their professional advancement rather than obstructing it. The employer bears the burden of proof for any alleged performance deficits. Inadequate ratings may only remain if they are representative of the entire employment duration.
In Swiss legal practice, the formulation 'good will' without explicit proof of performance constitutes an inadmissible qualitative devaluation. The duty of benevolent formulation must not obscure the material truth. An employee who finds this formulation in their document must immediately submit a written request for correction. In daily HR practice, this code signals to potential employers that the employee made an effort but was unable to achieve productive results due to a lack of professional competence. This leads to a severe restriction of employability in the job market.
Exceptions exist only in cases of verifiable breaches of duty, which may be mentioned objectively if they are essential to the overall assessment. Mere performance weaknesses do not justify a coded devaluation. It is important to emphasize that the employer is not obliged to issue an exaggeratedly positive certificate if this contradicts the truth. The balance between truth and benevolence must be carefully weighed in each individual case. A single isolated incident of misconduct must not dominate the overall assessment. The evaluation of conduct in reference letters always requires a delicate balance between the employer's duty of truthfulness and the statutory principle of benevolence. Courts consistently emphasize that the certificate must not unreasonably obstruct the employee's professional advancement. Therefore, ambiguous formulations that sound positive on the surface but carry a negative connotation in industry context are legally inadmissible and establish an enforceable right to correction.
1 The employee may request at any time from the employer a reference letter concerning the nature and duration of the employment relationship, as well as their performance and conduct. 2 At the specific request of the employee, the reference letter must be restricted to information concerning the nature and duration of the employment relationship.
Das Schweizer Bundesgericht statuiert, dass ein Arbeitszeugnis das berufliche Fortkommen des Arbeitnehmers wohlwollend fördern muss, ohne die Wahrheit zu verletzen. Codierte Formulierungen wie 'gutem Willen' ohne entsprechenden Erfolg verschleiern ungenügende Leistungen und verletzen den Anspruch des Arbeitnehmers auf ein klares, uncodiertes Zeugnis.
The use of this formulation signals an inadequate performance level to potential employers and should be contested immediately via a formal correction request. From the perspective of an experienced legal partner, this clause poses a significant risk to further professional advancement. We recommend actively demanding a correction to a standard formulation such as 'always to our fullest satisfaction' to rule out any misunderstandings. A formal attorney's letter significantly increases success rates.
Submit a briefing request in our local browser sandbox to parse, sanitize, and verify your document against Art. 330a OR.