We have advised Glassdoor that this review is not for a Practicus position, however they will not remove it despite it being factually inaccurate. Unfortunately Glassdoor don’t seem to understand the difference between a role recruited to be an employee of Practicus as opposed to offering a recruitment service to Practicus clients. We’d urge caution when reviewing feedback about interviews, as I suspect this will occur frequently with businesses that offer recruitment services. Also, the salary review section is incorrect as the examples represent roles that we have recruited on behalf of our clients acting as an employment agency, not jobs at Practicus. So to explain this:- We have an Interim Management (recruitment) part of our business where we recruit positions on behalf of other third parties. This was one such role. We take pride in taking references from applicants as this helps us choose the right person for our end client which explains why our hit rate is so good for our clients. Ask yourself the question, if you were recruiting someone would you not want references to ensure the applicant has done what they claim? We would also add that the applicant did apply for the role, we would never ask for references before this point, so their statement “before even applying” is inaccurate.