Secret codes in the Swiss work reference
What codes are, why they are problematic — and how the same message can be put as plain text, without legal risk and without personal harm.
- Complete grading-level list
- Plain-text alternatives per code
- Why codes are legally risky
What are secret codes?
Secret codes (also: reference codes, encryptions) are formulations in work references that convey a different — usually more negative — message to insiders than to non-insiders. Classic example: "always to our complete satisfaction" is read in the code tradition as grade 1, "to our satisfaction" without an adverb as grade 4.
In Switzerland, codes are widespread but not regulated by law. They have established themselves in practice over decades — and today face increasing criticism, both legally and socially.
The classic grading-level list
This is how the classic code tradition reads the typical satisfaction phrases. The plain text next to it shows how Kompass would say the same thing — without code.
Codes in the conduct section
Coding is particularly common here — for example by omitting a group of people or through positive-sounding stock phrases with a hidden core of suspicion.
Why are codes problematic?
Duty of clarity violated
A formulation that industry insiders understand differently from the person concerned is legally problematic. The reference must be understandable for third parties.
Correction claim becomes more likely
Whoever uses codes must, before a court, plausibly explain what the codes mean and whether they correspond to the truth. This regularly leads to correction claims.
Reading errors cost careers
Codes are read inconsistently. What one HR person reads as "grade 3", the next interprets as "grade 2". This disadvantages applicants without necessity.
No real information
Codes encrypt precisely the information that would help recipients — namely concrete observations. Plain text says more and is more robust.
Four plain-text alternatives
The same messages — factual, substantiable and traceable. That is the Kompass approach.
Observable behaviour
Instead of "was always striving" → "On project X Mr Y met the requirements. In area Z, development steps were agreed in employee meetings."
Concrete examples
Instead of "complete satisfaction" → "She reliably achieved the quarterly goals and exceeded them in Q3 by 12 per cent."
Weighting instead of omission
If an aspect was weak: do not leave it out (that is read as a code) but describe it more briefly and factually. Nobody expects a perfect profile.
Silence where there is nothing to say
What was not observed does not belong in the reference. A conduct assessment "toward customers" is omitted if the role had no customer contact — without that being negative.
What the legal situation says
The Swiss Federal Supreme Court has reaffirmed the duty of clarity in several decisions: a formulation that is meant differently for an industry-savvy third party than for the person concerned can ground a correction claim — even if it would be accurate according to classical code understanding.
In practice this means: whoever uses codes today bears the risk of having to explain and substantiate the meaning in a dispute. Whoever uses plain text bears the (smaller) risk of having to specify in individual cases — which usually succeeds easily with good meeting notes.
More on this on the page CO art. 330a and in our explanation of the tension goodwill vs. truth.
Frequently asked questions about secret codes
What are secret codes in a work reference?
Are secret codes allowed in Switzerland?
Which codes are particularly common in Swiss work references?
Why does ZeugnisPilot deliberately avoid codes?
What if I suspect codes in a reference I received?
Can I as an employer still use codes today?
How do I automatically check whether codes are in the draft?
No code, no code risk
ZeugnisPilot's compliance check examines every draft against the typical Swiss code patterns and proposes plain-text alternatives — per finding with reasoning.