Lotus People – Charity Work

Here at Lotus People, we pride ourselves on giving back to our community and we work with a number of influential charities. We are extremely proud of our philanthropic contribution and are delighted we have been in a position to support a range of different charities in a few ways.


Firstly, we have been able to donate our time. As a team, we have spent days out of the office volunteering at Oz Harvest and The Guide Dogs NSW to name a few, along with attending the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation Annual Gala for the last two years. We have found this to be a fantastic way for the team to work together outside of the usual work setting, and to allow us to really connect with the importance of giving back.


Secondly, when we meet target, Lotus makes a quarterly financial contribution to a charity of our consultants’ choosing. So far, our team have chosen charities that mean something personally to them including the Australian Cancer Research Foundation, the Cat Protection Society and Stepping Stone House. This Easter, we also chose to donate to the wonderful Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation instead of delivering Easter goodies to our clients and candidates.


Given the importance that we place on our work with charities, we have decided to focus our giving to one charity in particular, Oz Harvest. When we spent the day on site with Oz Harvest, we were blown away by how well they are run, how passionate their volunteers are and by how many people they reach with the work that they do. Originally set up to minimise food wastage and distribute it to those in need, the organisation has grown and expanded and does some really fantastic work with nutrition and food wastage around Australia. Since deciding to partner with Oz Harvest, the Lotus team have been down on site to partake in cooking leftover food from Woolworths that was then delivered around inner Sydney, we have hosted our own bake sale in support of the organisation and more recently, our senior consultant, Sara Cornwall, delivered a resume writing workshop to a group of young adults who are participating in OzHarvest’s nourish program – a pathway to employment for vulnerable youth.



We are extremely proud of this partnership and I encourage everyone to read more on the wonderful work that they do here.

You may also like...

March 5, 2026
A conversation with Hayley Martin, Executive Search Practice Lead at Lotus People As Lotus People formally launches its Executive Search practice, we sat down with Hayley Martin to talk about what separates a great senior hire from a costly one, what mid-market businesses consistently get wrong, and why she chose to build this here . 
March 5, 2026
A natural next step for Lotus People - Lotus Executive Search , an organic evolution of work we've been doing for years, now delivered with the rigour, discretion, and partnership it deserves.  Leading this practice is Hayley Martin who brings over 20 years of executive search experience, including deep expertise in the not-for-profit sector, membership organisations, and corporate leadership appointments
By Michelle Barrett February 25, 2026
In the ever-evolving world of talent acquisition, reference checks remain a standard practice. However, I've recently asked my network a question: Is bringing two candidates to the reference check stage a fair and ethical practice? The overwhelming consensus from HR professionals, recruiters, and hiring managers is a resounding no . While companies might justify this approach to ensure they make the best hiring decision, the practice has significant drawbacks. The Candidate’s Perspective: False Hope and Strained Relationships For candidates, reference checks often represent the final hurdle before an offer. Being asked to provide references is a hopeful moment—only to discover later that they were simply a “backup” candidate. This leads to: False hope : The process feels misleading if references are strong, but the candidate still doesn’t secure the role due to a small deciding factor. Professional risk : Candidates hesitate to repeatedly ask the same referees for endorsements, fearing it may strain professional relationships or cast doubt on their credibility. Frustration and wasted time : Candidates invest considerable effort in securing references, only to walk away empty-handed. The Referee’s Burden: A Drain on Time and Goodwill Reference checks aren’t just a candidate inconvenience; they also affect referees—often senior professionals taking time out of their busy schedules. Many commenters noted: Referees have limited patience: If a former manager is repeatedly asked for references for the same person without a job offer, they may be reluctant to vouch for them in the future. - A one-sided burden : The hiring company benefits from this additional insight, but referees get little in return other than expecting a favour. The Hiring Manager’s Responsibility: Why This Practice Undermines Decision-Making Some employers argue that reference checks help finalise a tough decision between two equally qualified candidates. However, many experts push back against this rationale: Hiring decisions should be based on direct assessment, not external opinion : As one commenter put it, “You should never put the decision of who best to hire in the hands of someone you don’t know and doesn’t work for your business.” Reference checks are not selection tools : Traditionally, references are a due diligence step , not a deciding factor between multiple candidates. It’s an outdated practice : With many companies now limiting references to basic employment verification, the value of this process is already diminished. So, What’s the Alternative? If reference checks shouldn’t be used to choose between candidates, how should they be utilised?
More Posts