Short course training and bonding - see this much?

[xgnr]

Jesus H.

First paid training course I have done in 4 years and they want to bond me for 12 months. Fair enough I spose but 12 months seems a bit steep esp. as this is training that will generate revenue immediately.

Bit that concerns me is the "Opportunity Cost" which seems a wide open statement that could mean some big numbers. (my charge out rate is $185/hr)

Any employment lawyers see this sort of thing much?

Training
Where the Employer has paid for or borne the cost of training to
enable the Employee to upskill and where the Employee resigns within 6
months of taking such training course (s), the Employee shall refund to the
Employer the full cost of training or the equivalent amount in lost revenue
(opportunity cost). For every month of service beyond 6 months, 1/6 of the
total cost will be deemed to have been paid by the Employee to the
Employer. The total cost of training and opportunity cost will have been
deemed fully paid when the Employee has completed12 months of service
from date of training.

Cheers

Stu

[Ixion]

I've never seen a clause like that. I would think the training cost would have to be HUGE (like high 5 figures a least) to justify something like that. And the "opportunity cost" thing seems totally unfair .

I wouldn't sign that.

[xgnr]

I've never seen a clause like that. I would think the training cost would have to be HUGE (like high 5 figures a least) to justify something like that. And the "opportunity cost" thing seems totally unfair .

I wouldn't sign that.

Course is an "on line" type which will be done primarily in my own time. Cost for course exams etc is $2k.

[Ixion]

Is the clause a "standard" one, or is it specifically to apply to this case?

Do you belong to he union?

And is the skill portable ? ie does it give you anything saleable outside the present company?

[mashman]

I had to sign one to get into NZ. Not unfair i thought as they were sponsoring my application etc... but I agree with Ix, i wouldn't sign that piece of paer under those conditions.

Talk $$$ with them, after all they're expecting you to undertake the course in your own time, as well as signing 12 months of your life away. If you're the man for the job, ask for a bonus to be paid on completion of the 12 months (you know what your take home is and how much they're making of your time and effort).

Good luck...

[CookMySock]

No employer is going to put thousands into an employee for them to do as they choose on a whim.

Steve

[Usarka]

It's not a new thing to expect a return of service for a substantial training outlay.

But the opportunity sounds a tad scary - imagine if the company loses a $100,000 missed sale that gets blamed on you for not completing xxxxx on time.

[marty]

I work in a bond-based industry. For $2k, I'd be considering paying for it myself. I am 6 months thru a 12 month bond of $12000, (this is for 2 months training in total, and the bond period started at the start of the 2 months - I am on full pay during this training) reducing at $1000/month, although I didn't actually sign anything but it's a small industry.

I know pilots that have had a $30k/3 year bond who have broken it after 2 1/2 years, then the bond company has prevented them from obtaining type ratings in leased sims until they paid the full amount.

The 'opportunity cost' clause is total bullshit for a $2k course. Tell them to get lost. If it's THAT valuable, and especially as you are doing it in your own time, offer to pay for it yourself - see what they say about that. Even if you paid for it on a credit card, it's a repayment of $180/month over what would be a self imposed 'bond period'. Bloody hell, that's not even 1 hour's chargeout!

[Mully]

I've got one - and it's much longer period than that. It is also about $12K

IMO, try to find a way to pay for it yourself. That way you "own" the knowledge and can do what you want with it. A lot can turn to custard in 12 months.

[marty]

If it goes the other way, and you are made redundant, would they be prepared to take an'opportunity cost' claim from you?

[imdying]

In my profession I'd laugh at my employer. But more than that, I don't do training unless the dangle a bit of bait and pay for the whole lot, to be done on their time.

Tell em they're crazy.

If they don't want you to leave, they should be providing a happy challenging correctly renumerated work place, not trying to contract you into staying... it's logical in'it?

[xgnr]

Is the clause a "standard" one, or is it specifically to apply to this case?

Do you belong to he union?

And is the skill portable ? ie does it give you anything saleable outside the present company?

Apparently this is now in the standard employment contract and signing this then amends mine in line with all new contracts in this regard. (they also have added in that the company's Kiwisave contrib will be paid by the employee :eek5: which gives you a flavour for the place)

Havn't belonged to a union since they were compulsory

Yes the course will have value if I moved on so in that regard I dont have a problem with the intent just a bit concerned about the open wording that could be painful if a dispute arose.

[marty]

What is the industry?

[xgnr]

In my profession I'd laugh at my employer. But more than that, I don't do training unless the dangle a bit of bait and pay for the whole lot, to be done on their time.

Tell em they're crazy.

If they don't want you to leave, they should be providing a happy challenging correctly renumerated work place, not trying to contract you into staying... it's logical in'it?

Yep, nice to have choices although ours is pretty specialised work hence the opportunities to move on and do the same thing are limited in NZ so I guess they can wave the big stick about these things.

[Ixion]

.. (they also have added in that the company's Kiwisave contrib will be paid by the employee :eek5: which gives you a flavour for the place)

...

Isn't that illegal?

EDIT: No, I see it's not. Ratbag, though

[marty]

Well I guess there's 2 choices - bend over, or take control. I know what I'd be doing.

And I'm in a specialised field with a small group of like-qualified people - doesn't mean you can/should be shafted.

[ynot slow]

Hell when I was with an ex employer we also had a funeral side of the business,part of that was block courses which were about $5000 annually,one guy was there 20years so was ok,another left after a few years,but back now.No bond was asked for.

Personally I used to go to numerous product knowledge courses,some daily and 2 days.Some or most were starting at 5.30pm so we went to them at our cost(no pay),some staff were annoyed,my idea was more product info I gleaned the harder it was to deny a raise if I asked.Was debateable who got the benefit from them,him due to my knowledge and able to pass it on to staff and customers via sales or me with the knowledge of the game.

[SlashWylde]

No employer is going to put thousands into an employee for them to do as they choose on a whim.

Steve

Yes they will...well the foolish ones anyway. I've seen it happen time and time again with training costs and employee relocation packages.

[xgnr]

If it goes the other way, and you are made redundant, would they be prepared to take an'opportunity cost' claim from you?


ummm me thinks not. 30 days notice... thats it.

I guess its being professional and doing that extra mile thing ( I work far longer hours than my 40 hrs) but it seems to be one way nowadays.

At the end of the day if I leave I will just pay up.... when asked, and provided with a reconciliation of what is owed (there systems are so flakey they would never be able to recall what course and what it cost anyway lol).

[Gremlin]

As an employer, it is prudent of them to secure the investment in you, and ensure the ROI.

As an employee, it is also prudent of you to reduce your personal liability, and in this case, its basically open liability. I would be wanting some clarification or additional clauses.

Sure, it can be all sweet and nice now, but if the shit hits the fan, it stops being nice, contracts are referred to and from that wording, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on, other than arguing what is reasonable.