Training Contracts 2

[WhiteCloud]

The first Training Contract thread got me thinking........Has anyone known a pilot who signed a training contract then left the company early and then actually paid the company?

 

[Smoking Man]

Yes.

 

[acapoisonpill]

Actually paid, NO!
Sued and lost yes!
I left Mountain Air Cargo after 9 months of a 12 month contract.
I didn't hear anything for over a year. Then one day, I am served in my home state. I am being sued in Charlotte, NC. I call the NC bar association and retain a lawyer($1000). He advises me that I will most likely lose. I am then invited to mandatory non-binding arbitration. Prior to the hearing, we come to an agreement with MAC counsel for approx. 50% of the amount. The MAC CFO refuses any offer and wants the full amount. We refuse. We then argue both sides in front of the arbitrator. We win! But, did I mention non-binding? They next ask the judge for a summary judgement to accept the contract on it's face. The judge issues a sumary judgement in MAC favor. Now I am waiting for them to come to my state. Again, it's been over a year, and no word. The judgement is on my credit report, but I bought my house months before the judgement was entered. I'm still fighting the good fight, but it ain't looking good for the home team.

 

[jarhead]

Let me see if I have this right. You expect your employer, who you signed a contract with, to be held to the terms of the contract. You, however, feel that you should be allowed to just "skip" on it. I guess fraud is ok, if it's not perpetrated on you. Have I got it right?

 

[English]

Yes, I know a pilot that made good on a training contract.

 

[acapoisonpill]

Let me see if I have this right. You expect your employer, who you signed a contract with, to be held to the terms of the contract. You, however, feel that you should be allowed to just "skip" on it. I guess fraud is ok, if it's not perpetrated on you. Have I got it right?

I would argue, and did successfully to the arbitrator, that MAC failed to live up to their end of the bargain. For various reasons, which I will not explain to your open mind, I felt perfectly justified in leaving MAC prior to the end of the contract. I only wish the judge would have taken the time to hear my case. Then I would feel better about his decision.

Fraud?!?!? Puhleeeez!

 

[jarhead]

WHY DID YOUR OWN LAWYER SAY YOU WOULD MOST CERTAINLY LOSE IN COURT?

 

[jarhead]

Hey Flip

It's my business, because this is a public discusion forum. I went by the information provided. The poster implied that he/she could not win in court, by his/her own lawyer. If you took time to notice, I asked a straight forward question. What's your problem?

And yup, I'm a pilot's "daddy", and pleased to be so. You got some sort of problem with that....A-Hole?

 

[taloft]

Sorry to hear about your position acap.

 

[WhiteCloud]

Thought I'd answer the PM's here. I started this thread simply out of curiosity and not to make a statement of any kind. A statement I would make is that no one should sign or agree to anything they aren't willing to live up to.

 

[canadflyau]

Someone with law experience will post I am sure .. but what I have heard is IN MOST STATES a contract that is one sided, not negotiable, and a condition of employment are not enforceable in MOST STATE COURTS.

During training we were presented our contracts by the HR person and told to fill our name in the blank on page one, put the Equipment type in, and sign the last page. That process would be very hard to be binding. No initials on each section or page.. For many of us the wrong equipment is put in, so the contract is based on receiving training in an AC we didn't get trained in. When you read it, it comes across as a scare tactic first and foremost. While I have choosen not to leave before it was up, despite other offers, many have. With their resignation letter they supplied a letter from an attorney for the company to contact if they wanted to persue the training contract remedies.

The one thing outside of money damages the employer may seek would be the fact that the PRIA does allow future employers to contact past employers about your training and performance. There is a box to check either: -would rehire -would not rehire.. and leaving before the terms of the training contract will surely get the "would not rehire" box checked and might catch attention from your prospective employeer.

Just play it safe and honor it, or don't accept employment where there is a training contract. Maybe when nobody wants to work there, employers will make the workplace somewhere that people don't want to bail within 1-2yrs

 

[Jack Schitt]

but what I have heard is IN MOST STATES a contract that is one sided, not negotiable, and a condition of employment are not enforceable in MOST STATE COURTS.

It's not a training contract, it is an EMPLOYMENT contract. If you agree to the terms of employment then you are responsible for violating the terms of said contract. It is not one sided. You receive employment (i.e. paycheck) in return for your word. Are you aware that every CEO and top level executive in this country signs an employment contract? It definitely is not illegal. Your only hope is that they don't spend the time and money to sue you in court. If they sue, you will lose.

 

[Foobar]

The issue is negotiability. If I quit my job, accept a new one and on the first day my employer says sign this contract or you can’t work here, then you have a non-negotiable contract. It’s not likely to be enforced. Most contract falls into that category and are not likely to be enforceable. And besides, even if it were enforced via a civil suit they can’t take you to jail for not paying. Your credit report may be attacked, but that’s about it. I suppose a lean so you can’t sell your house.

In any case, I would NOT sign on to a place with a training contract. It’s a GIANT RED FLAG which reads, “This job sucks, we treat people like crap, people keep quitting and this is our solution”

Hmmm, I wonder if Mesa has a contract, probably, how about comair where people want to work, probably not.

 

[pilotyip]

Contracts needed

We have a training contract at USA Jet, 18K 24 months prorated the second 12 months, I hate it and wish we did not have it, but due to the behavior of some of our previous new hires, we put one in place. We had pilots who had a job somewhere else with another company, the other company told him to get trained at USA Jet and we will hire you, he quit the instant the sim was shut down after his PC ride. Only cost us about 15K, not counting pilot salary while in training. We work in a terrible business on-demand air freight, it sucks, but all on-demand air cargo sucks, so we want to scare new hires away with the contract, if you really don't want to work do not sign the contract , it seems to be working. It is not the big red flag mentioned above, we have 82 pilots only 17 are on contract, so the other 65 pilots must think working here is ok. We have only had one pilot quit in the last year, and he went to Ford Motor Company's flight dept, a great career move until he was laid off last month. On the plus side it includes the best training in our sector of the busniess, plus type ratings in both the DA-20 and DC-9 if you hang around long enought to bid the seat. No one has beat our contract and some have spend a ton of money trying to do it. Everyone who left during their contract made arrangemetns to pay it off. There is no surprise everyone is given a copy of the contract when they interview. All the December DA-20 F/O new hires have no problem with the contract and they start at 33K per year, that is about 17K per year above where you would start at places without a contract, you could pay the contract off in one year with the extra pay. The class has, average Time 4000TT, 2500 MEL, 1000 PIC all have some tubine time, three have turbine PIC. Back grounds 1 - 135 charter CE-550, 1- US Army C-12 driver, 1 DA-20 F/O from 135 on-demand, 1- Part 121 lay off, DHC-8 driver and 2 USAF pilots one C-9 and one C-27. They all are exteremly well qualified and had no trouble with the contract. Do not limit your options just because of the training contract, go where you get the experience to enhance your resume.
Report this post to a moderator

 

[Jack Schitt]

The issue is negotiability. If I quit my job, accept a new one and on the first day my employer says sign this contract or you can’t work here, then you have a non-negotiable contract.

Why can't you negotiate when he slaps the contract down in front of you? Is he holding a gun to your head? You have the option to take it or leave it. You'd have to prove to a judge that you were illegally coerced into signing the contract.

I agree that your scenario is unfair, but it is not illegal.

 

[Foobar]

Its not that you are forced to sign the contract, it’s that it is non-negotiable. If you were offered the job and were told at the time there was a contract then it’s negotiable. You can say, no thank-you, I’ll stay where I am. To wait until after an employee has resigned a current position, and is now without pay or health insurance, to bring out the contract renders it non-negotiable. You can’t refuse to sign it; you are stuck with no job. That’s the issue.

 

[Thedude]

I am not absolutley sure of the legal term but in laymans that would be known as signing a contract under undue-duress and would probably be thrown out of court.

 

[Jack Schitt]

Yes, you can refuse to sign it. It's your choice to sign or not. If you agree with the terms you sign, if you don't agree with the terms you don't sign. Simple as that. All this undue-duress stuff is a bunch of b.s. Prove it to the judge. You two are going for the sympathy vote and I'm saying it'll be a tough sell in court. This is not the only job in the country. You can always go to Wal-Mart or Home Depot to find employment. No one is stopping you from working just because you want this job but you don't want to sign an agreement. I think you're confusing the word unfair with illegal. Life isn't always fair.

 

[Foobar]

http://globeandmail.workopolis.com/servlet/Content/legspeak/20031022/ls20031022?section=legspeak

"Quite often, employers spend a great deal of time, human resources and money drafting and crafting an employment agreement that contains all the right phrases and clauses, only to learn later that the court will not enforce the agreement, most particularly because of the manner in which it was entered upon"

"Present the agreement as part of or along with the offer of employment - timing is everything.... Since consideration, or the giving of something of value to the other party, is critical to creating an enforceable contract, it is essential that the employer wishing to provide a prospective employee with a written bargain, do so as part of the offer that is being extended of employment. That will maximize the opportunity at a later date to argue that the employee was free to accept those terms or walk away from the deal. The employee who chooses to accept those terms will have received "legal consideration", in the sense that he or she received the offer of employment, a part of which were the terms and conditions set out in writing; "

As I was saying, its about negotiability. If I have quit my job and accepted a new one and I am presented with an employment contract the first day it’s non-negotiable. Yes it is possible to refuse to sign it, but doing so would mean you would get no pay check, you’d have no health insurance and you’d probably miss your house and car payments. Thus a judge would likely say the contract was non-negotiable as the company put you in a position where you could not refuse to sign it. This is different than a contract presented with an offer. How often do you guys get the contract and the offer at the same time? I’m betting not often at all. If that’s the case you have a largely unenforceable contract. Of course it varies from state to state as contract law is primarily a state matter, not a federal one.

 

[jarhead]

If I am not mistaken, The U.C.C. (Uniform Commercial Code), is valid in 49 of the 50 states, with Louisiana being the only state not a signatory to the U.C.C. and they have their own unique code, which is similar in most respects. With so many contracts that cross state lines, it was determined to be necessary to have a common set of "rules" that could be enforced across state lines. Most breach of contract suits that go to court, will have the attorneys referring to articles in the U.C.C. to make their case for their respective parties.

 

[Jack Schitt]

OK Foobar, you proved me wrong. It is good to know, however, that if the company is open and honest about a training contract then you will be held responsible for violating the contract.

Can we agree that it's not worth spending $20k in legal fees in order to skip out on a $15k training contract?