Training Contracts, are they enforceable?

[SpauldingSmails]

No they aren't , does Mcdonalds or City Bus ask their employees to sign a training contract?

Wow there's some relevant advice!

On a more serious note, I bugged out on a training contract not that long ago and used my banked vacation hours to pay it off... company was satisfied, I didn't have to shell out of pocket.

The value of your contract will speak much about the lengths the company will go to recover the training bond. Bear in mind you may not end up in court, but you wouldn't want a black mark on your credit or public records either.

 

[Dodge]

You know you're working for a sleaze operator if they are requiring a training contract. They are telling you upfront that its crap. That should be incentive enough not to sign.

Those that say "don't sign it if you know you're gonna break it" must not have any experience with airline style managements. Airlines don't sign anything unless they know exactly when, where, and how many times they plan on violating the contract in the future.

 

[Mel Sharples]

This was the ALL-TIME LOW for training contract enforcement. I'm still in awe the company had the balls to try and do this. They did end up retracting the request and not pushing it, but honestly... why even do this in the first place?

But if you want to know how far will a company go to try and enforce one of these... All the way to the bottom.

Good stuff.

________________________________________________________

Mesaba bills ex-pilots for training costs

The bankrupt airline is trying to recover training costs from pilots who left before being laid off. The pilots union is outraged.

Liz Fedor, Star Tribune
April 18, 2006

Bankrupt Mesaba Airlines is insisting that first-year pilots, who were earning $21,000 a year, reimburse Mesaba for thousands of dollars in pilot training costs because the pilots left Mesaba shortly before their furlough dates.

An unspecified number of former Mesaba pilots were sent certified letters this month stating they must pay thousands of dollars to Mesaba within 30 days or their pilot-training bills will be turned over to a collection agency.

Tom Wychor, chairman of the Mesaba pilots union, expressed outrage Monday over management's actions. "Financially it's stupid, and morally it's reprehensible," Wychor said in a Star Tribune interview.

In late 2005, many Mesaba pilots were notified that they would be furloughed in January or February as the airline downsized its workforce in bankruptcy. Some of those first-year pilots who were about to lose their jobs at Mesaba found employment with other companies and gave Mesaba two weeks' notice.

But before they began flying for Eagan-based Mesaba, they'd signed training agreements calling for them to remain with the carrier for one year or else they would have to pay back part of their training costs.

Within the past week, union leaders have been contacted by several pilots who got the letters demanding quick repayment. Wychor read from a letter Monday that was sent to a first-year pilot who is ordered to reimburse Mesaba for almost $9,000.
Wychor said that Mesaba management spends about $21,000 per first-year pilot in training costs, and the pilots who received training bills are being directed to pay different amounts on a pro-rated basis. A pilot who flew for the carrier for six months -- and left before the furlough date -- would be billed for more than $10,000 in reimbursement costs.

Wychor, a 17-year Mesaba pilot, said that the payback provision had not been enforced during his tenure with the company. He explained that the language was a safeguard against pilots going through Mesaba's training, flying for the carrier for a few months and then deciding to shift quickly to another airline.

In 2005-06, he said, first-year pilots didn't simply pick up and leave Mesaba -- they resigned because they were about to be furloughed.

Mesaba management has a much different view.

"We are enforcing the provisions of the contract we signed with our pilot employees when they joined the company," Mesaba spokesman Jon Austin said Monday.

Mesaba declined to say how many pilots received the letters. Before Mesaba filed for bankruptcy in October, it had about 850 pilots. Now, the union said, 146 pilots -- the least senior -- are on furlough.
Leaders of the Mesaba branch of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA) expressed strong opposition Monday to management's decision to send training bills to pilots who left the company before their furlough dates. But they also stressed that management has informed them that it "reserves the right" to issue the letters to any pilot who was furloughed but had not completed one year of flying with Mesaba.

"We'd just as soon find a good solution" to this issue, Wychor said. He noted that the repayment topic surfaced in late 2005 and the union discussed it with Ed Davidson, then the vice president of flight operations at Mesaba.

Wychor said that Davidson joined Mesaba in the summer of 2005, and employees were notified in February that Davidson was leaving Mesaba to take an airline job in the United Arab Emirates.

When Davidson was hired by Mesaba, he got a $10,000 signing bonus, Wychor said, yet there is no record of Davidson having to repay it even though he voluntarily left his Mesaba management job in less than a year.

Mesaba's Austin said: "Mr. Davidson's relationship with the company has nothing to do with those contractual obligations between Mesaba and its pilots." Asked directly whether Davidson will have to repay the signing bonus after moving to Dubai, Austin said, "We do not discuss personnel issues as a matter of long-standing policy."

Mesaba is attempting to reduce its labor costs by 19.4 percent and to reach agreements with its unions that last for six years. Today, Mesaba pilot negotiators and management return to the bargaining table, but mediators are being brought in to help jump-start the talks.

 

[Soverytired]

Don't know who you're quoting, ya spaz, but it ain't me.

You also whiffed here... I haven't read it (yet), I haven't signed it, I have nothing to get out of. Three strikes, you're out!

Now return to telling your crashpad roomies about the factual inaccuracies inherent in the pap you are watching on tv, beat yer bishop, and sob mournfully into your pillow.

I didn't realize you had not signed one. I thought it was reasonable to assume that this sort of question is normally asked by those trying to get out of one.


This line of discussion comes up often on FI, and the "quote" is a summation of all of them. The replys range from :

• Yes, pay it, it's enforceable
• No, because you can fake your date and/or name on the agreement
• Yes/no, because I knew a guy who's lawyer said they were/weren't enforceable
• No, because you company "sucks". (not usually a good legal defense)

I think it's a matter of maturity. If you haven't signed one yet, why don't you ask your future employer if you'll have to sign one as a condition of employment? If they say "yes", make your decision then, not try to weasel out of it 6 months later.

They took a chance and made an investment in you by hiring and training you. They deserve to protect their investment, and if you sign a contract, you're acknowledging that fact.

Not anything I'd expect you to understand, of course, as you obviously have the maturity and mentality of a 12 year old adolescent.

"Beat your bishop", indeed.