Employment contract help

daveyj27 · 6 Mar 2006 at 10:58

Morning all, I’m hoping somebody can help me to draft an employment contract.
Here’s some background. One of our workers, Barry, is a trainee plumber for the company and the impression has been made to him in the past that his education would be paid for by the company (he is NOT enrolled on any courses yet though). Now it seems that the owner doesn’t want to pay for the lad to go to college, in case he “runs off and leaves as soon as he is qualified”. It’s a fair point I suppose, although I do feel that Barry has been led down the garden path somewhat.
Anyway, I want to convince the owner that some form of contract could be employed, one which ties Barry to the company for a period of time upon completion of the course (1 year maybe?). I believe that the contract should allow Barry to leave the company in that duration, but he would then have to repay the costs of the education.

Does anyone have any idea of the legalities of what I’m proposing? Also, please feel free to draft something that would be better suited to the situation.

I’m really trying to get this lad’s education paid for by the company, as he is a solid worker and seriously deserves it. Thanks in advance.

Borris · 6 Mar 2006 at 11:05

I would have a proper solicitor draft a contract - otherwise you might end up in all sorts of mess.

A few things come to mind - specifically regarding penalty clauses and potential enforceability issues, and the fact that he might end up as an indentured servant.

Rotty · 6 Mar 2006 at 11:08

It is legal and quite common practice

daveyj27 · 6 Mar 2006 at 11:20

Borris said:
I would have a proper solicitor draft a contract - otherwise you might end up in all sorts of mess.

I know, and definately agree.

The company has it's own lawyer and he will knock together any final contract i'm sure, but I need to be able to nullify the paranioa of the owner before it even gets that far. As far as he's concerned right at this moment it's a no go, he won't put the kid through college. I need to convince him that he wont lose out in the long run (the guy is the worst kind of boss, trust me).

Borris · 6 Mar 2006 at 11:23

It sounds like the owner is stuck in the 50's.

As Rotty pointed out, it's fairly common practice.

Perhaps you could hoodwink the boss into believing that Barry actually would be an indentured servant, tied to the company for life, signed for in the blood of innocents.

LordSplodge · 6 Mar 2006 at 11:54

Is it legal? Thankfully where I work I don't have that on my contract and as soon as my MCSE and CCNA are complet it's Newjobsville and Newsalaryville destination for me...

Company loyalty? Not when you have been shafted as much as I have!!!

Cookie-Monster · 6 Mar 2006 at 12:06

My study contract goes to the tune of leave within 12 months of completion of study pay back 100% leave between 12-24 mths, pay back 50% of study costs.

stoofa · 6 Mar 2006 at 12:45

LordSplodge said:
Is it legal? Thankfully where I work I don't have that on my contract and as soon as my MCSE and CCNA are complet it's Newjobsville and Newsalaryville destination for me...

Company loyalty? Not when you have been shafted as much as I have!!!

Of course it's legal.
In fact any company that would pay for courses for their staff and not tie them to the company for any period of time afterwards need their heads looking at.
Spend thousands on educating somebody and then watch them leave a month later to go to a new job - not exactly money well spent is it?

I'm personally more than happy in my work so although I'm tied in after expensive courses I wouldn't actually think about leaving anyway.

Visage · 6 Mar 2006 at 13:25

stoofa said:
In fact any company that would pay for courses for their staff and not tie them to the company for any period of time afterwards need their heads looking at.
Spend thousands on educating somebody and then watch them leave a month later to go to a new job - not exactly money well spent is it?

I disagree.

That sort of clause in an employment contract would me, from my POV, that i wouldnt touch the company with a bargepole.

Its all very well saying what you've said, but if it means that the best applicants turn you down before even entering employment then you're stuffed. Education is just as part of a job as the tools you use day-to-day. If my employee wanted me to suddenly start working with a new programming language, for example, i'd expect them to cough up for training/books etc. If i then left 6 months later i'd be damned if i was expected to pay back money that they spent on the basic materials for me to do my job.

Origin · 6 Mar 2006 at 13:59

I had exactly this at my job, all they did was give me two copies of the same "contract". All it said was my company agree to pay x amount for training, but I must stay for 1 year after completion or pay back pro-rata the amount of the courses I have been on.

It is very common practice, don't think you need to involve a solicitor at all as long as both parties agree and a copy is kept by both parties.

daveyj27 · 6 Mar 2006 at 15:07

Visage said:
That sort of clause in an employment contract would me, from my POV, that i wouldnt touch the company with a bargepole.

I'm trying to use this clause as a means to an end though, that end being to convince this moronic MD that he can safely pay for the boy's courses.
The most annoying (and slimy) thing about all this is that Barry is technically employed as a labourer (earning barely above minimum wage). About 14 months ago they asked him if he'd be interested in being trained up as a plumber, and they would sort all his academic stuff out for him. Well, he has been working as a plumber (but still on the same wage as before) for over a year now but they still hadn't done anything about getting him onto a course, so I got involved this morning to see what the procedures were. That's when our site Manager told me that the owner has said that he won't pay up.
So basically they've got the lad to do the work of a plumber, but for a little over minimum wage, on the false pretence that they would pay for his education. In my opinion, it stinks, and that's why I want to help as much as I can.

chimaera · 6 Mar 2006 at 15:08

Visage said:
I disagree.

That sort of clause in an employment contract would me, from my POV, that i wouldnt touch the company with a bargepole.

Its all very well saying what you've said, but if it means that the best applicants turn you down before even entering employment then you're stuffed. Education is just as part of a job as the tools you use day-to-day. If my employee wanted me to suddenly start working with a new programming language, for example, i'd expect them to cough up for training/books etc. If i then left 6 months later i'd be damned if i was expected to pay back money that they spent on the basic materials for me to do my job.

Sums up public sector employment, a lot of people work there to gain extra skills and training, then walk out once they've got it.

Not exactly a bad deal for the employer though, they manage to hold onto a certain percentage of people and the fact that they are quite free with their training budget means its a semi desirable place to work.

Visage · 6 Mar 2006 at 16:12

daveyj27 said:
I'm trying to use this clause as a means to an end though, that end being to convince this moronic MD that he can safely pay for the boy's courses.
The most annoying (and slimy) thing about all this is that Barry is technically employed as a labourer (earning barely above minimum wage). About 14 months ago they asked him if he'd be interested in being trained up as a plumber, and they would sort all his academic stuff out for him. Well, he has been working as a plumber (but still on the same wage as before) for over a year now but they still hadn't done anything about getting him onto a course, so I got involved this morning to see what the procedures were. That's when our site Manager told me that the owner has said that he won't pay up.
So basically they've got the lad to do the work of a plumber, but for a little over minimum wage, on the false pretence that they would pay for his education. In my opinion, it stinks, and that's why I want to help as much as I can.

Sorry - i didnt mean to suggest that it was bad idea in your case - as long as the employee and employer (yourself) know that its a measn to an end to get around your boss then its obviously fine.

I was talking about the general case of employers demanding that people stay as a result of provifing training.

wolvotim · 6 Mar 2006 at 17:08

daveyj27 said:
So basically they've got the lad to do the work of a plumber, but for a little over minimum wage, on the false pretence that they would pay for his education. In my opinion, it stinks, and that's why I want to help as much as I can.

Think you’ve hit the nail on the head there. The boss is probably more worried about losing out on some cheap labour rather that paying for a collage course. He’d have to probably have to pay double the wage if the lad was qualified.

Same thing happened to me and 3 other lads at a company I worked for. I was there for 5 years did my collage then he wouldn’t pay up for my final exam (which cost about 3 grand) so I could become “approved” by the industries governing body.

He was just getting one qualified guy to go round testing and commissioning jobs that we’d done, which is all nice and legal.

Spoze it makes good business sense really but it wasn’t very nice for me and the other 3 lads. Needles to say I told him where to shove his job one morning and walked out. I immediately got snapped up by another company and received the national rate which was more than double that what I was on.

Bear · 6 Mar 2006 at 17:39

Visage said:
I was talking about the general case of employers demanding that people stay as a result of provifing training.

So if you can do your job proficiently, then what incentive would there be for an employer to pay for your further development ?? Why would any employer want to invest in your development outside of their needs if you then leave when you have obtained your desired qualifications ??

The solution to it all is pay for the extra education and training yourself, that way you arent tied in to anything at all. If you want the free money, then you might be tied into the investment the company has made for you. Simple really.

VIRII · 6 Mar 2006 at 18:21

The payback contract is common as many others have said but another point is that the company can claim back a lot of the fees and lost time, they can get various training grants etc depending on the age and status of Barry.

At the end of the day the firm won't end up out of pocket but they might end up paying Barry higher wages 2 years down the road.

daveyj27 · 6 Mar 2006 at 22:49

Thanks for the replies guys, I appreciate it.