Legal Mags-Employment Question

[Garth Bimble]

I work in a field that is in the process of undergoing a significant, government-mandated change. (it isn't barrista or fry-cook) As a result, my employer will provide me with training at their expense. I received an e-mail from them today telling me that in order to start the training, I would need to sign a waiver stating that if I terminated my employment with them prior to October 1, 2016 then I would need to reimburse them for the training costs, which they say would be $7300.00.

I can understand why they're doing this. Training is expensive (not sure it's this expensive, but still) and there is a shortage of people out there who do what I do. The upcoming changes are only going to make this worse and I'm sure they're concerned that people will be jumping ship after they've been trained for the highest bidder when things start to get hairy.

FWIW, this is a one-way deal...the employer can terminate me at any time during the 3 year period.

I'm a little uncomfortable signing something like this but I have a feeling these kind of "arrangements" are going to be commonplace in my profession for a few years.

If anybody has any advice or experience with this sort of thing, feel free to share.

Thx.

[GeezerSteve]

I just looked at this issue a few weeks ago. I found this case: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...9/09-16167.pdf

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. Do not rely on it. I am not your attorney and will never be your attorney.

[hawkgt]

FWIW, this is a one-way deal...the employer can terminate me at any time during the 3 year period.



Thx.

???? so if they fire you or lay you off you have to re-pay??? I would not sign that.........

I have signed contracts such as this for training / relocation but only had to re-pay if I bailed in the time frame. If they fired me or lay off then no re-pay. I actually considered it a bonus... company paid to move me to CO and figured it was a guaranteed job for the time frame. Still working for them.....

[jfost]

are they pro-rating the costs so that you "earn" it away over the 3 years, or does it say you are liable for the full amount right up to that 10/1/2016 date?

I'd think any potential new employer would buy it out if need be, but sucks to lose potential cash on some dumb training, unless it is useful training that will improve your career forever.

[AdironRider]

Why exactly do you feel you need to not disclose your profession. That actually seems kinda beneficial to get solid advice.

Do they make you sign a non-compete as part of your employment currently? I would think that would be the more standard way to prevent employees from bailing to the highest bidder.

In almost all the situations Ive been in or facilitated, the payback was only for education or training that wasn't mandated but offered as a benefit to the employee type deal. Ala Im in management and want an MBA, employer pays for it, but didn't mandate it, then if I bounced I would have to pay the tuition back.

Also Id be asking questions as usually once tuition goes above 5250 a year it ends up being taxable income. Might want to hammer out that detail with them before signing.

[Hugh Conway]

Most such agreement's are "one sided" in that unless you get terminated for cause you don't owe them anything....

[irul&ublo]

I just looked at this issue a few weeks ago. I found this case: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...9/09-16167.pdf

Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. Do not rely on it. I am not your attorney and will never be your attorney.

Especially since its a 9th Cir case...

[Garth Bimble]

???? so if they fire you or lay you off you have to re-pay??? I would not sign that.........

I have signed contracts such as this for training / relocation but only had to re-pay if I bailed in the time frame. If they fired me or lay off then no re-pay. I actually considered it a bonus... company paid to move me to CO and figured it was a guaranteed job for the time frame. Still working for them.....

I don't have to pay if they decide to terminate.

FWIW, I like my employer and love the job, so thats not an issue, right now anyway.

[Garth Bimble]

Why exactly do you feel you need to not disclose your profession. That actually seems kinda beneficial to get solid advice.

Do they make you sign a non-compete as part of your employment currently? I would think that would be the more standard way to prevent employees from bailing to the highest bidder.

In almost all the situations Ive been in or facilitated, the payback was only for education or training that wasn't mandated but offered as a benefit to the employee type deal. Ala Im in management and want an MBA, employer pays for it, but didn't mandate it, then if I bounced I would have to pay the tuition back.

Also Id be asking questions as usually once tuition goes above 5250 a year it ends up being taxable income. Might want to hammer out that detail with them before signing.

FWIW, I'm in health care, on the revenue cycle side. No non-compete was signed. There is nothing that mandates this training, but in order for me to do my job after 10/1/14 I'm going to need it, or some form thereof.

I'll check on income issue...thanks!

[Hutch]

Especially since its a 9th Cir case...

... following a 7th Cir opinion by Judge Easterbrook... https://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov...7.01-4118.html

It's a loan that you don't have to pay back unless you stay. It's probably enforceable. Probably negotiable if they value your continued employment enough.

[hutash]

Except were effected by state and federal law, the rest is negotiable. Maybe have it prorated if not already, negotiate a lower buy out, negotiate with new employer to pay it off, et cetera.

Big Steve Disclaimer: This is not legal advice. Do not rely on it. I am not your attorney and will never be your attorney, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express.

[I Am Mr. Ed]

In addition to the FLSA, there may be state laws which could affect the employer's ability to require repayment

[mobygrape]

maybe talk to some peers in the industry at other firms? Are they getting the same thing on their end? Does not really change the situation if you're not ready to leave, but it might be nice to know everyone's in the same boat, no matter who they work for.

[Jethro]

My wife had to sign a deal like that with here first employer after she got her nursing license. She was a new nurse, and the hospital she worked at spent a lot of time and money training her. She had a two year commitment or she would owe money. I am not sure if the amount owed would go down as the work commitment was worked off, or if at some point she bailed she would owe the whole thing.

[Garth Bimble]

maybe talk to some peers in the industry at other firms? Are they getting the same thing on their end? Does not really change the situation if you're not ready to leave, but it might be nice to know everyone's in the same boat, no matter who they work for.

Working on this...thanks.

[RootSkier]

I'd think any potential new employer would buy it out if need be

........

[Hugh Conway]

........

PapaJohn's doesn't by corporate policy and Garth Bimble the special is a Domino's lifer.

[4matic]

While slightly different my company had training agreements that if we paid for training and the employee quit they had to pay it back. Difference was employee requested the training. One guy signed the form for one training class but didn't for his next one and then quit. The company said the agreement was assumed for all training, demanded payment, and got it. The company has never lost one of these judgements.

Do you have the stomach and money to fight a team of corporate lawyers if you quit? If you do leave for another job, tell the new employer to pay for the training.

[Garth Bimble]

PapaJohn's doesn't by corporate policy and Garth Bimble the special is a Domino's lifer.

Learning how to fold pizza boxes is a lifelong process...at least that's what you told me during training Hugh.

While slightly different my company had training agreements that if we paid for training and the employee quit they had to pay it back. Difference was employee requested the training. One guy signed the form for one training class but didn't for his next one and then quit. The company said the agreement was assumed for all training, demanded payment, and got it. The company has never lost one of these judgements.

Do you have the stomach and money to fight a team of corporate lawyers if you quit? If you do leave for another job, tell the new employer to pay for the training.

One of the questions being asked in my particular situation is that since our training is mandatory does that make a difference? As I've said before I'm not thinking about leaving and I'm not overly concerned about this. I wasn't planning on leaving for awhile anyway and since my position allows me to work remotely I've got lots of flexibility. I'm more curious than anything. I've got some feelers out to some others who work for other facilities in the same field...will be interesting to hear what they say. If these "agreements" are going to be commonplace then my guess is so will buyouts.