In some cases, employers try to recover the cost of “workplace” training, which is much more difficult for them to quantify. It has been reported that some large companies, such as Capita and FDM, bring some employees through training programs that cost very little, but the company requires people to leave their jobs after the end of the course to pay back much larger sums, allegedly up to $18,500. On the face of it, it would be a punitive clause and also a commercial restriction and therefore illegal and unenforceable. We understand that there is a legal challenge to these types of clauses. Starting in April 2020, all employers will be required to include the details of the worker`s training in their Section 1 accounts as part of the correct work plan, and this should include, if any, all amounts they will have to repay. As a result, employment contracts should include a clause outlining all reimbursements covering training costs. For refunds to be legal and not considered a punitive clause, they must be fair and reasonable and accurately represent the value obtained by the employer. In some cases, the fees you want to recover from the employee will be higher than their last salary, so what can you do? If you feel that the training costs will be significant, it may be worth asking the employee to sign a separate agreement before he or she teaches the course. The agreement may contain a folly that if their last payment does not cover the sums due, you reserve the right to recover the sums by a debt. While repayment agreements do not restrict the freedom of former workers in the same way as traditional restrictive agreements, they may nevertheless discourage the migration of workers to new, more promising positions and may perhaps delay the development of competitive capacities of potential new employers. … Employers can recoup the money they invested in training an employee (for example.
B send the employee to training sessions or workshops) if the worker decides to leave immediately after receiving training. Having a well-trained workforce is in the interest of all – employers, workers, and for the good of the economy as a whole. Employers have long invested significant amounts of money in training their workforce, but as the cost of training increases and workers tend to relocate more often than in the past, many employers are reluctant to invest large sums in training workers, who then move around and can take advantage of the skills acquired by the worker. One way to reduce the risk of workers leaving school shortly after leaving or, at the very least, reducing the financial cost of leaving is to require the employee to reimburse some or all of the training costs to the employer. Not only would your company not be able to benefit from paid training in the short term, but it could also, in the end, pay again for the same training if it makes a replacement. Factor in the lower costs inherent in any recruitment process and you can see how this could possibly leave a small business in a really difficult position. Here, too, it is above all a question of putting this balance in order. The training agreement model provided above will do the job in most cases – but sometimes you need more specialized assistance. If you need help developing a training contract, contact us with our human resources consultant. It is perhaps not surprising that the employer is required to reduce potential losses on the cost of training.