"Pay back" clauses for train drivers

[ID2425652]

Moderator Note: Posts 1-27 were originally in this thread

Have GBRf mentioned the Learning Agreement? They don't always mention it at Interview. They have quite a few resignations from people they have trained from passenger operators to freight within a 1 year leaving to go to other freight operators after GBRf invested in their training.

And yet GBRf pay more than most other freight operators.

I just can't possibly imagine why people would take a pay cut to leave GBRf.

What would make someone take a pay cut to leave a company? I just can't possibly imagine.

 

[Crazyb]

Have GBRf mentioned the Learning Agreement? They don't always mention it at Interview. They have quite a few resignations from people they have trained from passenger operators to freight within a 1 year leaving to go to other freight operators after GBRf invested in their training.

And yet GBRf pay more than most other freight operators.

I just can't possibly imagine why people would take a pay cut to leave GBRf.

What would make someone take a pay cut to leave a company? I just can't possibly imagine.

It's not all about the money......I was on the freight for over 3 decades, moving to intermodal in 1996 from RFD, but I'm now at a TOC and have been for quite a while now.

Personally GBRF and HH was not for me, I would rather something stable like Intermodal which runs like a TOC really.

Over the years, Ive seen TOC drivers come in, they last a few years then move back to a TOC.....Driving freight is not for every one..Watching freight trains and wishing to drive one, the novelty soon wears off....I'm not a big head, but you've got to be the right person to come into the freight world....It's totally different structure, working on your own, starting at stupid times, freezing your nuts off, especially when TOC drivers have been wrapped up for years, though I'm one now.

I'm not going to knock GB, but as with HH and DB your always going to be working hard, and be messed around, also having to bend over backwards.

There have also been a number of GB drivers that have came to Intermodal, which was a big drop in pay. People choices at the end of the day.

I always say....Do your home work, look at rosters and speak to the LDC reps at the depot.

 

[Train_manager]

Have GBRf mentioned the Learning Agreement? They don't always mention it at Interview. They have quite a few resignations from people they have trained from passenger operators to freight within a 1 year leaving to go to other freight operators after GBRf invested in their training.

And yet GBRf pay more than most other freight operators.

I just can't possibly imagine why people would take a pay cut to leave GBRf.

What would make someone take a pay cut to leave a company? I just can't possibly imagine.

Gbrf current salary £66.3k for 34.5 hour week.

LA contract. 64k for 5 years for train mangers.

And 38k for 5 years for rail operators.

They WILL and DO come after you.

 

[357]

Has anyone ever posted or confirmed here that THEY personally had been chased and had to repay? (Read: not messroom rumours)

From what I know of the bus industry, I thought I'd seen that these clauses were legally unenforceable.

Would be interesting to know.

 

[Train_manager]

It was in the Aslef journal about 6 months ago. And was confirmed by a GBrf company council rep. I won't name them.

 

[43066]

Has anyone ever posted or confirmed here that THEY personally had been chased and had to repay? (Read: not messroom rumours)

From what I know of the bus industry, I thought I'd seen that these clauses were legally unenforceable.

Would be interesting to know.

If it’s brought to your attention when you sign your contract, and you are also asked to sign a separate agreement dealing with repayment of fees, it may be enforceable. I have heard on here that some companies on the freight side are now taking this approach.

The way TOCs have done it historically - a clause buried in your the contract - is much less likely to be enforceable. From personal experience they didn’t even try.

The best bet for anybody wanting to know what it's like to work at GBRf is to keep an eye out for somebody with GB Railfreight written in Orange writing across their chest, and to ask them what they think of working at GBRf.

Good advice.

 

[357]

If it’s brought to your attention when you sign your contract, and you are also asked to sign a separate agreement dealing with repayment of fees, it may be enforceable. I have heard on here that some companies on the freight side are now taking this approach.

The way TOCs have done it historically - a clause buried in your the contract - is much less likely to be enforceable. From personal experience they didn’t even try.



Good advice.

Absolutely. I wasn't aware the situation had changed from what was in your second paragraph.

If it is a signed agreement then it's a very different situation.

 

[66701GBRF]

If it is a signed agreement then it's a very different situation.

But is also depends on when you signed the contract. I have heard that on some occasions it has been done while the trainee is already in the classroom, to me that amounts to signing under duress and is very unlikely to be enforceable.

 

[Train_manager]

But is also depends on when you signed the contract. I have heard that on some occasions it has been done while the trainee is already in the classroom, to me that amounts to signing under duress and is very unlikely to be enforceable.

I agree that's shocking.

On freight side(most companies) you get a LA to sign which is a separate document. It confirms the amount and timeframe when it's required to be paid back.

 

[nithen]

Has anyone ever posted or confirmed here that THEY personally had been chased and had to repay? (Read: not messroom rumours)

From what I know of the bus industry, I thought I'd seen that these clauses were legally unenforceable.

Would be interesting to know.

They are one of the ones who will definitely without a shadow of doubt chase you for it.

 

[Carl98k]

Has anyone ever posted or confirmed here that THEY personally had been chased and had to repay? (Read: not messroom rumours)

From what I know of the bus industry, I thought I'd seen that these clauses were legally unenforceable.

Would be interesting to know.

I’ve heard from a good source that can’t enforce it. In my previous job the same thing was brought in to stop people leaving. The individual contacted a lawyer and the company was told it’s not enforceable. But it won’t look good to another company that you’re prepared to breach a contract.

 

[12LDA28C]

I’ve heard from a good source that can’t enforce it. In my previous job the same thing was brought in to stop people leaving. The individual contacted a lawyer and the company was told it’s not enforceable. But it won’t look good to another company that you’re prepared to breach a contract.

If it's specifically brought to someone's attention when they take a job and sign a contract to say they agree to those terms, how can it not be legally enforceable? It's not unreasonable for a company to want to recoup it's training expenses which can run to tens of thousands of pounds for a driver.

 

[Train_manager]

I’ve heard from a good source that can’t enforce it. In my previous job the same thing was brought in to stop people leaving. The individual contacted a lawyer and the company was told it’s not enforceable. But it won’t look good to another company that you’re prepared to breach a contract.

Without going off topic. An employer can sue an ex-employee for breach of contract.

Rare yes but it can be done. Most don't bother.

 

[Carl98k]

If it's specifically brought to someone's attention when they take a job and sign a contract to say they agree to those terms, how can it not be legally enforceable? It's not unreasonable for a company to want to recoup it's training expenses which can run to tens of thousands of pounds for a driver.

I agree, and that’s exactly what I thought. I’m no expert on employment law, and I can only go off what I saw. But this other company couldn’t enforce it, despite the driver signing the contract.

Without going off topic. An employer can sue an ex-employee for breach of contract.

Rare yes but it can be done. Most don't bother.

That’s what I thought as well. Personally I wouldn’t do it, purely because it’s morally wrong.

 

[D5581]

Has anyone ever posted or confirmed here that THEY personally had been chased and had to repay? (Read: not messroom rumours)

From what I know of the bus industry, I thought I'd seen that these clauses were legally unenforceable.

Would be interesting to know.

A colleague of mine left tamping (is a driver) to go to GBRf, did all of his freight conversion training, came back after a few months as it wasn't for him, GB went for him and got their money out of him.

 

[matt_world2004]

If it's specifically brought to someone's attention when they take a job and sign a contract to say they agree to those terms, how can it not be legally enforceable? It's not unreasonable for a company to want to recoup it's training expenses which can run to tens of thousands of pounds for a driver.

I believe there were specific laws banning indentured servitude in the late 1800s which would apply to this

 

[ID2425652]

I believe there were specific laws banning indentured servitude in the late 1800s which would apply to this

Debt Bondage

 

[66701GBRF]

I believe there were specific laws banning indentured servitude in the late 1800s which would apply to this

Clawback or repayment clauses are perfectly legal. As with most things legal, the devil is in the detail of the contract. They maybe unenforceable if its deemed to be a penalty clause (the figure being asked to payback is more than the cost of genuine loss to the company). If someone leaves straight after they have passed out then clearly there is a genuine loss to the company as they wouldn’t have had any return on their investment. Leaving after 3 or 4 years of a 5 year contract that position is a lot harder to argue.

It may also trigger a “restraint of trade“ where the clawback clause prevents the employee changing employers.

A colleague of mine left tamping (is a driver) to go to GBRf, did all of his freight conversion training, came back after a few months as it wasn't for him, GB went for him and got their money out of him.

How much did they get?

 

[D5581]

How much did they get?

£15k

 

[12LDA28C]

I believe there were specific laws banning indentured servitude in the late 1800s which would apply to this

Ridiculous. So you're saying a written contract is worth nothing? Then why do we have them? Or any terms and conditions for that matter.

 

[matt_world2004]

Ridiculous. So you're saying a written contract is worth nothing? Then why do we have them? Or any terms and conditions for that matter.

Written contracts canf be illegal. For example a contract can't say I agree to have 6 hours gap between shifts or say . I agree to get paid.less than minimum wage

 

[12LDA28C]

Written contracts canf be illegal. For example a contract can't say I agree to have 6 hours gap between shifts or say . I agree to get paid.less than minimum wage

Then the answer is simple. Don't sign it. Neither of those situations you quote would apply to a train driver in the UK.

 

[43066]

Then the answer is simple. Don't sign it. Neither of those situations you quote would apply to a train driver in the UK.

But the point being made is that it isn’t as simple as saying “it’s in the contract, therefore you’re bound by it” or “if you don’t like it, don’t sign it”.

It’s perfectly possible for contractual terms to be held to be unenforceable, either because they’re expressly illegal in themselves, or because they’re unduly onerous. This is especially relevant in the context of employment contracts, where there is little equality of bargaining power. Hence clauses of this nature have to be very carefully drafted.

I’d be interested to know for example:

1. What happens if someone is recruited, and fails to pass out?

2. What happens if someone is sacked for poor performance during their first five years with the company?

Are people on the hook for five figure sums in these situations?

 

[matt_world2004]

Then the answer is simple. Don't sign it. Neither of those situations you quote would apply to a train driver in the UK.

My understanding is that indenturement which is to work for a certain employer because you are indebted to that employer was made illegal in the UK in 1917. Contracts do not override law. All too often we see employers skirt right upto the limit of what is legally permissable and sometimes beyond that. Taking advantage of light touch regulation or the fact that employees do not have the confidence to complain, or the expense to take the organisation to an employment tribunal. Often it is a fatality that highlights these organisational failings and the rail industry is no exemption to that.

 

[12LDA28C]

My understanding is that indenturement which is to work for a certain employer because you are indebted to that employer was made illegal in the UK in 1917. Contracts do not override law. All too often we see employers skirt right upto the limit of what is legally permissable and sometimes beyond that. Taking advantage of light touch regulation or the fact that employees do not have the confidence to complain, or the expense to take the organisation to an employment tribunal. Often it is a fatality that highlights these organisational failings and the rail industry is no exemption to that.

So presumably you see nothing morally wrong with taking advantage of a TOC or FOC training you up at huge expense and then buggering off to another employer as soon as you've got your key? Having been a driver, I would never have dreamt of doing that but clearly some people have a different viewpoint.

 

[matt_world2004]

So presumably you see nothing morally wrong with taking advantage of a TOC or FOC training you up at huge expense and then buggering off to another employer as soon as you've got your key? Having been a driver, I would never have dreamt of doing that but clearly some people have a different viewpoint.

It's not illegal to do that is it though?

From GBRFs modern slavery statement

"We do not tolerate the use of forced, bonded, compulsory
or child labour."

If you are required to buy yourself out of an employment contract it is a form of bonded labour

 

[43066]

So presumably you see nothing morally wrong with taking advantage of a TOC or FOC training you up at huge expense and then buggering off to another employer as soon as you've got your key? Having been a driver, I would never have dreamt of doing that but clearly some people have a different viewpoint.

Whether it’s morally wrong or not has nothing to do with the discussion about whether this contractual clause is legally enforceable.

I realise we have discussed this before! Can I ask why people getting a key and leaving bothers you so much, and why you seem to see it as some kind of moral failing? I don’t think I’ve ever encountered anyone who would consider it morally wrong for anyone to change jobs!

I left my first TOC during my PQA period without paying them a penny (albeit I left on good terms with my manager and immediate colleagues).

I did it quite simply because it suited me to do it, and I make decisions about my employment based purely on my own self interest. Why would I have loyalty to an organisation that sacked people at the drop of a hat, and would have done exactly the same to me if it suited them?!

 

[12LDA28C]

Whether it’s morally wrong or not has nothing to do with the discussion about whether this contractual clause is legally enforceable.

I realise we have discussed this before! Can I ask why people getting a key and leaving bothers you so much, and why you seem to see it as some kind of moral failing? I don’t think I’ve ever encountered anyone who would consider it morally wrong for anyone to change jobs!

I left my first TOC during my PQA period without paying them a penny (albeit I left on good terms with my manager and immediate colleagues).

I did it quite simply because it suited me to do it, and I make decisions about my employment based purely on my own self interest. Why would I have loyalty to an organisation that sacked people at the drop of a hat, and would have done exactly the same to me if it suited them?!

Why should you not have any loyalty to an organisation that has taken you on in good faith and spent a lot of time and money training you up to do a job which presumably you were keen to do, and accepted the restrictions surrounding your post-qualified employment when signing your contract? Sounds a bit militant to me, did you feel a sense of achievement from 'sticking it to the man' or something similar?

Maybe you should have a stint in recruitment, and see if you still have the same opinion at the end of it. It always helps to see both sides of an argument, I find.

 

[Horizon22]

A polite reminder for people to keep things civil and in line with the Jobs & Careers forum guidelines and forum rules

 

[matt_world2004]

Why should you not have any loyalty to an organisation that has taken you on in good faith and spent a lot of time and money training you up to do a job which presumably you were keen to do, and accepted the restrictions surrounding your post-qualified employment when signing your contract? Sounds a bit militant to me, did you feel a sense of achievement from 'sticking it to the man' or something similar?

Maybe you should have a stint in recruitment, and see if you still have the same opinion at the end of it. It always helps to see both sides of an argument, I

If the work conditions are not what was expected or the employer pushes the limits of what is permissiable in the employment contract why should an employee stay? If an organisation has high turnover (Particularly if its higher than the rest of the induatry) that is an organisational failing and an indicator of low morale

And things like pay not keeping up with inflation , extenous intrusions onto personal time and poor career progression or enforcement of legal rights within a contract can lead to people wanting to leave