"Golden Handcuffs" contracts?

[Jim123]

Evening All,

I've been flicking through a few train websites and came across this regarding toc's who want to keep you for a fixed period of time once they've trained you (understandably so) but i've not actually seen or heard any cast iron examples of this. Has anyone else on here? I'm about to start with Govia but didn't see anything in the contract.

Also, if someone has to move (family reasons ie: can't stand them....boom boom?) can they legitimately stop someone moving or, as i've heard on here, take them to court for the training costs?

Cheers

 

[302PS]

Bus companies do for what I imagine is much less cost
2k in first year, 1 k in second

 

[Jonny]

It depends on what's written in the contract. Even then, the contract is a 'limiting factor' and only if the relevant court agrees that the contract is fair (which isn't guaranteed).

 

[red2005]

I'm pretty sure my mate at freightliner had to sign an agreement saying if he leaves within certain times there may be fees to pay!

however he has also told me that he was informed by a solicitor that it's about as binding as toilet paper!....who knows lol

 

[TheVicLine]

I think most the TOC's do this with trainees now and they do enforce it (or try to). Not sure how successful they would be if they tried to make you pay and you said no.

You obviously wouldn't get a great reference from them but I suppose if someone was leaving during the period stated then they would already have a job to go to.

 

[Texas]

There was reference to this clause when I was sent an example of a DBS training contract, sliding scale of 'training cost's' that would be redeemable upon leaving, I guess that they want to make sure that only committed applicants apply and try to show the cost's involved in supplying said training.

Pm.

 

[302PS]

I noticed in a current cross country ad for qualified drivers it says you must have completed your 18 months with your current toc

 

[marcustandy]

I previously worked in recruitment (transport & logistics sector).

These type of clauses are common, however, we were always led to understand that it would be very difficult to enforce if ever it were to be called upon. Most likely, an employer wouldn't have the appetite for the 'fight' and it is felt that the Courts tend to sway towards the side of the individual (ex)employee if it indeed does get that far.

Personally, I think it is used by employers as some scant measure of an employee's commitment and desire; perhaps also to some degree to put the 'frighteners' on said employee, so that if they're having a bad day, they think twice before throwing the towel in and will just see it through 'the bad times'.

 

[Murph]

This doesn't constitute legal advice, it's just a vague understanding of something that I believe has been used by companies in the past (not specific to railways). I have no idea if it has been tested in court, or how likely it would be to be considered "unconscionable" by the courts.

Things can be written such that the employee is the one paying for training, but that the company automatically gives them a fixed term loan to cover the cost. The loan payments are automatically covered by the company, and there will be no loan remaining after the minimum term has elapsed.

 

[Jim88]

This doesn't constitute legal advice, it's just a vague understanding of something that I believe has been used by companies in the past (not specific to railways). I have no idea if it has been tested in court, or how likely it would be to be considered "unconscionable" by the courts.

Things can be written such that the employee is the one paying for training, but that the company automatically gives them a fixed term loan to cover the cost. The loan payments are automatically covered by the company, and there will be no loan remaining after the minimum term has elapsed.

Often tied in with a reduced training wage, the difference being used to service 'loan' repayments. Loan paid, wage goes up.

 

[sarahj]

This is only word of mouth, but I've head that recent conductor trainees have been only offered 2 year contracts. Whats in them, I don't know, but last year we did have a few trainees leave very soon after passing out. Why?, I don't know. Non moved on to other railway jobs.

However, what was of note was these were folks on the early 20's. Perhaps just too young for the shift pattens we have.

 

[Legzr1]

I noticed in a current cross country ad for qualified drivers it says you must have completed your 18 months with your current toc

Much more to do with the liabilities of taking on PQA drivers (and additional associated costs) rather than any 'training' costs.

 

[455driver]

A bloke who has been at our place for a year applied but got rejected even though he had 5ish years with another TOC, so wouldnt have been PQA anyway.

 

[jamess115]

This is only word of mouth, but I've head that recent conductor trainees have been only offered 2 year contracts. Whats in them, I don't know, but last year we did have a few trainees leave very soon after passing out. Why?, I don't know. Non moved on to other railway jobs.

However, what was of note was these were folks on the early 20's. Perhaps just too young for the shift pattens we have.

Interesting - but curious as to why a TOC would only issue temporary contracts in this case. Presumably they are still responsible for employee training costs (same as a train driver), in which case this would make no financial sense.

 

[TDK]

Much more to do with the liabilities of taking on PQA drivers (and additional associated costs) rather than any 'training' costs.

Taking on a PQ driver is a risk and a cost to the company, any company will employ a driver with over 5 years experience with a clean record rather than a PQ driver. It isn't impossible but it is difficult to get in. I always asked why an candidate wanted to leave a company so soon and if I didn't get a logical answer they had no chance. All TOC's priorities are the safety record and will employ a qualified driver on their record and their length of service over anything else. As for relocating, I did this after 2 years driving experience and was asked why I wanted to leave my TOC and relocate, my answer was I married a Welsh girl and wanted to take her home, it worked and was true, I relocated from South London to North Wales and got the job with ease. I did take evidence with me to prove I was relocating such as paperwork from my estate agent proving my current house was on the market and also a lot of paperwork from the estate agents from the area I was moving to.