Training Agreement

SarEl

I agree - such schemes can be a source of cheap labour - or sorting the wheat from the chaff. But the employer is still paying for the training, and I suppose would still argue that people who never finish or fail is not their problem as they should have worked ahrader at the course! In law not finishing or failing isn't a big problem - very few people taken on don't finish or fail, but then, the problem is getting taken on in the first place as it is highly competitive.

But I would not rely on the "getting sacked" get out - apart from the obvious detriment of getting yourself sacked, it is actually pretty rare that such agreements do not include getting sacked! Generally the only get out is frustration of contract - where through no fault of either side the contract ends - or redundancy (and not always then, so people should read what they are signing very carefully).

bluesnake

DrGash wrote: »

Every 6 months I am given new objectives by senior management which directly affect my annual wage rise and share allocation. If any objectives are not met I receive less of a wage increase and fewer shares.

You do realise the objectives are probably more important than the mundane bits of the job? Since the objectives is often how one is judged, especially when working for the government or large organization, forget doing the job or performing, and solely concentrate on the objectives. Colleagues may b!tch due to them having to cover your work, but if you completely meet your objectives, then you are quids in.

Make sure the course actually make you as a person worth £1000 more. i.e. the bluesnakeNO1 course teaches you how to wash potatoes, while bluesnakeNO2 teaches how to be a Michelin rated chef. Think you can work out the better course for £1000 and which course takes you for a ride.