Repay training costs?

gary1983

marybelle01 wrote: »

You said that you joined the company on one of their training schemes. So that would suggest it was an actual training scheme. Which is it?

Hi marybelle01, I apologise for the confusion. I'm not entirely sure if there is a legal definition of a training scheme; and if there is a definition I don't know what that it is.
To clarify the organisation I work for is large due to this there are often lots of vacancies. Most of the vacancies require industry specific training. Occasionally the organisation will run recruitment campaigns to fill these vacancies. People are recruited through a central campaign and there are assessment days to decide who is suitable. The people who get through are then assigned to specific vacancies. Once employed the training takes place throughout the first year of employment. Part of the training is internal but there is some external training. Once the training period has ended we are eligible for a pay rise. Colloquially within the organisation it is referred to as a training scheme. I'm not sure if what I have described constitutes a training course or not. I would say I joined a role with a large element of training included.
Is there a particular relevance if it is a training scheme or not?

marybelle01

I think there may be, yes. What you say isn't relevant - it's what the law says. I honestly think you'd be better taking some legal advice. I don't think it's as clear cut as doing some training on top of your role, because it seems that the training was part of the recruitment and clearly stated and transparent. It's not that I am against you - I honestly don't know. I just don't think it's a simple as stated in some places here. I do know that in some jobs if training is part of the package when you join, costs are enforceable provided that they are reasonable. My own employer requires two years (albeit these are higher degrees we are talking about) after training is completed, and then it trails off for a further year. But the fact is not that you don't expect to use the training again - that is your choice. It's that the employer expected to benefit from it. And they won't. I just think it'd be worth checking out properly. Then if you owe it, at least you know that you do - and if you don't it's money well spent on being sure about it!

gary1983

Thanks for the reply. I was hoping someone on here might have sufficient legal training to give appropriate advice. I'm not sure of the costs of getting legal advice and I don't want to start that until I know what it will cost.
I am trying to go through the citizens advice bureau for some free advice, however this is quite a lengthy process. After the first phone call, I've got a second call booked before I can speak face to face with a solicitor.

uknick

OP, this topic comes up quite a lot on the internet. One example,

http://www.personneltoday.com/hrspace/forums/paying-back-training-corse-fees-11004.aspx

What have you found on the internet?

With regard to legal advice, I would have thought a 1 hour session with a solicitor would answer your questions, and will be a lot cheaper than having to pay back the training costs. It seems to all come down to, did you sign and agree the possible repayment? And, was it clear what you signed up to?

gary1983

I've found similar things to the link you have provided. An employer can only claim back external training costs not internal training costs.
For them to claim back external training costs there should be a separate agreement in addition to the employment contract. In order to show that the company is claiming back genuine losses and not just a penalty clause the amount owed should decrease with time. This is not the case with the letter containing my job offer. Also the paperwork I signed said I agreed to the terms and conditions. The terms and conditions make no mention of repaying training costs.
On balance I think repaying the training costs would be unenforceable, however if it came to it I would now pay for legal advice to confirm this.

gary1983

I've been given some free legal advice. In case anyone finds themselves in a similar position. If you look in Tolley's Employment Handbook 27th edition page 337 it states:
...it may be struck down as a 'penalty clause' unless it can be said to represent a genuine pre-estimate of loss suffered by the employer. This will usually mean , for example that the proportion of costs to be repaid must depend upon how long the employee remains after being trained.
There are also some references to case law.
Thanks for the help and I'll let you know how I get on if it gets nasty.

andy444

It is against the law for an individual or company to claim back money which they claim for in one go should the person not to have the full amount to hand, so you should only need to pay back the expenses in instalments. There should be no need to take out a loan to pay back the expenses in one go.