Is this normal? (repaying recruiter fee if I leave within two years)

mmmsnow

Hi guys,

I recently interviewed for a job and it ticks all the boxes: it's something I'm passionate about, the hours are pretty much 9-5 M-F, great annual leave and the pay is very competitive.

I went through a recruitment consultant (which was a... um... interesting experience). Anyway, as part of my contract, there's a clause that says that, if I leave the company within 2 years, I have to pay all/portion of the fee the company paid the recruitment consultant (which is HEFTY). The penalty reduces over time from £6k if I leave straight away to £3k if I leave in a year etc.

Is this normal?

This is a good company that's been around for quite a while and the director made me aware of this when I was negotiating my annual leave.

gettingtheresometime

Never heard of that one before but recruitment fees are one reason why OH is recluctant to think about employing someone.

agrinnall

While it's not something that would be seen very often it's certainly not unheard of. £6K is actually not a bad amount, it could cost an employer anywhere from 6 months to a year's salary for the position that's been recruited into. Now you know about it you can factor that into any decision to leave within 2 years, you'd need a new job that pays at least that much more than you're getting now.

mmmsnow

Thanks for the replies. It's a great job so I'm going to sign the contract tomorrow.

ReadingTim

It doesn't matter what's "normal" - sign it and you're agreeing to it.

So, either negotiate for its removal, don't sign, or agree and remember you'll be bound by it for the next 2 years.

What you can't do is sign, then 18 months down the line claim you don't like it and won't be bound by it because "it's not normal"....

mmmsnow

ReadingTim wrote: »

What you can't do is sign, then 18 months down the line claim you don't like it and won't be bound by it because "it's not normal"....

It's something I haven't come across before so I asked a question. I understand how contracts work, that's why I'm querying it now, before signing.

Jog on, mate.

ReadingTim

mmmsnow wrote: »

It's something I haven't come across before so I asked a question. I understand how contracts work, that's why I'm querying it now, before signing.

Jog on, mate.

If you actually knew how contracts work, then you'd know there's little that's objectively "normal", only what, subjectively, the parties agree amongst themselves what's "normal".

If you meant "is this a common clause / does this occur often?" then you should have asked that.

Jog back to school, mate.

gettingtheresometime

mmmsnow wrote: »

It's something I haven't come across before so I asked a question. I understand how contracts work, that's why I'm querying it now, before signing.

Jog on, mate.

Whilst your specific query is unusual there have been so many threads where the questioner have queried whether the (soon to be ex) employer can take all their final salary due to a training agreement even though it was a signed agreement you do have to have to wonder whether people sign contracts believing they can chance it.

steampowered

It is very common for training / relocation costs.

It is less common for recruitment costs. Though I can see that the same logic applies. It doesn't seem unreasonable.

sangie595

mmmsnow wrote: »

It's something I haven't come across before so I asked a question. I understand how contracts work, that's why I'm querying it now, before signing.

Jog on, mate.

Yes, actually, it's quite common. Just because some people haven't seen it doesn't mean it isn't. It is particularly common at higher grades and in certain industries.

General_Grant

As well as if you decide to leave within the first two years, is it reciprocal? If they decide, for whatever reason, to dismiss you within that time, do you still pay them? (Especially given that for those two years you have fewer employment rights than someone with longer service.)