Charged for training when resigned

Savvy_Sue

Now now, less of the assault.

The OP said they hadn't received any certificates. Sadly that is not unusual, especially if it was in-house training and they don't want the employee to benefit from THEIR training.

Ja7188

Ps. It's questionable, in fact, whether they can claim it at all. It would seem that this training is a requirement for the job. In which case they can't charge you to provide training you need for the job if you are an employee.

On a general note, who has the right to decide on whether a given training course is a requirement for the job or whether it would simply be useful to the employee and not essential? I'm guessing there could be a bit of subjectivity involved here...?

sangie595

Ja7188 wrote: »

On a general note, who has the right to decide on whether a given training course is a requirement for the job or whether it would simply be useful to the employee and not essential? I'm guessing there could be a bit of subjectivity involved here...?

It depends on your definition of subjectivity. An employment tribunal decides. You would have to make a claim for unlawful deductions. It's more complicated that "simply useful" or "essential". You could argue that manual handling, for example, is useful but not essential. But if the employee could lift anything, and is not trained to do so, then that leaves the employer in a dicey situation vis a vis health and safety. Equally the employee, without that training, is entitled to refuse to lift stuff. Which might not technically be "right" but the employer would be stupid to enforce a task they refuse on health and safety grounds.

Generally, common sense prevails. But that can be sadly lacking at times.