please delete

Dani101001

Request for thread to be deleted.

Blatchford

If you didn't sign they can't reclaim the costs. But they can block your appointment and leave you stuck in your current job. Government departments don't function as independents. They back each other up. As you've already seen. Can you speak to the union?

Dani101001

request for thread to be deleted

ReadingTim

Why don't you want to "strike a bargain" with HR then? I assume you'll continue with the course, and gain some professional benefit from having it, so why the objection to (say) footing the bill for the half when you're in the new role? You could even try and negotiate with the new department for them to foot it - a sort of buyout award, as it were.

Suspect this is the least worse outcome, with the alternatives being the new offer is rescinded and you're forced to stay in the old role. Then again, you could leave, see if they bill you, and ignore it, gambling on the fact they wont pursue it....

Blatchford

ReadingTim wrote: »

Why don't you want to "strike a bargain" with HR then? I assume you'll continue with the course, and gain some professional benefit from having it, so why the objection to (say) footing the bill for the half when you're in the new role? You could even try and negotiate with the new department for them to foot it - a sort of buyout award, as it were.

Suspect this is the least worse outcome, with the alternatives being the new offer is rescinded and you're forced to stay in the old role. Then again, you could leave, see if they bill you, and ignore it, gambling on the fact they wont pursue it....

I'm guessing here, but given that the poster has specified that these are both government departments, I suspect the unions advice to strike a bargain is based on the fact that two different government departments are still the same associated employer. So they aren't leaving one employer and hoping to hell that it won't follow them. It will follow them. These are sensible suggestions to try to break the impasse by suggesting a compromise. Government departments are unforgiving in many matters, and what individual managers think will make not a jot of difference to their machinery. I suspect they are still able to deduct from wages what they say is owed and leave it up to the poster to sue them for it back. Not a remotely sensible idea to sue your "government" employer though, if you intend on a career! If the union say compromise, then I'd tend to trust their advice on this one if you want to remain a government employee. What is your legal right and what is in your best interests are not necessarily the same thing.

BoGoF

Genuine question.....what do you think the purpose of the box saying you would stay for 2 years was?

Blatchford

BoGoF wrote: »

Genuine question.....what do you think the purpose of the box saying you would stay for 2 years was?

It could have been a staff survey? Seriously, that's a genuine answer. The law is very clear on what constitutes a training agreement, and it is neither a tick box nor is it a term in the staff handbook. And a government deoartment knows that very well, which is why they started using the correct documents after they raised they screwed up with the poster.

Legally the poster does not have to pay back a penny because the employer screwed up. If they'd signed and didn't want to pay it back then it's have no sympathy at all. Although, as I said, that stance might have a detrimental impact on their future in government departments. But that balance and moral positions are a matter for the poster to decide.

VictorT

Dani101001 wrote: »

Thanks for the reply. I have spoken to the union but they didn't fill me with a huge amount of confidence as they spoke about "striking a bargain" with HR. Luckily despite Senior management being quite obstructive my line manager is quite supportive so hopefully wouldn't block a transfer. I'm just nervous they'll send me a bill in the post once if I leave !

I assume you were disappointed because since you didn't sign the thing on the intranet, you wouldn't be liable for any of the cost.
You are however, essentially at the mercy of goodwill in the organisation which you are trying to move about within.
Do you not think that since you knew that the department expected you to stay there two years after the training, that paying back half the course costs since you are leaving after one year would be a fair bargain? In order to maintain goodwill and chance of further advancement of course.

ReadingTim

From the cache of google:

Hi all - I work for a government department and last year took up a two year course funded by my department. The course form asked me to tick a box to say I had an intention to stay with the department for two years following the completion of the course (which I did at the time).

A year later, growing unsatisfied in my role I applied and was accepted for a secondment to a different government department for a year however my director blocked this as they had funded my course.

The new government department then offered me a permanent contract however my team told me if I tried to leave I would be sent a bill for the full course. I was show a policy on the intranet which I had never been shown before stating course fees must be repaid if I leave my department. The intranet page also has a learning agreement form to sign which outlines this too (j was never asked to sign this).

Since raising this at work people who have signed up to the course after me have been sent the learning agreement to sign.

I'm just looking for advice on whether my department really can, as they say, send me a bill if I move to another department even though I never signed a form to say this. They seem to be relying on a clause in my contract which says I will comply with local policy documents (which this intranet pdf would probably count as).

Advice would be warmly welcomed!
Thanks!

OP - deleting threads is bad form, as it prevents others who might be in a similar situation benefiting from the responses. Unless of course you weren't actually after an answer to your question, but for someone to tell you what you wanted to hear.

It's also pointless, as I've demonstrated, as it can usually be found in cached thread. Best of luck with your civil service career though.

[Deleted User]

Another poster that goes and deletes their thread content when they don’t hear what it is they want to hear.

Undervalued

MarkN88 wrote: »

Another poster that goes and deletes their thread content when they don’t hear what it is they want to hear.

Quite!

It is frankly insulting to those who take the trouble to reply when people do this. Posters need to understand that this is a discussion forum and not a private and confidential advice service. The person who starts a thread does not "own" it any more than other contributors.

Another forum I belong to only allows posts to be edited or deleted for 20 mins after posting. This gives time to re-read and correct any errors, or even have second thoughts about posting at all, but after that it becomes part of the record. Personally I feel this forum should operate in the same way.