Can an employer reclaim training course costs if you leave within 2 years of the course?

michaels

My DD has just started with a new employer in an office admin role.  In her contract they state that they will reclaim any training course costs from her if she leaves within 2 years of the training - 100% reclaim if she leaves within 12 months and 50% reclaim if she leaves within 24 months of the completion of any course.  She is not on any specific apprenticeship or training contract, probably more like compulsory H&S, Diversity etc training.

Are such clauses fair and enforceable?

Grumpy_chap

Whether such clauses are fair and / or enforceable is a matter of debate and / or the detail of the contract.

It does depend on what the training is or might be, and how transferable the skill is from the training.
I always use two examples
 - First Aid at Work is required in most jobs that I will get.  If an employer pays for my FAaW and I leave, I am taking with me a transferable qualification.
 - Most jobs also require that I do some training on their in-house processes.  Well, this has no transferable element and of no value to me if I leave.

I would not object to repaying a part of the FAaW fee.
I would object to repaying a part of the in-house processes fee.

DullGreyGuy

michaels said:

My DD has just started with a new employer in an office admin role.  In her contract they state that they will reclaim any training course costs from her if she leaves within 2 years of the training - 100% reclaim if she leaves within 12 months and 50% reclaim if she leaves within 24 months of the completion of any course.  She is not on any specific apprenticeship or training contract, probably more like compulsory H&S, Diversity etc training.

Are such clauses fair and enforceable?

Most companies dont charge for mandatory training, excluding professional qualifications, its normally limited to discretionary courses. 

There isnt a blanket answer to if it's fair and enforceable or not, it depends on the circumstances etc. An associate had their employer pay £65,000 for an Executive MBA and 3 months after qualifying they quit. Think most would say it was reasonable for the company to recover the outlay, they didnt attempt to recover the "paid study leave" that they had also given them over the course of the qualification. 

lincroft1710

Does it state they "will reclaim" or "may reclaim"?

FallenAngel2612

Did she sign any ‘learning agreement’? 

Savvy_Sue

I think that part of the answer is that if it's just a general statement in the t&c it's not enforceable, it has to be a separate agreement: "we're paying for this training, you'll have to repay us if you leave within two years". 

So, the learning agreement mentioned above. 

And the questions above: what does she get for the training, is it transferable?

If it IS transferable, it is sometimes possible to get the new employer to pay something for it - if they're getting the benefit of your accountancy qualification, that seems entirely reasonable, no?

Hoenir

What's the nature of the "office admin role" ? 

The employment contract is likely to be generic in nature. Not modified for the particular role. 

michaels

Thanks all.

itsthelittlethings

I think if they do any special training that’s valuable like an NVQ, yes, health and safety generic training probably no.

Grumpy_chap

Just a note to add.

A year or so back, I was speaking with a company that were offering to sponsor an MBA.  By any definition, this is highly transferable and I would normally have expected a retention / claw-back clause, however there was none.  The reason given was that as the potential employer had structured the MBA to fit within the Apprenticeship framework and, therefore, funded by the Government, it was not permissible to include a retention / claw-back clause.

Ordinary_Yet_Unique

Personally I think it depends on who funds the training and for what purpose.