Thanks for all your input people, some things to think about and i will be contacting either the union or county hall for their take on this issue.
And yes my school does have investors in school status, should that make a difference?
Sounds interesting, imo i wouldn't let them get away with that kind of thing. Schools have a CPD budget, if you were asked to go on it then obviously there was a need for the skill for the school. They can't then say oh by the way, your new skills you've aquired are now ours and can you put this leash around your neck, it's unfair and you wouldn't have that if you were a teacher, guaranteed. Disappointing schools now want their cake AND eat it, if you're that much of a liability (in a leaving sense) why put you on it at all?
I would tell them that it's an unreasonable request now that you've been on the course and wouldn't of bothered if it meant 'terms and conditions'.
I feel disappointed that you've been treated this way, what ever happened to a 'golden handshake', much more appropriate, gives each party a little respect and removes the leash from the whole equation.
Good luck with it all though buddy.
If there is nothing in your contract of employement covering the recovery of the costs of training should you leave, or you you were not asked in advance to sign anything in relation to this then at present you have to take no action at all.
I did leave a company 3 months after doing a training course, and yep I did have to pay back the cost of the course in full, but it was already written into my employement contract.
I have been put on a training course recently and i was not asked to sign any agreements in case i left school during. Personally i wouldn't as this should of been something up front.
As others have said, tell them you have to speak to your union first, but on another note surely once the training has been paid for you cant really stop the person from attending and expect money back. Could they really get you removed from the course as your registered under your name and not that of the school.
I work in bedfordshire and I sign before I go on courses to say that I won't leave within 6 months, after that it is considered paid on both sides. They once tried getting me to sign afterwards but I told them no and they would have to accept my word that I wouldn't leave. Since then I signed contracts before I go on training courses.
I took a job last year and said I would only accept the position if they put me on my uni course. I left after 5 months and now they are trying to reclaim the fee's. This has been going on since January and it has my head done in.
Wouldn't have minded if they sat me down before and said sign this - but to just get the City Treasurers trying to take me to court after I left is a joke. I'm standing my ground with it and I expect to win.
As a condition of you joining you asked them to put you on the course, but as a condition of you joining, they probably put a term in your contract saying that if you left within 2 years you had to pay it back in full, thats pretty standard for councils.
I've been out of schools for too long to say what happens there for teachers but in FE it's normally the case that anyone (lecturer or support staff) receiving more than a few pounds for training would be expected to pay it back if they left within a short space of time.
Every decent employer knows that they need to train their staff and also knows that as an employer they will get some benefit from this and the employee will get some benefit. What they need to do is try and balance the cost of the training against its benefits to all involved.
The reason I'm standing my ground is because of the principle of the thing. I feel it is wrong to have nothing said to me or being asked to sign anything, and then have a letter coming through my door that includes and invoice - completely out the blue!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)