Therefore, there is no fixed and fast rule, since what applies to each case depends on the conditions of the bond and the circumstances of each case. The key is to find the right wording and find the right balance. Be clear about the consequences of leaving within a defined period of time after training. Make sure your reimbursement plan is fair and reflects the actual costs of training. Clarify that employees are responsible for reimbursing training costs when they leave, but are always free to leave. And once you`ve done so, create a training agreement template so that the conditions for each training opportunity are clear. This protects your investments in training, but most importantly, it protects your business for years to come. And by which the employee has agreed to accept the service bond for the period of one year and five months that the company offers from September 12, 2016, in accordance with the conditions discussed and agreed. The development of a sustainable training strategy is often compromised by financial considerations and staff migration. These concerns have recently been addressed by the introduction of training obligations. Therefore, the bond was valid and enforceable without having to consider its reasonableness or other elements of the contract. Below are some practical considerations on how to ensure the relevance of training obligations. But especially for employers, it can also be used to determine when an employee might be responsible for reimbursing these training costs and how that reimbursement would work.
In particular, it can define whether these costs become reimbursable if an employee leaves the company shortly after completing the training. A training bond that allows the employer to amortize the investment from an employee`s monthly salary is valid and enforceable. (9) However, employers and employees are advised to seek the advice of a lawyer before establishing and implementing training bonds to ensure that they are enforceable in the event of a dispute. To deal with losses that could result from employees terminating their contract after receiving the training, employers often require employees to issue bonds to remain in their service for a certain period of time after acquiring new skills or certificates. From the employer`s point of view, this ensures that the employer amortizes the investment made in that employee. The National Labour Court of Nigeria (NICN) has made conflicting decisions as to whether a training contract is considered a trade restriction. Thus, in Overland Airways Limited v. Oladeji Afolayan & Anor, (1) NICN rejected the defendant`s argument that the training obligations in question were trade-restrictive contracts: as regards enforceability, an action against the subsequent employer of an employee who withdrew in breach of a previous training bond cannot be upheld; The attempts have not been successful so far. In Overland Airways Limited v.
Ingr. However, Shehu Sekula & Ors (above) suggested to the NICN that a lawsuit could be filed against a subsequent employer if evidence is presented that the new employer caused the employee to break the training bond. Recently, however, the courts appear to be taking a more pragmatic approach to determining the applicability of the training bond, which is a form of restrictive agreement in labour law. In other words, in order to determine whether a training obligation is a restrictive agreement and/or constitutes forced labour, the courts will consider the circumstances of the case. This article provides practical information on the operation and design of training obligations in Nigeria. It reviews court decisions with the aim of clarifying legal considerations related to training obligations for the benefit of both the employer and the employee. But if that employee stayed two years after completing the course and used this training every day, then £2,000 is not a reasonable estimate of how much money the company really lost. In this case, using a training contract to try to recover the entire £2,000 would not be reasonable – and probably would not exist legally. It is important to note that in order to award financial damages to a business, a court must have suffered a loss due to the premature termination of the employment relationship.
It is the employer`s responsibility to prove the amount of the damage suffered. This may be easier if the company keeps well-kept records of all the costs necessary for the employee`s training. However, it is important to note that even if the amount is higher than that included in the contract, the employer cannot claim more damages than is stated. (3) In particular, the Court of Justice has not been aware of its earlier decision distinguishing a contract restricting trade from a training bond. It should be noted that an employer who terminates an employment contract cannot take legal action for the performance of the training obligation. In Overland Airways Limited v. Oladeji Afolayan & Anor (above), the court held that the termination of the employment relationship relieves the employee of any obligation in the training bond. In this case, the court found that the employer terminated the employment relationship of the first defendant when the employer refused to pay his wages, thereby exempting the defendant from any obligation under the training guarantee. However, it must be presumed that if the dismissal is due to intentional or serious misconduct on the part of the employee, an employer should have the right to bring an action for reimbursement of training costs. However, if the training contract is properly drafted, it can reasonably be expected that the employer will receive a certain portion of the £2,000 return. A training contract is a written agreement between an employer and his employee that sets out the terms of each training that the company pays for its participation.
It determines the cost of the training, who provides the training and who is primarily responsible for it. The Institute of Management of P.O. Box 2987 – 00100 represented by the duly authorized Regional Director, Mr. Saman Kinh, is hereinafter referred to as “the Institute” and includes the Institute of Management or the “Employer” as it is composed today or from time to time during the implementation of this Agreement The rules relating to corporate obligations are an important aspect of a company when it comes to hiring employees.3 min Read the introductionTraining obligations are considered a form of business restrictionWhen are training obligations enforceable? Practical ConsiderationsComments Details on training and investment should be provided He rejected Raymond`s assertion that Overland`s training obligations contradict the practice of the aviation industry in Nigeria, where pilots would only be bound for the term of their licence(s), as Raymond had not provided evidence to support this allegation. . . .