Mixing
![I was put on a performance Improvement Plan for 6 months [closed]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjbpfN9tAutmK93bJRC3ZoROZzi2TJDms5n8_qJuhgE0a9b52OOHayv3NGT8igAdFL7byXNst-_1DZK5SjrIJ28_6RQPUpBROqMs5s6jo-ZsjX8kjDwfxJufIitH3TaQRXWaGSQKRQib-f/s72-c/1.jpg)
Employer wants training money back if I quit in 18 months [closed]
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
I have been a programmer at company x for about 7 months now and I had asked if they could pay a 50£ course from Coursera for me. The course is not directly connected with my day-to-day work so it's not really sure I will ever directly apply the knowledge I derive from the course. However it's very interesting and there is some potential..
I did enroll on the course and started it while weeks passed without receiving any confirmation from my boss. After 2-3 weeks my boss emails me that he can do this but only if I oblige to stay 18 months under employment.
Is this common practice? His reasoning is that in that way he will get benefit from the investment. However to me this feels slightly intrusive.
united-kingdom employer-relations training
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
closed as off-topic by paparazzo, Jim G., Masked Man♦, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦ Jun 10 '16 at 10:27
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jim G., Masked Man, Dawny33, Lilienthal
 |Â
show 5 more comments
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
I have been a programmer at company x for about 7 months now and I had asked if they could pay a 50£ course from Coursera for me. The course is not directly connected with my day-to-day work so it's not really sure I will ever directly apply the knowledge I derive from the course. However it's very interesting and there is some potential..
I did enroll on the course and started it while weeks passed without receiving any confirmation from my boss. After 2-3 weeks my boss emails me that he can do this but only if I oblige to stay 18 months under employment.
Is this common practice? His reasoning is that in that way he will get benefit from the investment. However to me this feels slightly intrusive.
united-kingdom employer-relations training
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
closed as off-topic by paparazzo, Jim G., Masked Man♦, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦ Jun 10 '16 at 10:27
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jim G., Masked Man, Dawny33, Lilienthal
6
50 pounds? That doesn't really seem worth the trouble involved in getting your employer to pay for it. I would answer that this kind of thing is common but adding that clause over 50£ isn't, both because it's such a small amount of money and because people don't typically apply for such cheap courses through their employer.
– Lilienthal♦
Jun 9 '16 at 21:59
4
If the course is not directly related to your work, why do you even ask the employer to pay for it?
– Masked Man♦
Jun 10 '16 at 0:40
2
Could you add a Country tag? Because if you live in the UK, pay it yourself. 18 months is way to much for 50 Pounds. Would be stranger if they didnt ask you to stay for atleast x time.
– Raoul Mensink
Jun 10 '16 at 9:10
1
While remuneration of training costs is the norm, even here in the UK, requiring 18-months obligation for £50 is tantamount to involuntary servitude. They are essentially requiring you to be bound to the company for the grand outlay of your monthly wages plus £2.77. That would not be defensible by the company at tribunal or in a court of law - but you would be in a position where there is ill will or bad feeling if you left the company, so its up to you to decide whether you need this company on your CV or not. If you do, then my advice would be to pay the £50 and move on with your life.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 9:42
1
@JoeStrazzere to anyone with confidence and maturity, that is the way to look at it - its not a big thing, just pay the £50 and move on. To a junior dev, or someone who hasnt found their confidence in their working life, its a threat, regardless of the monetary amount attached. A reasonable employer wouldnt even bother asking for any repayment obligation, which says a lot about this one imho.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 17:53
 |Â
show 5 more comments
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
up vote
-2
down vote
favorite
I have been a programmer at company x for about 7 months now and I had asked if they could pay a 50£ course from Coursera for me. The course is not directly connected with my day-to-day work so it's not really sure I will ever directly apply the knowledge I derive from the course. However it's very interesting and there is some potential..
I did enroll on the course and started it while weeks passed without receiving any confirmation from my boss. After 2-3 weeks my boss emails me that he can do this but only if I oblige to stay 18 months under employment.
Is this common practice? His reasoning is that in that way he will get benefit from the investment. However to me this feels slightly intrusive.
united-kingdom employer-relations training
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
I have been a programmer at company x for about 7 months now and I had asked if they could pay a 50£ course from Coursera for me. The course is not directly connected with my day-to-day work so it's not really sure I will ever directly apply the knowledge I derive from the course. However it's very interesting and there is some potential..
I did enroll on the course and started it while weeks passed without receiving any confirmation from my boss. After 2-3 weeks my boss emails me that he can do this but only if I oblige to stay 18 months under employment.
Is this common practice? His reasoning is that in that way he will get benefit from the investment. However to me this feels slightly intrusive.
united-kingdom employer-relations training
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
edited Jun 10 '16 at 9:20
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
asked Jun 9 '16 at 21:36
Johannesberg
5351412
5351412
closed as off-topic by paparazzo, Jim G., Masked Man♦, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦ Jun 10 '16 at 10:27
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jim G., Masked Man, Dawny33, Lilienthal
closed as off-topic by paparazzo, Jim G., Masked Man♦, Dawny33, Lilienthal♦ Jun 10 '16 at 10:27
This question appears to be off-topic. The users who voted to close gave this specific reason:
- "Questions seeking advice on company-specific regulations, agreements, or policies should be directed to your manager or HR department. Questions that address only a specific company or position are of limited use to future visitors. Questions seeking legal advice should be directed to legal professionals. For more information, click here." – Jim G., Masked Man, Dawny33, Lilienthal
6
50 pounds? That doesn't really seem worth the trouble involved in getting your employer to pay for it. I would answer that this kind of thing is common but adding that clause over 50£ isn't, both because it's such a small amount of money and because people don't typically apply for such cheap courses through their employer.
– Lilienthal♦
Jun 9 '16 at 21:59
4
If the course is not directly related to your work, why do you even ask the employer to pay for it?
– Masked Man♦
Jun 10 '16 at 0:40
2
Could you add a Country tag? Because if you live in the UK, pay it yourself. 18 months is way to much for 50 Pounds. Would be stranger if they didnt ask you to stay for atleast x time.
– Raoul Mensink
Jun 10 '16 at 9:10
1
While remuneration of training costs is the norm, even here in the UK, requiring 18-months obligation for £50 is tantamount to involuntary servitude. They are essentially requiring you to be bound to the company for the grand outlay of your monthly wages plus £2.77. That would not be defensible by the company at tribunal or in a court of law - but you would be in a position where there is ill will or bad feeling if you left the company, so its up to you to decide whether you need this company on your CV or not. If you do, then my advice would be to pay the £50 and move on with your life.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 9:42
1
@JoeStrazzere to anyone with confidence and maturity, that is the way to look at it - its not a big thing, just pay the £50 and move on. To a junior dev, or someone who hasnt found their confidence in their working life, its a threat, regardless of the monetary amount attached. A reasonable employer wouldnt even bother asking for any repayment obligation, which says a lot about this one imho.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 17:53
 |Â
show 5 more comments
6
50 pounds? That doesn't really seem worth the trouble involved in getting your employer to pay for it. I would answer that this kind of thing is common but adding that clause over 50£ isn't, both because it's such a small amount of money and because people don't typically apply for such cheap courses through their employer.
– Lilienthal♦
Jun 9 '16 at 21:59
4
If the course is not directly related to your work, why do you even ask the employer to pay for it?
– Masked Man♦
Jun 10 '16 at 0:40
2
Could you add a Country tag? Because if you live in the UK, pay it yourself. 18 months is way to much for 50 Pounds. Would be stranger if they didnt ask you to stay for atleast x time.
– Raoul Mensink
Jun 10 '16 at 9:10
1
While remuneration of training costs is the norm, even here in the UK, requiring 18-months obligation for £50 is tantamount to involuntary servitude. They are essentially requiring you to be bound to the company for the grand outlay of your monthly wages plus £2.77. That would not be defensible by the company at tribunal or in a court of law - but you would be in a position where there is ill will or bad feeling if you left the company, so its up to you to decide whether you need this company on your CV or not. If you do, then my advice would be to pay the £50 and move on with your life.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 9:42
1
@JoeStrazzere to anyone with confidence and maturity, that is the way to look at it - its not a big thing, just pay the £50 and move on. To a junior dev, or someone who hasnt found their confidence in their working life, its a threat, regardless of the monetary amount attached. A reasonable employer wouldnt even bother asking for any repayment obligation, which says a lot about this one imho.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 17:53
6
6
50 pounds? That doesn't really seem worth the trouble involved in getting your employer to pay for it. I would answer that this kind of thing is common but adding that clause over 50£ isn't, both because it's such a small amount of money and because people don't typically apply for such cheap courses through their employer.
– Lilienthal♦
Jun 9 '16 at 21:59
50 pounds? That doesn't really seem worth the trouble involved in getting your employer to pay for it. I would answer that this kind of thing is common but adding that clause over 50£ isn't, both because it's such a small amount of money and because people don't typically apply for such cheap courses through their employer.
– Lilienthal♦
Jun 9 '16 at 21:59
4
4
If the course is not directly related to your work, why do you even ask the employer to pay for it?
– Masked Man♦
Jun 10 '16 at 0:40
If the course is not directly related to your work, why do you even ask the employer to pay for it?
– Masked Man♦
Jun 10 '16 at 0:40
2
2
Could you add a Country tag? Because if you live in the UK, pay it yourself. 18 months is way to much for 50 Pounds. Would be stranger if they didnt ask you to stay for atleast x time.
– Raoul Mensink
Jun 10 '16 at 9:10
Could you add a Country tag? Because if you live in the UK, pay it yourself. 18 months is way to much for 50 Pounds. Would be stranger if they didnt ask you to stay for atleast x time.
– Raoul Mensink
Jun 10 '16 at 9:10
1
1
While remuneration of training costs is the norm, even here in the UK, requiring 18-months obligation for £50 is tantamount to involuntary servitude. They are essentially requiring you to be bound to the company for the grand outlay of your monthly wages plus £2.77. That would not be defensible by the company at tribunal or in a court of law - but you would be in a position where there is ill will or bad feeling if you left the company, so its up to you to decide whether you need this company on your CV or not. If you do, then my advice would be to pay the £50 and move on with your life.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 9:42
While remuneration of training costs is the norm, even here in the UK, requiring 18-months obligation for £50 is tantamount to involuntary servitude. They are essentially requiring you to be bound to the company for the grand outlay of your monthly wages plus £2.77. That would not be defensible by the company at tribunal or in a court of law - but you would be in a position where there is ill will or bad feeling if you left the company, so its up to you to decide whether you need this company on your CV or not. If you do, then my advice would be to pay the £50 and move on with your life.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 9:42
1
1
@JoeStrazzere to anyone with confidence and maturity, that is the way to look at it - its not a big thing, just pay the £50 and move on. To a junior dev, or someone who hasnt found their confidence in their working life, its a threat, regardless of the monetary amount attached. A reasonable employer wouldnt even bother asking for any repayment obligation, which says a lot about this one imho.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 17:53
@JoeStrazzere to anyone with confidence and maturity, that is the way to look at it - its not a big thing, just pay the £50 and move on. To a junior dev, or someone who hasnt found their confidence in their working life, its a threat, regardless of the monetary amount attached. A reasonable employer wouldnt even bother asking for any repayment obligation, which says a lot about this one imho.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 17:53
 |Â
show 5 more comments
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
This is common.
You are wanting an extra benefit, they are wanting to ensure that this extra turns into further retention. This is especially common since the course isn't directly applicable to your work so they aren't likely to see a business benefit from you taking this course other than you being grateful that they paid for it.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
1
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
4
down vote
It's not uncommon that a company would pay for a training course with an agreement that the money is paid back or partially paid back depending on when you leave the company (normally you would want paying back after you get laid off with no fault of your own to be excluded).
This should usually be agreed upon before the course starts. If you had assumed that the company pays in full and then your boss comes with extra conditions, that wouldn't be good. Or if you had expected payment with conditions, and then the company doesn't pay after you started the course, that wouldn't be good either. In this case everything was fine because the agreement was what you expected.
Finding a training course for £50 would be a bit unusual. And signing up a contract and so on about £50 would be quite unusual, since (a) £50 won't stop you from leaving, (b) recovering £50 from you is probably more effort than the £50, and (c) writing the agreement, signing it, and storing it in a safe place, is probably also more effort than the £50.
Most employers would pay the £50 with no conditions, or not at all.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If paying for it yourself wasn't acceptable, you shouldn't have started the course until you knew what their answer would be.
Yes, this is common when the business value of the class is unclear.
The alternative would be for them to just say no; would you really prefer that?
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
suggest improvements |Â
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
11
down vote
This is common.
You are wanting an extra benefit, they are wanting to ensure that this extra turns into further retention. This is especially common since the course isn't directly applicable to your work so they aren't likely to see a business benefit from you taking this course other than you being grateful that they paid for it.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
1
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
11
down vote
This is common.
You are wanting an extra benefit, they are wanting to ensure that this extra turns into further retention. This is especially common since the course isn't directly applicable to your work so they aren't likely to see a business benefit from you taking this course other than you being grateful that they paid for it.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
1
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
11
down vote
up vote
11
down vote
This is common.
You are wanting an extra benefit, they are wanting to ensure that this extra turns into further retention. This is especially common since the course isn't directly applicable to your work so they aren't likely to see a business benefit from you taking this course other than you being grateful that they paid for it.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
This is common.
You are wanting an extra benefit, they are wanting to ensure that this extra turns into further retention. This is especially common since the course isn't directly applicable to your work so they aren't likely to see a business benefit from you taking this course other than you being grateful that they paid for it.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
answered Jun 9 '16 at 21:42
Myles
25.4k658104
25.4k658104
1
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
suggest improvements |Â
1
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
1
1
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
Yeah once my company was offering free certification once you're hired. About 5 people came on board, all took the certification, passed, then left for better paying jobs. After that my company only gave it with conditions of staying employed there for 2 years. So yeah retention is important.
– Dan
Jun 10 '16 at 14:59
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
4
down vote
It's not uncommon that a company would pay for a training course with an agreement that the money is paid back or partially paid back depending on when you leave the company (normally you would want paying back after you get laid off with no fault of your own to be excluded).
This should usually be agreed upon before the course starts. If you had assumed that the company pays in full and then your boss comes with extra conditions, that wouldn't be good. Or if you had expected payment with conditions, and then the company doesn't pay after you started the course, that wouldn't be good either. In this case everything was fine because the agreement was what you expected.
Finding a training course for £50 would be a bit unusual. And signing up a contract and so on about £50 would be quite unusual, since (a) £50 won't stop you from leaving, (b) recovering £50 from you is probably more effort than the £50, and (c) writing the agreement, signing it, and storing it in a safe place, is probably also more effort than the £50.
Most employers would pay the £50 with no conditions, or not at all.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
4
down vote
It's not uncommon that a company would pay for a training course with an agreement that the money is paid back or partially paid back depending on when you leave the company (normally you would want paying back after you get laid off with no fault of your own to be excluded).
This should usually be agreed upon before the course starts. If you had assumed that the company pays in full and then your boss comes with extra conditions, that wouldn't be good. Or if you had expected payment with conditions, and then the company doesn't pay after you started the course, that wouldn't be good either. In this case everything was fine because the agreement was what you expected.
Finding a training course for £50 would be a bit unusual. And signing up a contract and so on about £50 would be quite unusual, since (a) £50 won't stop you from leaving, (b) recovering £50 from you is probably more effort than the £50, and (c) writing the agreement, signing it, and storing it in a safe place, is probably also more effort than the £50.
Most employers would pay the £50 with no conditions, or not at all.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
It's not uncommon that a company would pay for a training course with an agreement that the money is paid back or partially paid back depending on when you leave the company (normally you would want paying back after you get laid off with no fault of your own to be excluded).
This should usually be agreed upon before the course starts. If you had assumed that the company pays in full and then your boss comes with extra conditions, that wouldn't be good. Or if you had expected payment with conditions, and then the company doesn't pay after you started the course, that wouldn't be good either. In this case everything was fine because the agreement was what you expected.
Finding a training course for £50 would be a bit unusual. And signing up a contract and so on about £50 would be quite unusual, since (a) £50 won't stop you from leaving, (b) recovering £50 from you is probably more effort than the £50, and (c) writing the agreement, signing it, and storing it in a safe place, is probably also more effort than the £50.
Most employers would pay the £50 with no conditions, or not at all.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
It's not uncommon that a company would pay for a training course with an agreement that the money is paid back or partially paid back depending on when you leave the company (normally you would want paying back after you get laid off with no fault of your own to be excluded).
This should usually be agreed upon before the course starts. If you had assumed that the company pays in full and then your boss comes with extra conditions, that wouldn't be good. Or if you had expected payment with conditions, and then the company doesn't pay after you started the course, that wouldn't be good either. In this case everything was fine because the agreement was what you expected.
Finding a training course for £50 would be a bit unusual. And signing up a contract and so on about £50 would be quite unusual, since (a) £50 won't stop you from leaving, (b) recovering £50 from you is probably more effort than the £50, and (c) writing the agreement, signing it, and storing it in a safe place, is probably also more effort than the £50.
Most employers would pay the £50 with no conditions, or not at all.
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
answered Jun 9 '16 at 23:28
gnasher729
70.6k31131221
70.6k31131221
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
suggest improvements |Â
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
While you're right about the 50, it might just be a matter of principle because this exception was not foreseen: all courses paid come with a retention/payback clause. This way an employee is not suddenly surprised when next time he asks for a 500 course and receives the payback response.
– Konerak
Jun 10 '16 at 12:02
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If paying for it yourself wasn't acceptable, you shouldn't have started the course until you knew what their answer would be.
Yes, this is common when the business value of the class is unclear.
The alternative would be for them to just say no; would you really prefer that?
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
2
down vote
If paying for it yourself wasn't acceptable, you shouldn't have started the course until you knew what their answer would be.
Yes, this is common when the business value of the class is unclear.
The alternative would be for them to just say no; would you really prefer that?
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
suggest improvements |Â
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
If paying for it yourself wasn't acceptable, you shouldn't have started the course until you knew what their answer would be.
Yes, this is common when the business value of the class is unclear.
The alternative would be for them to just say no; would you really prefer that?
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
If paying for it yourself wasn't acceptable, you shouldn't have started the course until you knew what their answer would be.
Yes, this is common when the business value of the class is unclear.
The alternative would be for them to just say no; would you really prefer that?
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
edited Jun 10 '16 at 0:35
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
answered Jun 9 '16 at 22:24
keshlam
41.5k1267144
41.5k1267144
suggest improvements |Â
suggest improvements |Â
6
50 pounds? That doesn't really seem worth the trouble involved in getting your employer to pay for it. I would answer that this kind of thing is common but adding that clause over 50£ isn't, both because it's such a small amount of money and because people don't typically apply for such cheap courses through their employer.
– Lilienthal♦
Jun 9 '16 at 21:59
4
If the course is not directly related to your work, why do you even ask the employer to pay for it?
– Masked Man♦
Jun 10 '16 at 0:40
2
Could you add a Country tag? Because if you live in the UK, pay it yourself. 18 months is way to much for 50 Pounds. Would be stranger if they didnt ask you to stay for atleast x time.
– Raoul Mensink
Jun 10 '16 at 9:10
1
While remuneration of training costs is the norm, even here in the UK, requiring 18-months obligation for £50 is tantamount to involuntary servitude. They are essentially requiring you to be bound to the company for the grand outlay of your monthly wages plus £2.77. That would not be defensible by the company at tribunal or in a court of law - but you would be in a position where there is ill will or bad feeling if you left the company, so its up to you to decide whether you need this company on your CV or not. If you do, then my advice would be to pay the £50 and move on with your life.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 9:42
1
@JoeStrazzere to anyone with confidence and maturity, that is the way to look at it - its not a big thing, just pay the £50 and move on. To a junior dev, or someone who hasnt found their confidence in their working life, its a threat, regardless of the monetary amount attached. A reasonable employer wouldnt even bother asking for any repayment obligation, which says a lot about this one imho.
– Moo
Jun 10 '16 at 17:53