Unfortunately, the answer is not always as simple as we would like. Sure, companies can get an employee to sign a commitment agreement and feel pretty protected in that way, but the test is really whether that agreement is enforceable when it`s reviewed by the courts, and it`s always a case-by-case decision. When the employee is simply trained for the job, this is often only seen as a benefit to the company and not to the employee. In this case, it could be considered unfair and therefore illegal to bind them. However, if the employee obtains through the training a formal qualification or equivalent ability recognized throughout the sector, which is clearly an advantage for himself, the company has a valid case to hire the employee, to derive value from the expenses and investments he has made. In the case before the bar, the question was whether the master had to pay US$27,641.51 for his training, knowing that because of this termination, he was violating his training ties after only five months of work with the employer, whereas the conditions required in the training contract were twenty-four months. And the employee who has agreed to resume the service loan for a period of one year of five months that the company will propose from September 12, 2016, according to the conditions discussed and agreed. The Institute of Management of P.O. Box 2987 – 00100, represented by Mr. Saman Kinh, Duly Authorized Regional Director, is hereinafter referred to as “the Institute” and includes the Institute of Management or the “Employer”, as formed today or from time to time during the implementation of this Agreement The Worker has undergon training paid for by Carson Air at the beginning of her employment.
Towards the end of her probation, she was dismissed on the grounds that she was not fit for purpose. The employee brought an action against Carson Air Ltd. for discrimination, breach of contract, harassment, unlawful dismissal and defamation. The employer argued that the dismissal was justified and brought a counterclaim to the detriment of the training. The employee contested responsibility for the training costs and argued that she had entered the training contract under duress. The 25 Contract Items concluded and exported on August 1, 2016. This case shows the importance for crew members to remain professional in their work environment. not only during the flight period, but also when flight crew members are in contact with the operator`s management team. All flight crew members who sign a training obligation must comply with their contractual obligations. Training obligations are legally binding and enforceable documents. Training obligations are interesting legal instruments for pilots who are willing to improve their aviation qualifications to advance in their careers, but pilots must recognize that such agreements represent a considerable amount of money and can therefore entail serious personal debts in the event of a breach of contract. .