I don't see what all the mud slinging is about here? This seems to be an excellent addition to the Award. Bonds have always been a bit of a wild west with everyone just doing what they want, we had employers taking advantage and employees taking advantage, the sword cut both ways, I've seen both sides of it and in the end no one really wins when either side does something ****ty but have had very little recourse in the past.
Here we have an addition that seems to balance things out, an employer can only bond them up to 50% of the training cost which is an acknowledgement that training costs are a cost of doing business but that they also expect a suitable return on this "investment" in their employees. There is also an implied requirement that the Employer has a proper costing of these training expenses and could easily be taken to task by any lawyer or judge to simply present these to prove why they charged what they charged.
Hamley, no operators who were doing the wrong thing have had anything legitimised by this, they have been brought to task and will now be required to show what these expenses are and can't just hide them anymore.