Your first paragraph is correct my dear holmes.
On rereading not sure my analogy on customers really worked. Never mind, it was early.
Let me have another go at trying to articulate my thoughts. It is my job as a manager to maximise the long term (note the word longterm its important) profits and returns to my boss the shareholders.
The word long term is crucial in this. In the short term I can maximise profits by if I may use the term shafting the employees. However the impact of that in the long term is that I get at best demotivated and at worst ex-employees and this will result in lower long term profits.
Now the long term profits I can generate are self evidently the difference between the revenue I can earn from my customers and the costs I incur to run my services.
Now whisper this quietly but if I could screw my customers for more revenue by putting up the fares i would, more lovely lolly for my boss the shareholders and a much deserved company porsche for me. sadly the customers are wise to this and i have already set the fares at the highest level I believe I can sustain in the long run.
Now the airline industry is not a highly profitable one. In fact shareholder returns are pretty dismal. With revenue effectively already maximised and costs already to close to revenue to provide shareholders with a good return, i have to ensure that all money I invest will provide the business and therefore the shareholder with an acceptable return.
My pilots are a vital commodity to me. I am happy to invest significant sums in their future to train them. All I ask in return for this is the opportunity to earn a reasonable return by sticking with me and using this valuable training for the benefit of my business rather than just disappearing off to pastures greener. Sadly the evidence on the ground in my business is that I need bonding to ensure that some pilots who have agreed to give me the opportunity to recoup my investment deliver on their promise when I have met promises made to them.
I accept of course that there will be times when exceptional circumstances mean that pilot acting in good faith cannot now fulfill his promise. In such circumstances I believe the bond should be waived. Up to now I would use my own judgement as to whether exceptional circumstances exist but I am prepared to concede that other operators may be less moral and yes I have to confess that I am less than perfect and perhaps at times pilots in my business who are bonded may reasonably consider that they have been less than perfectly treated. In such circumstances an independant arbiter of reasonableness as you suggest is perhaps not a bad idea.
Arguement for subsequent employee bonding follows from this. If I choose to make it impossible for pilot to meet his promise to give me an adequate return by taking his type away, he should not be expected to promise me an adequate return again on the next lot of training.
If however he chooses to ask me to invest in him again to further his career I think it is entirely appropriate to ask him to pormise again to give me an adequate retrun on the new training. If he doesnt want to do this, I am more than happy for him to stay on his old type. I really dont see why I should pay for him to be trained out of my money for him simply to hike his new found skills to another operator for his own benefit.
Wow a marathon post. Off to bed to catch up on some much needed sleep. Oh by the way employee issue solved to all sides agreed benefit. Hooray a win-win, always the aim in any employer/ee issue.