Training Bonds

[proxypilot]

Hi Guys,

I know it's been asked before but after doing a search the only reference I can find is to helicopter companies in the "rotorheads" section, so I'd like to ask the question with regards to airlines, specifically European airlines.

Are training bonds legal and enforceable?

Would an airline have to justify the amount they are bonding you for? ie. if it seems an arbitrary figure?

Cheers,

Proxy

[Dreamshiner]

Don't know how much help it may be but I read something about a German pilot on here winning a court case. The judge ended saying that a bond was only valid for 1 year. Don't know if it could be used as a precident EU wide or where to find it.

Sorry can't be more help, but its a start.

[captjns]

Perhaps proxypilot, you would do better by consulting with a labour attorney regarding the legalities of training bonds in various industries and countries.

[JW411]

On the other hand, I know of one chap in UK who was taken to court by the airline and, despite union representation, lost the case and had to repay the outstanding balance of the bond.

As someone has already said, you need proper professional advice.

[BIGBAD]

aviation is a small world, I've heard of people leaving one company and telling them to stick the bond, to go somewhere else. Then suddenly the job they are going to doesn't exist as somebody in the previous company has had a word with their friends in the new company. After all would you train and bond somebody who has just walked away from another company's bond ???

[flysi]

I was told directly by the chief pilot of my previous airline that if I didn't pay the bond, then they would not acknowledge that I'd worked for them.

This would then mean that I would be unable to pass the security screening for the issue of a UK airside security pass, i.e. a five year background check.

The legality of the situation doesn't mean much if you can't start your new job.

I paid the bond.

[Dreamshiner]

You could post pictures of yourself in the RHS on a public networking site with your little general hanging out. The picture could then be published in a Sunday rag such as the News of the World with your modesty protected by a little concorde photoshopped over the offending article. Causing your airline embarrassment resulting in you being told you can leave without holding you to your bond.

[bear11]

Generally speaking in an EU context, I believe there's enough prior court rulings in EU countries to suggest that an airline shouldn't bond you for any more than the training has cost. Airlines can, of course, inflate the actual cost somewhat on paper. "Seems an arbitrary figure", therefore, could have been carefully constructed as a result. How long they can bond you for and if/when the bond reduces over time would be more contentious issues.

I don't think there's anything definitive, I'm sure it would vary from country to country within the EU, and as pointed out they have more than one way of skinning you in any case. The airline line is that the reason bonds exist is that people like you (no offense) took what they could and ran off thumbing their noses at the airline, if you don't like it don't sign it and don't work there, and if you did sign it, suck it up and live up to your legal responsibilities.

It's like the old joke "Doctor, my arm hurts when I bend it this way". "Well, don't bend it that way from now on".

[judge11]

'Are training bonds legal and enforceable?'

If you have signed a contract then the answer is yes unless the contract itself is 'illegal' and contravenes aspects of national legislation.

What would be eminently arguable in court would be the amount of the bond because, as you suggest, some of the amounts levied are manifestly ridiculous and massivley overinflate the actual cost to the airline.

In the case of the UK, this is yet another matter BALPA should be, but hasn't been, invloved in.

[parabellum]

Proxy Pilot - If you scroll your way through these 111 threads you will see a lot written about training bonds:

http://www.pprune.org/search.php?searchid=6278562

But the bottom line is that if you have signed it then you have signed a contract. Other than under exceptional circumstances a person who breaks a bond has demonstrated that they are unreliable, dishonest, lack foresight and don't keep their word, not qualities most employers are looking for, add to that they are scarred for life within the industry, sooner or later it will almost always come back to bite them.

Don't be fooled by people who want to tell you that a decent employer doesn't need to bond, the truth is that bonding has come about because of people who have taken the training then taken off without giving a proper return of service.

I have worked for an airline that treated bonds very, very seriously and bond breakers were ruthlessly and tirelessly pursued, on the other hand, in the same company I have seen people go to the office and negotiate, often coming away very pleasantly surprised at the terms and amount of repayment. Honesty pays.

[CheekyVisual]

Flying is a very small world. Everyone has a mate somewhere else and once you make a "name" for yourself getting the next job becomes all the harder. Every reference form sent out says "Would you re-employ this person ?" If you've run off and not paid the answer is definately going to be no. Never run away in breach of contract no matter how good the next job looks. You don't know how long the great jobs going to last.

If you really have to leave and can not repay the bond then, provided you are not actually refusing to pay, then legally the company holding your bond have to at least consider and have a very good reason for not accepting a reasonable repayment schedule over a reasonable period of time. I know several people who have gone down this route successfully spreading a large bond pay off over up to two years without getting themselves on the Chief Pilots network !

[flyprototype]

so guys you are telling me that if the company treats me bad, ask me to fly illegally,... I have to stay because I signed a bond?

a bond become not valid when a company break rules.Just refuse to fly.
I know most airlines break rules...It would be very easy to go somewhere else and black mail them:E.

[Bealzebub]

No, a training bond is a contract term that provides for compensation or redress on the part of the provider if the signee breaches the terms of the contract. It is a stand alone issue from how an employer "behaves" or is perceived to treat you. Those are matters that may have an entirely different means of redress.

On the assumption you have an IQ of more than 70, read and understand the terms of the contract you are entering into before you sign and thereby agree to be bound by them. If they are beyond your scope of understanding, or you otherwise feel you properly need professional advice before entering into a contract, then obtain that before you sign.

Dreaming up alternative realities, and engaging in wishful thinking after the event, is usually fraught with difficulties and expense. The same holds true for most forms of contracts. Mortgage contracts often have penalty clauses for breach, as do most other forms of contract. Act like an adult and save yourself lots of potential grief, and internet forum hand wringing if it all goes wrong as result of your lack of proper understanding later on.

[747JJ]

A lot of nonsense here but some useful info.

I have never heard a pilot not being hired for having jumped a bond. Most pilots feel negative about the matter and would not hold it against the individual unless there is a clear case of what I like to call abusing the company. Do bear in mind though that most companies have forgotten with the introduction of incompetent as retarded HR persons how to treat people. Actually many companies have HR to hire people and bypass pilots in the selection board or override them.

A contract is an agreement between two parties. A good contract in an IDEAL world is fair to both parties however this is rarely the case (Usually never in the advantage of the employee or contractor) A company and individual in this case. Should the conditions of the contract be such that these could be interpreted to be unfavourable or unfair for one party, then these conditions could be invesitgated by a clevel lawyer and perhaps the individual is out of the contract binding him/her but out of a job as well.

Again when a company does not respect agreements I fail to see why I should honor my side of the contract. Lets say that company A tells you in the interview that your base is Europe and sends you regardless your objections to Asia for an extended period of time, that according to my lawyer subsitutes for a breach of contract. The company states that personal taxes are your responsibility and your salary is xxxx amount. 2 years later they inform you that you are now to pay tax to a 3rd country you have nothing to do with as they have made a deal tax people there. Again your salary drops by 30% as you have been tax exempt in your home country. A breach of contract again. Now would you respect your contractual obligations in the face of flagrant disregard the company shows towards the contract? I would not and I wont :E

What is a legal training bond? Apparently if a company receives aircraft from the manufacturer and has type ratings as an added bonus, these need to be valued separately. An unnamed company bonded pilots on the Avro RJ for 3 years and 45000 eur. A bit harsh on the money I think. Another company bonds you for everything: Type, landings, line training, upgrade to capt and any other training you take with the company as they see it as a potential source of revenue.

This industry has gone to the dumpster long time ago and I cannot wait the time when I can stop flying and finish my studies and get a real job.

[Stingray]

I know that in Switzerland a court will look at the time the bond lasts which has to be 'reasonable'. That is something between 1 and 3 years. Then an employee can only be bonded for training that is not considered training only valuable with that company. So you can be bonded for the cost of a type rating because that is something you can take with you if you leave the company providing it. But you can not be bonded for the cost of the company introduction course, since that course has no value outside of that company. Then they can not bond you for an amount that is not in line with the actual training cost.

A court will accept that you as a job seeker, specially if you have no job are at a disadvantage, and companies are not allowed to take advantage of your situation. That can be a reason that even so you signed under a bonding contract not every part of it is considered legal.

Knowing all this, the best strategy is to talk to the company, and cut a deal instead of taking them to court. If they feel that you are informed about the legal situation, you will have some leverage in the negotiations.

I assume that similar principles will be applicable in other European countries.

[parabellum]

A lot of nonsense here but some useful info.

Care to enlighten us 747JJ? Tell us about the 'nonsense' for a start.

[747JJ]

Dear Parabellum

I had decided to leave it to my comment about the BS, bus since you insist, I'll entertain you:

Quote:

But the bottom line is that if you have signed it then you have signed a contract. Other than under exceptional circumstances a person who breaks a bond has demonstrated that they are unreliable, dishonest, lack foresight and don't keep their word, not qualities most employers are looking for, add to that they are scarred for life within the industry, sooner or later it will almost always come back to bite them.

Unquote

A loaf of sha.it if I've ever seen such a thing. Never ever heard of being scarred for life for failing to respect a bond agreement. But then again we are all entiteled to our own views and decisions or are we not? Some decide to jump a bond so to speak, some cross picket lines and work when other strike ala 1989. On that latter subject I have heard people getting scarred for life and being marked men. That mark DOES follow people around.

[Kirks gusset]

Airlines have got wise to the old lags "engineering" their dismissal or claiming the Bond was unreasonable for instance if a pilot is already typed and have taken advice from various council, including the pilot Unions.
If the Bond specifies what it includes, ground training, transport, hotac, sim, OCC etc and you sign the contract, you are agreeing to refund those costs if you leave, full stop.
Now, if you jump ship and don't honour the agreement, should it end up in court, the airline would have to demonstrate their costs where infact, reasonable, therein rests a problem.. Most of us would argue the sim is xx per hour, hotel xx etc etc, however, the airline could reasonably claim that part of their " operational" costs could be included as without their fixed structures and organisation, the training could not be completed in the first place.
If you don't want to be " Bonded" politely refuse to sign it and try and negotiate a solution, sadly, this may mean no job.
Of interest is the increasing trend towards " non reducing" bonds, the result being if you leave anytime during the contracted period of the bond, you pay the lot back. This method, should it end up in court, heavily favours the airlines as they could argue the " training" was completed in advance and without it you could not have operated at any time and they are writing off the costs after a fixed period. The reducing bond argues they are writing off the cost over a fixed period and opens the door to all levels of arguements about work contributions etc. For instance, is it fair for the bond to reduce at the same rate for two guys, one whom is off on sick leave then holidays against the 100hr a month company bike.
One small consideration is the cost of you defending the action against you, you can't roll over and play dead and if you have assets they can take a charge over you could be in peril. These big companies have huge budgets and legal support, for every 50p it costs them, it could cost you 2 quid!
Beware, a colleague of mine is still paying back his to a well know lowco after they got an ex-partie judgement on him, he thought burying himself in HK would be OK,,not so when you have a home in UK.
Lastly, come on guys, we are meant to be professionals, not a bunch of chancers.

[winkle]

I wrote a nice letter saying I didn't want to fly again. I left then got a letter thanking me for being open etc, a few weeks later I got a letter from some accounts dept saying I owed such an amount. I ignored it and never heard a thing since, if they do come back to me then I will ask for my job back but since it was 3 years ago and I haven't flown since I don't suppose they would be too interested coupled with the fact that I have heard they are laying people off.
Do I miss it .....................nah!:ok:

[parabellum]

A loaf of sha.it if I've ever seen such a thing.


Sorry 747JJ but no it isn't. There is a wealth of evidence out there to support what I have said and quite a few who have posted here on previous threads in PPRuNe who have demonstrated just those 'qualities' I have mentioned. I personally know of three people who have had serious trouble finding another job, having jumped ship, with an outstanding bond, they all had what they felt were good reasons and could have gone to the office to negotiate but no, they just took off and that is dishonest..

Remember, the whole issue of bonding came about because pilots were taking the training and then clearing off before giving a fair return of service, the pilots caused bonding to happen, not the companies.

Don't let your own experience with a bad company, (you chose them, you signed the contract), to cloud your judgement. If a company breaches it's contract with you and you walk away with a bond outstanding then you are both in the wrong, one doesn't, as many seem to think, cancel out the other.

[proxypilot]

Cheers for the replies. Interesting reading, along the same lines as what I'm hearing in the "real" world.

Thanks

[Adios]

Bral,

This would be a case of the company leaving you, not vice versa. If they are offering a pay cut, that would be a new contract. If they terminate you for not signing a new contract at lower pay, then you would be free from the bond. I would ask them to cancel the bond in exchange for the pay cut. I doubt they'd take the offer, but it's worth a try.

[flyprototype]

bral.

i guess the company would be happy if you don't accept the pay cut and leave.
these airline are loosing so much money, all they want is to get rid of pilots, bonding or not!

[320seriesTRE]

The Bond, then is null and void....... Enjoy the free rating old chap....:ok:

[Heli-Ice]

Does any of you have a copy of a training bond that you would like to share? Of course with names omitted from the document.

Or guide to a link on the interweb where one can find his copy?

I have searched Googoo but with no results yet.

[Kickingkatie]

All training bonds will be different, there is no standard.
Some may be enforceable and some may not.
The bottom line is not one of what is morally right or wrong but of a legal nature. So don't sign it unless you are confident you can defend your breach of contract in a Court.

Most of what has been written on this post is rubbish and opinion so my advice before signing any contract is take it to a Contract solicitor before signing and ask them for advice. Some do a free hour or it may cost you around £100

[Heli-Ice]

kickingkatie

I appreciate your answer.

I am aware that these agreements vary but I am just shopping around for one to see the wordings and to get a general idea of how these things are constructed.

Karl

[hawkerjet]

I have a buddy in Macau flying private jets. He decided to leave with a week or so before his recurrent is due( he gave the mandatory notice period of over 30 days). In fact he'd have been the air right now heading for training if he didn't decide to leave. What makes this case different is that there was nothing written in his contract about recurrent training. there is a bond aggreement for Initial Classes and new type ratings for 24 months, but nothing for any other training. They just decided to deduct an amount the bean counters came up with for the relative cost of the recurrent training. Has anyone else heard of such a thing. If it is not in the contract then what is happening to him sounds illegal.:ugh: