Enforcement of Training Bond

[cf6-80c2b5f]

This is my first post on this forum. It was highly recommend by a co-worker and I can see why. I hope I have posted this question in the right sub-forum.

I am typed on the DC-10 and 747 Classic. I was considering taking a position in Asia as an F/O on the 747-400, but the employment contract/training bond has me somewhat concerned.

Has anyone had any experience or known of any of these foreign carriers attempting to enforce an employment contract/training bond here in the United States?

In my 25-year career, I think I can count on one hand the number of crewmembers that I didn't enjoy flying with, but I have never worked for a non-U.S. carrier and I have heard the horror stories from other co-workers about the cultural barriers in some of these countries.

Specifically, I am looking for actual court cases (state or federal) in the United States where a company has gone after a crewmember for breach of contract.

Thanks in advance.

[Time Traveller]

If you don't like the contract, you shouldn't sign it.

Going into a job knowing you might break the contract is pretty bad form, and will just make the company wary of employing pilots from your neck of the woods in future.

[cf6-80c2b5f]

Going into a job knowing you might break the contract is pretty bad form.

And signing a contract not knowing what's at stake is pretty good form?

[Mach E Avelli]

It depends on which jurisdiction you sign up for, and what reach they have. If you break their training bond the Singaporeans will hunt you down to the ends of the earth. Repossess your house, your wife and your dog. And if you break a bond in your own country - as we say in Oz - you are rooted (word of mouth will precede you because aviation even in a global context is a very small pool).
So don't go there unless you want to go there....

[cf6-80c2b5f]

Agreed: No pilot wants to go there any more than a pilot wants to go to an alternate. Respectfully--and without this string digressing into an issue of whether a pilot should even be foolish enough to consider a worst-case scenario--I was simply looking to see if anyone was aware of any case filed in a U.S. jurisdiction where a foreign (non-U.S) air carrier actually attempted to domesticate a judgment for breach of contract that was issued by a non-U.S. court.

[kick the tires]

What a strange first post; there is a hidden agenda me thinks!

If you have indeed had an aviation career of 25 years you will know of such cases and you will know of the morality of signing a contract knowing that you are going to break it. Its simply dishonourable and wrong!

If you dont think you are going to like it, why go in the first place? There is no excuse for not doing your homework. A man of your experience and background is not wet behind the ears!

Strange posting indeed.

[SloppyJoe]

I don't think it is that strange and I would be wondering the same thing if I was in his position. Maybe it does not happen in the US like in the rest of the world but contracts are not that solid, they have ambiguities and wording that the employer uses to their advantage, with the worse operators they plainly ignore items and change things at their whim. There are companies out there that promise everything but in the end deliver very little. I think if the contract you sign pans out exactly as stated then yes you should stick with it for the agreed period. I know one of the main worries is cultural and not getting along with the other crew members and that will not be mentioned in the contract. As an FO on a 744 you can expect the crew already employed to be professional, if they are not then I think that is grounds enough to pack it in and get out without any moral concerns about breaking the bond.

I would be wondering the exact same thing, if it is as ****ty as it could be can I get out without any problems before the 5 or whatever years as to be honest life is to short. Without problems is not being followed back home with this crap.

[clanger32]

I would humbly suggest that whilst we must caveat up front that not all carriers would do so, you should also consider that in the vast majority of cases, if the situation is intolerable to the contracted, or unforeseen events elsewise necessitate, most companies - as long as you approach in a reasonable and considered manner can be persuaded to release you for some consideration. Contrary to popular opinion, most management teams do at least retain enough savvy to know that if someone wants out it's better all around to reach a mutual agreement and let that party go on reasonable terms.

To do this MAY harm your chances of future employment in that region, but would mitigate likelihood of being a test case for the scenario you directly seek advice on.

[Sygyzy]

If you are going anywhere that begins with SI I would say that you'll enjoy it. Ask all relevant Q's at interview. If you don't like the answers then don't sign.

But downtown LA it ain't. They're hard masters-even to their own kind-but they are fair. Perhaps not so fair to western eyes but then this is a different culture in a different part of the world. A training bond with them will be with up front money banked into a local bank. Break the bond and the money will go, have no doubt of that. Plus you'll be PNG at a very important travel crossroads.

I have little experience of other parts of Asia, but I do read the horror stories on here. A good agency-an oxymoron perhaps-should be able to keep you clear of most of those.

S

[GlueBall]

You could bail out as long as you plan to stay out of the respective country where you sign the contract. If you return you may be arrested.

As to "chasing you down in the States" and "repossessing your home" is wild imagination. It's not a "criminal" case. At most it would be a misdemeanour, . . . not an "Interpol" case. U.S. courts have no jurisdiction over an employment contract that you sign with a foreign company in a foreign country. Nobody will come after you.

And why should you feel guilty of terminating your employment agreement early? . . . Especially when employers will fire you without notice, especially in Asia where foreign contractors have zero rights and zero labor protections. Ever hear of the CX 49ers? Virtually nothing has changed.

[411A]

Hmmm, training bonds.

Only signed one on one occasion, the company offered training in the actual airplane (as well as the simulator) and wanted cash up front to cover the fuel expenses.
So, I deposited the funds in a local bank, completed the aircraft training...and was rewarded by having the cash released within one year, with an interest rate of 13%.
In the end, I was sorry they didn't ask for more....:}

[cf6-80c2b5f]

From the research I have conducted, most employment contracts with non-U.S. carriers contain a forum selection clause and an agreement to consent to the personal jurisdiction of their country's courts. As a practical matter, no pilot is going to stick around to argue his case in a foreign court in the unfortunate event that things go pear shaped, even if he thought he would get a fair hearing.

Consequently, if the carrier decided to pursue it, as I am told some will do, they would be entitled to a default judgment, issued by a court in their country. They would still have to domesticate that judgment in the state (specific county) where the pilot's non-exempt assets are located before they could execute on those assets. Execution means that they could get a writ ordering that a law enforcement official seize and auction the asset and give the money to the judgment creditor to satisfy the amount of the judgment. In most states, execution also allows garnishment of up to 25% of the debtor's wages and seizure of his bank accounts to satisfy the judgment.

The carrier's problem is that mutual suspicion of one another’s court systems has prevented the United States from entering into treaties with other countries for mutual recognition of judgments. Thus, the enforcement of foreign judgments in the United States is governed almost entirely by state law. Some states, like Colorado, do not even recognize foreign court judgments. Many other states scrutinize foreign judgments and are favorable to the judgment debtor when issues of fairness, jurisdiction or affirmative defenses are raised.

This is obviously a very sensitive subject for some, as manifested by some of the replies to my original query. Perhaps my employment by strictly U.S. carriers throughout my career has resulted in a sheltered state of ignorance regarding the employment practices of some of the world's major air carriers. I have no "hidden agenda," but I could just as easily ask whether the respondents, who are apparently repulsed merely by the fact that I have raised the question, are acting to protect ulterior corporate interests.

I am just trying to do my "homework," which would necessitate examining the worst-case scenario. The best-case scenario is, of course, what we all hope to experience.

[parabellum]

If you state the airline you are considering you will probably get some first hand experiences and advice, try the South Asia and the Far East (http://www.pprune.org/south-asia-far-east-45/) forum too.

SIA will chase you if you jump ship without completing or paying off your bond but they will negotiate with you if you sit down and talk to them. Those that I know who negotiated got away quite lightly.

[GlueBall]

. . . "Execution means that they could get a writ ordering that a law enforcement official seize and auction the asset and give the money to the judgment creditor to satisfy the amount of the judgement..."

Just think about it: . . . an employment contract violation with a foreign air carrier by a U.S. citizen in Asia. Wow.

Before any U.S. Federal or State law enforcement officer can seize your property or bank account, an order must be issued by a U.S. court. But no U.S. court has jurisdiction to rule on a foreign employment contract violation. It would be equivalent to a Mexican police officer trying to make an arrest in California!

On a larger scale: Imagine, . . . just as the French courts did not honor an arrest warrant of Roman Polanski for statutory rape, as "ordered by a California court." . . . And you're worried about being chased down by a foreign air carrier, about having your house repossessed, your bank account seized and your wages garnered? Get real. :ooh:

[cf6-80c2b5f]

The U.S. court recognizing the foreign judgment need not have jurisdiction over the contract dispute itself. It need only recognize that the foreign court had jurisdiction over the case and the parties.

Actually, there are two types of jurisdiction--personal jurisdiction and subject matter jurisdiction. Because the terms of most employment contracts expressly consent to the jurisdiction of the foreign court over the parties, personal jurisdiction exists and is not an issue, even if the pilot is not a resident of the foreign court's forum.

Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court to hear the dispute. For instance, in the U.S., federal courts are courts of limited jurisdiction. They can generally only hear cases that deal with federal questions or where the parties are "diverse," specifically, where the defendant is not a resident of the state and the amount in controversy exceeds $75,000 (known as "diversity jurisdiction"). On the other hand, state courts are courts of general jurisdiction. Because of this, most contract actions are heard in state courts.

It is unlikely that a foreign carrier's lawyers would be foolish enough to file their dispute in a local foreign court that lacks power to hear the dispute. There is certainly a correct local court in that foreign jurisdiction to file the action and I am confident they will file it there. In addition, there is a forum selection clause in the contract that specifies the proper forum and a choice of law clause that specifies the law to be used.

Once they get a default judgment from that court, then it becomes a question of taking the judgment to a U.S. court and domesticating it.

The lack of jurisdiction issue is not a question of whether the U.S. court has jurisdiction, it is whether the U.S. court, when presented with the foreign judgment, would determine that the foreign court entering the judgment had jurisdiction. Of course, for the state court to domesticate the judgment, it would have to have personal jurisdiction over the pilot (e.g., pilot resides in that state).

Since the employment contracts I have seen generally contain forum selection clauses and consent to personal jurisdiction of the foreign carriers' courts and laws, I am looking for information about cases where foreign carriers have actually tried to enforce a foreign judgment here in the U.S. Unlike federal courts, most state courts' records are not available on-line, unless the case actually got appealed and a decision from the state appellate court was published. Thus, there are probably few (if any) cases available on-line.

[hunterboy]

It seems to me that you should be looking for a job as a lawyer in the Far East rather than a pilot. It certainly pays more.

[cf6-80c2b5f]

It certainly isn't that way here in the states. There are lawyers with $150,000 student loans from ABA law schools doing document review for $17 per hour--with no benefits whatsoever. Think I'm kidding? Check out sh*t law jobs. com. Besides, there is no law job anywhere that could come close to the feeling of pushing up the power levers on a 396,800 kg machine.

[TOFFAIR]

Is the contract direct with the Asian carrier or is it done through a contractor, possibly represented in the US?
And what would be the reason for leaving? greed or safety? I think this might weigh somehow if the case comes to court, but Im not a law expert, just trying to use common sense...
Good luck anyway, and not to forget there are always new opportunities showing up!

[cf6-80c2b5f]

The contract is with the foreign carrier, but you raise a good point about some of the crew leasing companies being based in the U.S.

The reason for leaving, if it even happened, would be to care for elderly parents that would have no one else to help them. They have always been there for me and I'd hate to be in a position where they needed my help and I was unable to leave. It has nothing to do with greed or jumping ship for a better opportunity.

[TOFFAIR]

I think in this case you could have a good basis to negotiate with the company. Its a non standard situation, talking to them directly might open the door to a satisfying solution for both sides.
Wish you best!

[parabellum]

It may not be SIA that you are considering but the Chinese generally and Singaporeans in particular take filial responsibility very seriously, (it is within Singaporean law for parents to sue their children for non support and an order for maintenance being made against the children).

In one instance where I know of an individual being able to negotiate the bond he was first given a year off without pay but kept his job, then, when that didn't work out, he was able to negotiate a very reasonable departure, an agreed sum to be paid over a period of years and the Bank Bond was released without deduction. What no company likes is someone who justs jumps ship and makes no effort to settle their contractual debts.

[cf6-80c2b5f]

Thanks for the input. The United States had to enact the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) because large companies (more than 50 employees) who were committed to nothing but the bottom line were obviously not willing to voluntarily keep a job open when an employee needed time to care for a sick parent. Even with the FMLA, it only provides for 12 weeks of unpaid leave per year. It sounds like SIA is pretty reasonable.

[crazydud2000]

if you leave a company in Asia, they may pass your name to their own DCA(Asian FAA).
in the future, you may have problems to get a validation.

Asia is "who you know and how much money you have", and most countries are corrupt.

they usually ask you to fly illegally, take risks by landing in heavy rain...
in Asia, pilots don't make very long. They go home or they go to their own funeral.

[cf6-80c2b5f]

This is a little off-topic, but I have a friend who is flying an N-registered aircraft based out of China and he said that once he gets his Chinese CAAC license and they transfer the aircraft to a Chinese registry, it may be the only Chinese company he ever works for unless they go under or they are bought by another company. As he understands it, the CAAC's position is that the company owns the license/records and any prospective employer would have to buy-out his previous employer (in the neighborhood of $100,000) in order for the license to have any validity with a new employer.

[winkle]

Or maybe if the company was that good it wouldn't need to bond because no one would want to leave.
;)

[parabellum]

It sounds like SIA is pretty reasonable.



If you are up front and honest, Yes, if you try to cheat them then watch out.

[4runner]

Clearly none of you guys are contract pilots nor have you ever engaged in expat contract work. Should you bother to peruse these forums, you would see that more often than not, certain areas of the world tend to violate pilot contracts on a regular basis. So the question offered in the original post with regards to breaking a bond or contract is reasonable and justified. Maybe the mx sucks, or there is no perf data, or the dispatchers are idiots and can't get you the proper info to safely conduct the flight yet management is pressuring you into going. All of these are justfiable reasons to jump ship and things that any contract guy can expect. Sometimes this is our only recourse as the lack of aviation knowledge and arrogance at some companies is so detrimental to safety that a rapid exodus is the only option. So a guy heading to Asia and wondering about jumping ship at a possible amateur operation is unreasonable??? Me thinks not, he's being responsible and has experience and foresight. If you haven't done contract work, don't puff your chest up in self righteous wisdom about what is morally responsible. What this guy is diving into is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ballgame than a western 121 operation. I think we have alot of wannabes on this forum....

[VS1711]

If the operation is actually unsafe, report it. Don't just bog off and wait to read about a crash in the newspapers. If the company is out of business or grounded for safety reasons then your bond can't be enforced and you're on your way to being a free man (unless you're bonded to a crewing agency).

If you're entering into the bond with the view that you might have to break it then you're entering into a contract in bad faith, no matter how noble your reasons may appear to you. The other option, mentioned by other people, is to negotiate to buy your way out of your bond.

Seriously, if you lent someone a five figure sum and they declined to pay in back on the grounds that it had become inconvenient and they thought you probably wouldn't be able to sue them, what would you think of that guy?

[4runner]

Once again, non contract guys...Do you really think that reporting safety issues to the local Aviation Authority does anything in countries that operate via a system of organized corruption??? A resounding NO! "Yes Mr. $#$#%%%, I'd like to report that the airline that just gave you a bribe is operating unsafely". LOL, it doesn't work my friend. Been there, done that, got the t-shirt. The only thing that works sometimes is when pilots leave by the droves. And as far as a training bond goes, an airline must pay to keep their pilots recurrent much the same way as the pay for fuel. It's a cost of doing business. So does this mean that a pilot is an indentured servant to their airline and may never leave? Absolutely not. Now, if one leaves after their last recurrent without going back to the line, that's a different story but a guy that jumps ship because of lax mx or other issues is really just doing his/her job.

[VS1711]

"Doing their job" is a bit rich. I'll buy "saving their own skin", and I don't mean that as a criticism.

It may be naive to think that you're going to change a sub-standard system by whistle blowing, but this post has gone a long way from the initial point. If you do your homework and still enter into a bond with a company that you have reason to believe will cut corners and leave you no option but to leave, then you're as bad as they are to take their money and run.

[4runner]

How do you know if they'll cut corners? You don't till you arrive, get validated, put on your superman suit and go to work. You don't owe anybody anything man. The sooner people figure this out the better off we'll be. The only thing we owe anything to is our fellow pilots and passengers. And if that means bailing mid-contract because of safety issues then so be it.

[4runner]

Additionally, it's not taking their money and running. You already spend a good deal of coin to get your tickets, a recurrent is the responsibility of your employer. Also the responsibility of your employer is to pay you and provide you with the proper tools to do our jobs. If they don't, get the hell out. That simple. Got a better gig lined up mid contract? Pay the fee and bail. If enough pilots do it, the company will be forced to clean up their act and/or pay more $$$. It's called capitalism.

[VS1711]

If bad MX or ops issues are the problem, bail out and be prepared to defend it in a court when you get home.

[parabellum]

4runner - I think you may have misunderstood the nature of the bond most Asian and Far Eastern airlines impose on a new employee. If you arrive type rated and experienced then there should be no bond, but the bond will apply if you have to undergo a type rating conversion course at the employer's expense. I spent a large part of my working life as a contracted pilot and never came across a bond for a recurrent check, only for the initial type rating course.

If you agree to a training bond and the company provides the type rating then they are entitled to a return of service from you, either you work the bond off or negotiate your way out. Aviation is a relatively small community and jumping ship will get you noticed and black listed.