Enforcement of Training Bond
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 59
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enforcement of Training Bond
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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hotel time zone
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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....
So don't go there unless you want to go there....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 59
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 47
Posts: 1,007
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Guildford
Age: 49
Posts: 359
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Training bond
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
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
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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....
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....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 59
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,095
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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 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.
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.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cf6-80c2b5f . . .
. . . "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..."
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 59
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 59
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florianopolis
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Los Angeles
Age: 59
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Florianopolis
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
Wish you best!