5 ms·

Most employers don't go after employees for these because the employee has already paid taxes on the money and the business itself has written the money off. Ha

Most employers don't go after employees for these because the employee has already paid taxes on the money and the business itself has written the money off. Having to go back and change taxes or sue an employee typically isn't worth the cost of the bonus itself. This is also null and void if they're violating her rights, like the ability to use the bathroom or take a lunch break. Last, 28 / hour is fairly low for an RN. While indeed shows a median salary of 28.30 in New Orleans, it seems like most companies in the area are hiring at 54-64 dollars per hour setting the median for the pandemic at 46.52 per hour. If she can nearly double her pay, who cares about 10k... I've never seen a company try to enforce these.

bigmattystyles 5y ago
I guess the company can bluff the employees pretty easily. They’re not exactly rolling in it (employees) either or have much spare time. If you get one strongly worded letter or ‘reminder’ from HR, I’d venture most would fold rather than go to an attorney.
- user5994461 5y ago
  It's not bluff. It's common to have claw back clauses on sign-on bonus or trainings, for a limited period (3 years might be too long though). The comment you reply to is giving really bad advice to ignore it. That sort of clause is valid and the company may or may not action it. You don't know. What your friend should do is interview for other companies and mentions to the HR interview that she has to refund 10k if she leaves now, and ask whether they would be able to cover it. It's routine for companies to offer a sign-on bonus to cover this sort of things and you can expect the same claw back clause attached for one year. Alternatively, if she has the money AND can get a job that pays significantly more, she can switch anyway, the worst that can happen is that she has to pay some money if the company asks.
  - selimthegrim 5y ago
    They are desperate down here with COVID, she can probably call their bluff and win.
  - bastardoperator 5y ago
    No one is arguing the commonality, it's the enforcement of these policies that are questionable. In a right to work state, these clauses are meaningless.

bigmattystyles 5y ago

I guess the company can bluff the employees pretty easily. They’re not exactly rolling in it (employees) either or have much spare time. If you get one strongly worded letter or ‘reminder’ from HR, I’d venture most would fold rather than go to an attorney.

user5994461 5y ago
It's not bluff. It's common to have claw back clauses on sign-on bonus or trainings, for a limited period (3 years might be too long though). The comment you reply to is giving really bad advice to ignore it. That sort of clause is valid and the company may or may not action it. You don't know. What your friend should do is interview for other companies and mentions to the HR interview that she has to refund 10k if she leaves now, and ask whether they would be able to cover it. It's routine for companies to offer a sign-on bonus to cover this sort of things and you can expect the same claw back clause attached for one year. Alternatively, if she has the money AND can get a job that pays significantly more, she can switch anyway, the worst that can happen is that she has to pay some money if the company asks.
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  They are desperate down here with COVID, she can probably call their bluff and win.
- bastardoperator 5y ago
  No one is arguing the commonality, it's the enforcement of these policies that are questionable. In a right to work state, these clauses are meaningless.