4 ms·

There is a reason they’re quitting. Could be the pay is low, or they don’t like the job. Maybe they aren’t very good at it after all. Throw in some sick pare

There is a reason they’re quitting. Could be the pay is low, or they don’t like the job. Maybe they aren’t very good at it after all. Throw in some sick parents they need to take care of and top it off with a manager that is awful to work for. Holding a financial gun to someone’s head isn’t a good way to handle this for anyone. What if someone gets fired, do they have to repay it?

gjsman-1000 4y ago
If they knew the terms of the deal, knew the cost of their training, and agreed, it is exactly like if you joined college and changed your major in my eyes. You don’t get off the hook for those bills because you changed your mind, and you knew what you were getting into.
- PuppyTailWags 4y ago
  Changing a major doesn't occur financial penalties, and colleges also allow you to take extremely extended leaves (3+ months, aka a semester/quarter) for emergencies as a normal point of cause and your education credits don't expire for several years (I think a decade?) so if an emergency happens you can step away and return even years later with fairly minimal penalty academically. Credits aren't even charged if you quit early enough IIRC.
  - stonemetal12 4y ago
    If you took out a loan to pay tuition, the loans don't disappear. Isn't this basically the same thing? The employer is loaning you the money to cover training with loan forgiveness for time worked.
    - frumper 4y ago
      Schools are highly regulated. Loans are highly regulated. Education from colleges is accredited and held accountable to third party institutions. Employers training you then charging you isn't regulated at all. It's ripe for abuse and clearly abuse is taking place to the woman in the article.
    - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
      No, because the employer isn't loaning you money. In fact it would make much more sense if the employer gave the employee money as a lump sum in exchange for some agreement, much like a relocation or signing bonus. Instead this is the employer pretending its training is worth real money on the real market. In the Reuters article, an esthecian was charged nearly 2k for leaving a shitty job because of "training", despite already independently having the license necessary to do the job and no one reasonably paying that beauty parlor 2k to be educated. Additionally, certain education-related loans do in fact disappear! Loan forgiveness is a real thing.
- bena 4y ago
  It's a little more complicated than that. It could be that the place is offering training as a carrot and overpricing it as a means of suppressing pay to their employees. So you get a junior developer for half the cost for whatever the length of the payback period is OR you get the cost of a couple of junior developers paid to you by that person. Not to mention, you could only learn that they're severely underpaying you once you get into the industry. And when you absolutely need a job, you'll get desperate enough to take some bad deals. Because the alternative is destitution.
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  1. People who are desperate do what needs to be done. Unlike corporations, humans feel pain. 2. People aren’t perfect. Does everyone know what they’re getting into? Do they know beforehand what kind of salary they’ll get from the company before training? Do they also know how competitive that salary is? Or how good the company is? Maybe it’s the most toxic company ever but is able to hide its negative footprints online.
dncornholio 4y ago
Why does the reason matter? If you invest in your employee, you want to see something back. It's not cool to take free training if you know you will be out shortly. The reason people go out can be anything, could be something silly like moving house. "just be a better company" sounds like people live in a fantasy world
- skinnymuch 4y ago
  It sounds like your last line is saying corporations are too corrupt and broken to be as good as human beings? It’s not cool to force training on someone and then force them to stay or pay it back either. Why does the corporation get off the hook?
  - dncornholio 4y ago
    My point is, corporations can be just as corrupt as the employees and vice versa. Also, you can have a perfect working place, but people will still leave your company. It would suck if people would leave after you've invested in them and I understand companies want some sort of insurance.
    - skinnymuch 4y ago
      I find it hard to imagine people being more corrupt than corporations the vast majority of the time. Especially pilots vs corporations. The insane power imbalance and the capitalist society we live in makes it highly unlikely individual middle class people are close to as corrupt as corps. Also, the companies should get some sort of insurance. Not screw over individual powerless people.
    - frumper 4y ago
      It does suck. Companies should buy an insurance plan from a company that sells insurance if they want insurance. If the company is good at keeping trainees then that'll reflect in their premiums. If they're bad, they should figure out why they're bad.
- ryandrake 4y ago

gjsman-1000 4y ago

If they knew the terms of the deal, knew the cost of their training, and agreed, it is exactly like if you joined college and changed your major in my eyes. You don’t get off the hook for those bills because you changed your mind, and you knew what you were getting into.

PuppyTailWags 4y ago
Changing a major doesn't occur financial penalties, and colleges also allow you to take extremely extended leaves (3+ months, aka a semester/quarter) for emergencies as a normal point of cause and your education credits don't expire for several years (I think a decade?) so if an emergency happens you can step away and return even years later with fairly minimal penalty academically. Credits aren't even charged if you quit early enough IIRC.
- stonemetal12 4y ago
  If you took out a loan to pay tuition, the loans don't disappear. Isn't this basically the same thing? The employer is loaning you the money to cover training with loan forgiveness for time worked.
  - frumper 4y ago
    Schools are highly regulated. Loans are highly regulated. Education from colleges is accredited and held accountable to third party institutions. Employers training you then charging you isn't regulated at all. It's ripe for abuse and clearly abuse is taking place to the woman in the article.
  - PuppyTailWags 4y ago
    No, because the employer isn't loaning you money. In fact it would make much more sense if the employer gave the employee money as a lump sum in exchange for some agreement, much like a relocation or signing bonus. Instead this is the employer pretending its training is worth real money on the real market. In the Reuters article, an esthecian was charged nearly 2k for leaving a shitty job because of "training", despite already independently having the license necessary to do the job and no one reasonably paying that beauty parlor 2k to be educated. Additionally, certain education-related loans do in fact disappear! Loan forgiveness is a real thing.
bena 4y ago
It's a little more complicated than that. It could be that the place is offering training as a carrot and overpricing it as a means of suppressing pay to their employees. So you get a junior developer for half the cost for whatever the length of the payback period is OR you get the cost of a couple of junior developers paid to you by that person. Not to mention, you could only learn that they're severely underpaying you once you get into the industry. And when you absolutely need a job, you'll get desperate enough to take some bad deals. Because the alternative is destitution.
skinnymuch 4y ago
1. People who are desperate do what needs to be done. Unlike corporations, humans feel pain. 2. People aren’t perfect. Does everyone know what they’re getting into? Do they know beforehand what kind of salary they’ll get from the company before training? Do they also know how competitive that salary is? Or how good the company is? Maybe it’s the most toxic company ever but is able to hide its negative footprints online.

dncornholio 4y ago

Why does the reason matter? If you invest in your employee, you want to see something back. It's not cool to take free training if you know you will be out shortly. The reason people go out can be anything, could be something silly like moving house. "just be a better company" sounds like people live in a fantasy world

skinnymuch 4y ago
It sounds like your last line is saying corporations are too corrupt and broken to be as good as human beings? It’s not cool to force training on someone and then force them to stay or pay it back either. Why does the corporation get off the hook?
- dncornholio 4y ago
  My point is, corporations can be just as corrupt as the employees and vice versa. Also, you can have a perfect working place, but people will still leave your company. It would suck if people would leave after you've invested in them and I understand companies want some sort of insurance.
  - skinnymuch 4y ago
    I find it hard to imagine people being more corrupt than corporations the vast majority of the time. Especially pilots vs corporations. The insane power imbalance and the capitalist society we live in makes it highly unlikely individual middle class people are close to as corrupt as corps. Also, the companies should get some sort of insurance. Not screw over individual powerless people.
  - frumper 4y ago
    It does suck. Companies should buy an insurance plan from a company that sells insurance if they want insurance. If the company is good at keeping trainees then that'll reflect in their premiums. If they're bad, they should figure out why they're bad.
ryandrake 4y ago