3 ms·

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 sho

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
If a company is willing to pay to train an employee, but not willing to pay a higher salary to retain that [now more valuable] employee, that's a decision totally on the company. It seems silly for a company to invest the large initial cost and then fail to pay the ongoing costs.
FireBeyond 4y ago
> It's not cool to take free training if you know you will be out shortly. It's also not cool to hire people when you know layoffs are coming, but employers do this all the time. But, as you say "just be a better company" is fantasy world belief. My ex- had this, applied for a job. "We want someone who is going to be here for the long haul, five years plus." She had aspirations for vet school in the next year or two. To you, that's a commitment from an employee that is fair to expect. "Is the company committed to giving me a job for the next five years?" ... well, why not? You're very much in the mindset of "an employee should be happy to have a job".

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

If a company is willing to pay to train an employee, but not willing to pay a higher salary to retain that [now more valuable] employee, that's a decision totally on the company. It seems silly for a company to invest the large initial cost and then fail to pay the ongoing costs.

FireBeyond 4y ago

> It's not cool to take free training if you know you will be out shortly. It's also not cool to hire people when you know layoffs are coming, but employers do this all the time. But, as you say "just be a better company" is fantasy world belief. My ex- had this, applied for a job. "We want someone who is going to be here for the long haul, five years plus." She had aspirations for vet school in the next year or two. To you, that's a commitment from an employee that is fair to expect. "Is the company committed to giving me a job for the next five years?" ... well, why not? You're very much in the mindset of "an employee should be happy to have a job".