Whats in good formI'm going to take the other tack here. Spending training dollars on an employee who then leaves shortly thereafter is the cost of doing business. That's a gamble that you take in business and that's the reason few companies are offering so much tuition reimbursement anymore. They just don't want to put out tens of thousands on someone who gets an MBA and leaves a month later. If they do have such a program, they take that gamble or they write in a reimbursement clause. For a training class, convention, sales meeting, junket or just flat out company boondoggle, that's the breaks. We won't ever know if this person knew before the trip or not. Chances are good they found out during the trip because most employers won't wait more than 2 weeks for you, so I doubt they knew much further out than that.
Tess Was it a he or a she? Either way I am surprised that the organization did not demand repayment of the training dollars, especially if it was external training that benefited the employee. They very likely knew that they were leaving and yes it was bad form. Recently, a co-worker of mine left his organization in kind of a haste (he did give notice though), but.....his co-workers, and some others were a bit disappointed in him leaving because the expected him to stay around. He was on a project he was getting sick of being on, BUT, he was indeed very close to moving on to something else. But, a job offer he got, he couldn't turn down the extra 10K he was getting, basically it was the money he couldn't turn down. And they kind of wasted resources on him JUST before he left, they flew him off to a class, and when he came back, he put in his two week notice. It upset others that she moved on (possibly burned a bridge) because she was rather impatient. Was that in bad form? Also
Yeah I buy that in many cases. I guess it is the industry I am in. We have repayment clauses. Training someone in SAP is expensive and has a very tangible value. If we send them to class we expect to get that value back. Depending on the course and the cost we get that cost back.
Bad form? Would it have been in bad form for the company to have laid this person off the week they got back from training (or the week before Christmas, or whenever) because business had slowed down? Or just because of a "reorganization"? Assuming this person did not have a contract, they were an "at-will" employee, meaning that the relationship could be terminated at any time, with or without notice, by either the employee or the employer. The company wouldn't have hesitated to get rid of this person if it made good business sense to do so. Why should the employee not do the same if it made good business sense (like an additional $10k a year) to do so? | |
|
Career Tips
|