Training costs Arbitration

or Register to post new content in the forum

46 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Apr 3, 2007 12:30 pm

Does anyone have experiance with going to arbitration on training costs, and if you do what was it, and what was the outcome?


Thank you

Apr 3, 2007 7:27 pm

Christ man, didn't you at least open one account while you were there?

Apr 4, 2007 3:47 pm

skee,


Who pooped on your cornflakes?  Let someone answer the man's question.

Apr 4, 2007 8:27 pm
usacav:

Does anyone have experiance with going to arbitration on training costs, and if you do what was it, and what was the outcome?


Thank you



If you signed a contract agreeing to pay back training costs if you leave, pay them their damned money. Why should others shoulder YOUR burden? What's so great about you? GTFOOH with crap.

Apr 4, 2007 8:36 pm

BH:


You've got to quit being so encouraging to other posters.

Apr 4, 2007 8:52 pm
jokeriswild:

BH:



You've got to quit being so encouraging to other posters.





But what makes BH wrong?



Whether or not the training is worth anything is a moot point when the

individual in question has signed a contract or agreement. I hate to find

myself in the position of defending these companies' inflated estimates of

the worth of their training, but a deal, when all is said and done, is a deal.

Apr 4, 2007 9:03 pm

For $50, he can borrow a uniform from a McDonald's employee and show up

at the arbitration....just a suggestion.



Plenty of people sign agreements....doesn't mean squat. My suggestion is to

have a great offense.



I just saw The Pursuit of Happyness. Only Wall Street can "hire" talented

people and not pay them.

Apr 4, 2007 9:05 pm
jokeriswild:

BH:


You've got to quit being so encouraging to other posters.



No.

Apr 4, 2007 9:14 pm
skeedaddy2:




Plenty of people sign agreements....doesn't mean squat. My suggestion is to

have a great offense.






Now THERE'S a perfect example of the lack of honor so prevalent in the

business world, and in society at large.



Does giving your word and your personal honor mean nothing? The answer,

it would seem, is obvious.

Apr 4, 2007 9:56 pm

Interpretation of the written word is the key to our legal system. Otherwise,

we wouldn't need lawyers now would we?



You probably carry a short samurai sword on you ready to commit hari kari

to preserve your honor? Don't make me laugh.



Let's all yield and praise to the most honorable among men, Philo Kvetch.





Apr 4, 2007 10:08 pm

Hari Kiri? NEVER!



Who would protect my clients from those whose word means nothing?



(If the shoe fits, wear it!)

Apr 4, 2007 11:37 pm

Philo,


This is one of the instances where I have to disagree with you slightly.


This Jones Training contract, for most of those who sign it, is BS. 


Why?


Because Jones enters into the contract with you from a position of trust, with a bunch of misinformation if not flat out lies.  Verbal information given by Jones and their advisors leading up to the contract plays a strong hand in the reason many people sign on.  This in my humble opinion should make the contract void. 

Apr 5, 2007 7:19 am
gad12:

Philo,



This is one of the instances where I have to disagree with you slightly.



This Jones Training contract, for most of those who sign it, is BS.



Why?



Because Jones enters into the contract with you from a position of trust,

with a bunch of misinformation if not flat out lies. Verbal information given

by Jones and their advisors leading up to the contract plays a strong hand in

the reason many people sign on. This in my humble opinion should

make the contract void.





That may well be Gad, but it begs the eternal question: Can you prove it to

a court?

Apr 5, 2007 8:33 am

Souds like the firms are as reasonable as the law firms.

Apr 5, 2007 9:33 am
rrbdlawyer:

Guys:


You might want to re-read this article I wrote a while back http://registeredrep.com/mag/financefree_training_cost/


As a former RR and as an industry lawyer for most of the last quarter of a century, let me just express a personal opinion on this issue.  I have no problem whatsoever with an employer seeking repayment of all legitimate training expenses HOWEVER the touchstone here is that the expenses must be reasonable.  It is simply absurd to believe that any BD is truly expending $75,000 plus to train a newbie.  First off, most of those expenses are absurdly inflated.  For example, a training booklet may be valued at $100 when it is nothing more than a copy made at five cents a page.  Additionally, you may be told that some high-priced industry consultant was paid $500 an hour to conduct a class and you are being asked to repay that cost--except there were ten folks in the class and your basis, at most, should only be $50.


Similarly, there is the issue of whether there should be a fixed production point at which no payment is required---for example, once you produced $25,000 in gross commissions the repayment is waived.  After all, doesn't every hire include some element of risk for both the employer and employee?  Is it fair to simply shift all of that risk (monetarily) onto the employee because the job just didn't pan out?  Sure, many folks simply get a better job and look to leave--but do any of you really think that the generic training is of such value as to constitute a significant detrment to the employer?


At the end of the day, let's get to the bottom dollar.  They sue you for $75,000 but often take $5,000 in settlement.  That says it all.





Philo, no, of course it would be near impossible to prove what was "said" in court.  However, the point, and the one made above by rrbdlawyer shed a little light on the argument that those of us who try to get out of/and or reduce these costs are dishonorable cheats. 

Apr 5, 2007 7:05 pm

[quote=rrbdlawyer]

Guys:



You might want to re-read this article I wrote a while back

http://

registeredrep.com/mag/finance_free_training_cost/



As a former RR and as an industry lawyer for most of the last quarter of

a century, let me just express a personal opinion on this issue. I have no

problem whatsoever with an employer seeking repayment of all legitimate

training expenses HOWEVER the touchstone here is that the expenses

must be reasonable. It is simply absurd to believe that any BD is truly

expending $75,000 plus to train a newbie. First off, most of those

expenses are absurdly inflated. For example, a training booklet may be

valued at $100 when it is nothing more than a copy made at five cents a

page. Additionally, you may be told that some high-priced industry

consultant was paid $500 an hour to conduct a class and you are being

asked to repay that cost--except there were ten folks in the class and

your basis, at most, should only be $50.



Similarly, there is the issue of whether there should be a fixed

production point at which no payment is required---for example, once

you produced $25,000 in gross commissions the repayment is waived.

After all, doesn't every hire include some element of risk for both the

employer and employee? Is it fair to simply shift all of that risk

(monetarily) onto the employee because the job just didn't pan out? Sure,

many folks simply get a better job and look to leave--but do any of you

really think that the generic training is of such value as to constitute a

significant detrment to the employer?



At the end of the day, let's get to the bottom dollar. They sue you for

$75,000 but often take $5,000 in settlement. That says it all.

[/

QUOTE]



So rather than firms setting the value of the training, we should let

lawyers hash it out.



Oh yeah.



Much better.
Apr 5, 2007 10:13 pm

No, just do the honorable thing and write them a check for $75,000 for

something that costs $5,000

Apr 5, 2007 10:30 pm
skeedaddy2:

No, just do the honorable thing and write them a check for $75,000 for
something that costs $5,000


You're forgetting their opportunity cost of being able to recover more than $75,000, had he not turned out to be a loser that couldn't hack it.

Apr 5, 2007 10:32 pm

Skee, I find the $75,000 price tag as objectionable as you do. Further, from

what I've seen and been told of the Jones training, they're the last firm that

should be charging top dollar for their training. Still, the time to negotiate is

before the signature is on the line that is dotted (with apologies to Alec

Baldwin).

Apr 6, 2007 10:35 am

B Hull,


Of all the poster's on this site, you sound like the biggest loser.  If you're looking for a new job, forget about couseling, you probably wouldn't have success there either.  Everything you write is trying to smack someone down.  Does this make you feel like a big man?  Are you even in the industry or do you just hang around this site because you have nothing better to do?, especially seeing that you have made almost 7 posts per day since you joined. Grow up and go away!!