Staff Training Fee Is Violated Before Training.

Before the unit trains employees, it requires the workers to pay their own training fees first, and make an appointment to refund the employees after 5 years' work.

Recently, the request from the staff to return the training fee was supported by the court.

In October 2008, Huang applied for a mechanic manufacturing company as a trainee apprentice.

The two sides signed a training contract for technical workers.

The contract stipulate: the company is responsible for Huang Mou's special training and training for the lathe workers. The training period is no less than 6 months, and Huang pays 6 yuan training fee for 4800 yuan.

After working for 5 years, Huang started to refund the training fee by installments, and agreed the guarantor and the guarantee responsibility.

Huang has been working in the company since he completed his studies. Huang did not pay for his social insurance premiums, and demanded the termination of labor relations and refund of training fees.

After the court supported the request of Huang, the company appealed to the intermediate people's court.

The Central People's court held that

It is stipulated that the employer can provide special training expenses for workers, and if he carries out professional and technical training, he may conclude an agreement with the worker and stipulate the term of service, and the employing unit shall not collect property from laborers in the name of guaranty or other names.

The company signed an agreement with Hwang, and agreed on the service period.

The company first charged, not the company first provided, and the agreement also designated the guarantor, and agreed.

This is a clear violation of the law.

Finally, the court dismissed the appeal and upheld the original verdict.

Related links:

Near the end of the year, Zhang was prepared to quit job because he was dissatisfied with the salary of A unit.

Not long ago, the boss of B promised to accept him with high salary.

On the day of receiving the promise, Zhang drafted his resignation application and sent it to the company.

The company leader retained, but Zhang was resolute.

When the leader of A company has arranged for someone to take over the job of Zhang, when Zhang leaves the formalities for departure, B suddenly comes to the news that the intention agreement has been cancelled.

Zhang wanted to stay in the A company for thirty days because he had the right to withdraw his application.

Zhang wants to apply for arbitration to the labor department. Can the arbitration agency support Zhang's request?

The thirtieth clause of the labor contract law stipulates the termination of a labor contract by a worker's unilateral notice: "the worker can notify the employing unit in writing thirty days ahead of time, and may terminate the labor contract".

This provision endows the workers with "the right to resign". This power is a "right to form", which does not require a commitment by the employer, and has a legal effect from the service of the employer.

If the applicant fails to receive a written reply from the enterprise, and if the employer fails to start the process of resignation, if the worker proposes to cancel the resignation in writing, the resignation of the worker can be cancelled after the employer agrees.

But in this case, Zhang's application has been submitted. The employer has accepted Zhang's application and arranged for someone to take over Zhang's work. The employer does not agree. Zhang's application can not be withdrawn or revoked.