labour lawyer recommendation
Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, North Shore
labour lawyer recommendation
Does anybody have the name/number of a labour lawyer who is well versed in aviation case law regarding training bonds and/or contract issues?
-
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1982
- Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2013 9:24 am
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 120
- Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2014 10:23 am
- Location: ysb
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
I know who not to use- YYZ Law in Toronto.
- JohnnyHotRocks
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1084
- Joined: Tue Mar 29, 2005 7:18 am
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
If you signed a training bond and jumped ship....do the honourable thing and pay what you agreed to pay. Simple
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
But you don’t understand...he doesn’t want to work there anymore so shouldn’t have to pay it back. He only agreed to the bond because at the time he did want to work there.JohnnyHotRocks wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2018 12:36 pm If you signed a training bond and jumped ship....do the honourable thing and pay what you agreed to pay. Simple
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 693
- Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:57 am
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
I know of someone who got taken to court for a training bond they never actually signed (company never asked). Some people won't have the means to pay a lawyer so they just settle. It's dirty and if it happened to me I'd fight right through to a court verdict.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Stop signing/agreeing to bonds for god sakes people, the shoe is on the other foot as far as experienced pilots are concerned and training is a cost of doing business. No bond no need for a lawyer to leave a shitty job.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Why is it expected that us employees are supposed to be noble and play nice but when as soon as it suits the company to drop said employee because of economics, its suddenly ok for the company to do whatever for its bottom line. Company has no real loyalty to employees yet the employees better honour a contract that the company would walk out on itself if it benefited it
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Exactly and it can be quite expensive for the company doing the hiring, therefore many require some form of commitment for a given time frame from the pilot being hired to make sure they don't leave when they get a better offer and the company has not received hardly any value for the training.and training is a cost of doing business.
I do however agree that you should not pay for your training up front, the bond should be for xxx $ for xxx months and pro rated over that time frame.
What do you consider a shitty job?No bond no need for a lawyer to leave a shitty job.
- schnitzel2k3
- Rank (9)
- Posts: 1456
- Joined: Sun May 15, 2011 11:17 pm
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Bonds by their very nature are incredibly one way. The fact that a company needs a bond suggests it likely has enough negativity surrounding it's workplace that it needs a financial incentive for an employee to stay.C.W.E. wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2018 6:24 pmExactly and it can be quite expensive for the company doing the hiring, therefore many require some form of commitment for a given time frame from the pilot being hired to make sure they don't leave when they get a better offer and the company has not received hardly any value for the training.and training is a cost of doing business.
I do however agree that you should not pay for your training up front, the bond should be for xxx $ for xxx months and pro rated over that time frame.
What do you consider a shitty job?No bond no need for a lawyer to leave a shitty job.
That being said while playing devils adv. I see the side of the company - even a half decent one seems to need bonds - because 'everyone' nowadays is making a run for the mainlines.
If the top companies were moral - they would do the right thing and terminate the pilots that left their former companies hanging without so much as a sorry. It happens daily and it's the top reason even the best companies that aren't mainline have to bond everyone.
I've heard of guys bouncing between Jazz and Sunwing like a pinball. Pilots who started training only to not show up for the ride because Encor'Ter called. A week into line indoc and AC calls - peace!
Those are the pilots that ruin it for everyone.
S.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
And that is why there are bonds.Those are the pilots that ruin it for everyone.
-
- Rank 7
- Posts: 693
- Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2016 8:57 am
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Blueontop wrote: ↑Fri Jan 26, 2018 6:20 pm Why is it expected that us employees are supposed to be noble and play nice but when as soon as it suits the company to drop said employee because of economics, its suddenly ok for the company to do whatever for its bottom line. Company has no real loyalty to employees yet the employees better honour a contract that the company would walk out on itself if it benefited it
Or worse yet, when the company and owner makes you (or attempts to make you) break the law and if you want to quit you're on the hook for a bond. IMO, if the company forces anyone to do anything illegal, bonds should be invalid at that second. Contracts work from both ends.
-
- Rank 3
- Posts: 126
- Joined: Thu Mar 27, 2014 8:16 pm
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
The nature of bonds are quite simple and straight forward. There's really only three elements to a bond, as it's a contract between the employee and the employer. You can agree or disagree with bonds, but the fact is the employee and employer have entered a legally binding contract and if broken there are consequences. For a contract to be valid it needs to satisfy the following parts:
Offer
Acceptance
Consideration
Company A offers a job plus all training costs.
The prospective employee reads the contract and provisions and decides to accept the offer.
Both parties provide something of value to each other (the employer extends a employment and paid training, the employee offers their skill-set to the employer for a term specified in the agreement). Therefore, consideration has been met.
All the provisions for a legally binding contract are in place.
Offer
Acceptance
Consideration
Company A offers a job plus all training costs.
The prospective employee reads the contract and provisions and decides to accept the offer.
Both parties provide something of value to each other (the employer extends a employment and paid training, the employee offers their skill-set to the employer for a term specified in the agreement). Therefore, consideration has been met.
All the provisions for a legally binding contract are in place.
Not entirely accurate. Both parties have to play nice. If an employer lays you off, they don't hold you to the bond. The bond is null and void at this point. Also, employers can't just lay you off. You're required a certain amount of notice, or pay in lieu. Contracted employees might work differently.Why is it expected that us employees are supposed to be noble and play nice but when as soon as it suits the company to drop said employee because of economics, its suddenly ok for the company to do whatever for its bottom line. Company has no real loyalty to employees yet the employees better honour a contract that the company would walk out on itself if it benefited it
The problem is many of the upcoming pilot don't have experience so they don't really have a leg to stand on when it comes to negotiating. Bonds don't equate to a shitty job or shitty operator. That's a really outdated view of things IMO. The number of people I've seen come through and quit during ground school, or quit a few weeks to months into the job has been steadily increasing. Just as it has with every other operator as of late. Are all these employers getting shittier by the day, or is it more likely people are jumping ship because they'd rather fly an aircraft that has a big red maple leaf stamped on it, or a teal stripe running along it's body?Stop signing/agreeing to bonds for god sakes people, the shoe is on the other foot as far as experienced pilots are concerned and training is a cost of doing business. No bond no need for a lawyer to leave a shitty job.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Any reputable company today that recognizes the need for quality pilots will pay a bonus to have you instead of asking for training bonds.
- Jack Klumpus
- Rank 5
- Posts: 379
- Joined: Fri Jan 29, 2010 4:46 pm
- Location: In a van down by the river.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Which ever law firm you deal with bebupfrint and get them to agree on the price of their services upfront. I've dealt with a lawyer in Winnipeg with regards to a training bond, even though we settled to pay much less than what the company wanted, the lawyer was trying to milk me for everything, including photocopies and envelopes. And this was the 'best' lawyer in Winnipeg. My saving grace was that I had agreed on a price before hand.
Before the audience here jumps all over me, I quit my job due to the company's continued failure to keep the airplanes safe. Company was later shut down by TC.
Before the audience here jumps all over me, I quit my job due to the company's continued failure to keep the airplanes safe. Company was later shut down by TC.
When I retire, I’ll miss the clowns, not the circus.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
I'm not a lawyer but I'm well versed in the case law re training bonds.
Summary: you need to pay them. You're not going to get out of it plus you'll pay court costs.
Summary: you need to pay them. You're not going to get out of it plus you'll pay court costs.
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Generally speaking, Bede is correct.
However, feel free to send me a message and we can have a (free) chat. Though I'm not associated with any firm, I've switched back my law society membership to practising status so can provide advice.
For what it's worth, I wrote an article in Skies Magazine a couple years ago on the legality of Training Bonds. https://www.skiesmag.com/news/breaking- ... contracts/ (not sure why my name is no longer on the headnote).
However, feel free to send me a message and we can have a (free) chat. Though I'm not associated with any firm, I've switched back my law society membership to practising status so can provide advice.
For what it's worth, I wrote an article in Skies Magazine a couple years ago on the legality of Training Bonds. https://www.skiesmag.com/news/breaking- ... contracts/ (not sure why my name is no longer on the headnote).
Charging for disbursements (i.e. photocopies and envelopes etc.) is pretty standard billing practice by all law firms. When I was working at a firm I thought it was pretty silly - the client is already paying hundreds of dollars an hour for legal representation, that should at least also include stationary. However, that was the firm's policy so that's what I had to bill. The lawyer wasn't trying to 'milk' you, just following standard billing.Jack Klumpus wrote: ↑Fri Feb 09, 2018 6:36 am Which ever law firm you deal with bebupfrint and get them to agree on the price of their services upfront. I've dealt with a lawyer in Winnipeg with regards to a training bond, even though we settled to pay much less than what the company wanted, the lawyer was trying to milk me for everything, including photocopies and envelopes. And this was the 'best' lawyer in Winnipeg. My saving grace was that I had agreed on a price before hand.
- HansDietrich
- Rank 6
- Posts: 453
- Joined: Sun Feb 07, 2016 9:33 am
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
Pff... I know many people that skipped on their bond and nothing happened, aside from some "useless threatening letters". Those bonds are good for the outhouse.
Just ignore it. It will go away... No company in their right mind will spend 20K on a lawyer to get their 10K back. Also, even if, absurdly, you get taken to court, what judge do you think will side with the company? One step further; even if you're told to pay the bond back, you can say "Sorry I don't have the money. I'll pay back $25 a month for the next 50 years"... These guys know this and they won't do jack sh*t. No 703 will take you to court for not paying an "illegal" bond.
Just ignore it. It will go away... No company in their right mind will spend 20K on a lawyer to get their 10K back. Also, even if, absurdly, you get taken to court, what judge do you think will side with the company? One step further; even if you're told to pay the bond back, you can say "Sorry I don't have the money. I'll pay back $25 a month for the next 50 years"... These guys know this and they won't do jack sh*t. No 703 will take you to court for not paying an "illegal" bond.
Das ist mir wurst...
Re: labour lawyer recommendation
I'm trying to figure out if your post is sarcasm or ignorance. Did you read my article that I posted just two posts above? There are plenty of decisions where the judge sides with the company. And while you may have not have money now, do you want a judgement rendered against you on the system when you go to apply for a mortgage? While going after a bond will always be an economic as well as business decision by an operator, starting from the position of "no, I'll never have to pay this" is a very poor approach indeed.HansDietrich wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2018 3:52 pm Pff... I know many people that skipped on their bond and nothing happened, aside from some "useless threatening letters". Those bonds are good for the outhouse.
Just ignore it. It will go away... No company in their right mind will spend 20K on a lawyer to get their 10K back. Also, even if, absurdly, you get taken to court, what judge do you think will side with the company? One step further; even if you're told to pay the bond back, you can say "Sorry I don't have the money. I'll pay back $25 a month for the next 50 years"... These guys know this and they won't do jack sh*t. No 703 will take you to court for not paying an "illegal" bond.
Bede has some pretty extensive education and is extremely adept on legal issues. I am a lawyer and previously practiced aviation law. It seems it is all for naught though as you obviously know better.
Last edited by JBI on Sat Feb 10, 2018 6:17 pm, edited 1 time in total.