Training Bond issues

[YQBpilot]

Hello to all,

I'd like to have some advice on a training bond issue.
Short story, I signed a bond in October 2014 of 24 months reducing 1/24th for every worked month on an ATR42.
In the late September 2015 I had a major opportunity to go work for a major airline outside canada which I took.
Problem is the company closed its ATR operation afterwards around the 6th of October 2015. So they are claiming me around 10K after keeping some salary and per diems.
Now they are assigning me to court in Quebec. I'd like some advice as it is ridiculous to claim money to retrain a pilot when you don't have the aircraft to fly anymore....

Any given advice would be appreciate

thanks

[tango308]

Sounds like P@$(@n. Just playing devil's advocate here... you signed the bond. Period. What happened after you left the company is no longer relevant as you broke your end of the contract before that. Do you think the company would have retrained you on a other type bond free? if yes then you may be out of luck, Would they have required you to sign a new bond? if so F them.

[digits_]

It all depends on what was written in the bond, but usually the amount becomes payable the moment you leave. What happens a few months later after you leave, is IMO irrelevant. You can't use the fact that you didn't pay, as an argument to cancel the payment alltogether.

It would be different IF your bond contains a clause that says it becomes invalid if the company doesn't operate the type anymore and IF they stopped operating the type BEFORE you left.

There could be an opening if you can prove the bond was excessive, or if they kept salary illegally (but you probably allowed them in your bond to deduct it from your salary if you didn't pay it in time)

[bobcaygeon]

Hello to all,

I'd like to have some advice on a training bond issue.
Short story, I signed a bond in October 2014 of 24 months reducing 1/24th for every worked month on an ATR42.
In the late September 2015 I had a major opportunity to go work for a major airline outside canada which I took.
Problem is the company closed its ATR operation afterwards around the 6th of October 2015. So they are claiming me around 10K after keeping some salary and per diems.
Now they are assigning me to court in Quebec. I'd like some advice as it is ridiculous to claim money to retrain a pilot when you don't have the aircraft to fly anymore....

Any given advice would be appreciate

thanks

As an operator it would be easy to just say that the expense of having to train your replacement was what put the final nail in the coffin.

[JohnnyHotRocks]

You signed it. Man up. Pay it.

[CL-Skadoo!]

Let's say I hired you to cut my grass for two years and bonded you to that. 11 Months later you bolt on our written agreement. About a month after that, I decide to put a giant garage on my lawn. Lawn is no longer there.
Are you still not tied to the contract? You broke the contract, I'm not obligated to keep the lawn for an employee who bolted on me.
I don't see how you could argue yourself out of this one. You gave your word, you broke your word. That word had a legal document tied to it.

To the pilots climbing the ladder: this is the danger of signing a bond. Know this going into it, be prepared to own up when the grass grows greener elsewhere.

[Redneck_pilot86]

People like you are the reason we have bonds in this industry to begin with.

[Bede]

Interesting case. I'm not a lawyer, but here is my uneducated opinion. (Also, I assume you're in Quebec based on your handle which uses civil law which is something I'm completely unfamiliar with). However, I'll base my opinion on common law principles.

In common law, I believe that you're required to pay up unless there is some reason that your contract is unenforceable (such as it's against the law for some reason, or oppressive or made under duress- most likely none of these apply). However, I would argue as a defense that by enforcing the contract, the company would be unjustly enriched by any payment you make to them. Since the plane is gone, they no longer have to train a replacement and had you stayed, they'd be spending more money on you to retrain you than if you left.

[digits_]

However, I would argue as a defense that by enforcing the contract, the company would be unjustly enriched by any payment you make to them. Since the plane is gone, they no longer have to train a replacement and had you stayed, they'd be spending more money on you to retrain you than if you left.

What about the argument "we sold the plane because he left and we couldn't find a replacement in time"?

[cncpc]

However, I would argue as a defense that by enforcing the contract, the company would be unjustly enriched by any payment you make to them. Since the plane is gone, they no longer have to train a replacement and had you stayed, they'd be spending more money on you to retrain you than if you left.

What about the argument "we sold the plane because he left and we couldn't find a replacement in time"?

Bede is on the right track.

When the aircraft was sold, it would not have been possible for you to live up to your end of the contract. What the lads say about you leaving when the aircraft was there is not entirely correct, but it is partially correct. Bede is close on unjust enrichment, but only if you had paid up front. However, a court may find it is being asked to unjustly enrich the company be rendering the contract void in October, but trying to sue you. Unjust enrichment usually depends on money paid, but this may stink to a court. If you are in Quebec, you are under civil law and I'm not up on that.

[timel]

Caselaw with an operator in Qb and a training bond.

http://citoyens.soquij.qc.ca/php/decisi ... 8F9&page=1

[5x5]

I guess I'm missing something here, but aren't training bonds intended to cover the costs of training you - not your replacement? There's no unjust enrichment involved as you did take advantage of the training they provided and left before the time you agreed would be provided in exchange for that training.

While you may not like training bonds, that's the essence of them as far as I know.

[godsrcrazy]

People like you are the reason we have bonds in this industry to begin with.

Cant agree more. Without the ATR endorsement would you have got on with a Major.

Pay up buddy. Not sure what Quebec law is. I know in some provinces if you lose you now become responsible for legal fees of the company suing you. Are you prepared to ad on to what you already owe.

[Benwa]

The company he signed the bond with doesn't exist anymore. If he stayed, he would have been layoffed a couple of weeks later.

Even the parent company went under and still owes all previous employees a lot of money... the new owners are just trying to grab cash wherever they see opportunity.

Don't stress it out. Send them a letter stating that the bond was with Express... and unfortunately they do not operate any aircraft anymore.

[Old fella]

Hello to all,

I'd like to have some advice on a training bond issue.
Short story, I signed a bond in October 2014 of 24 months reducing 1/24th for every worked month on an ATR42.
In the late September 2015 I had a major opportunity to go work for a major airline outside canada which I took.
Problem is the company closed its ATR operation afterwards around the 6th of October 2015. So they are claiming me around 10K after keeping some salary and per diems.
Now they are assigning me to court in Quebec. I'd like some advice as it is ridiculous to claim money to retrain a pilot when you don't have the aircraft to fly anymore....

Any given advice would be appreciate

thanks

Personally I would consult a lawyer who has speciality in labor issues for legal advise and lay out all the facts and associated documentation to this person.

[valleyboy]

Personally I would consult a lawyer who has speciality in labor issues for legal advise and lay out all the facts and associated documentation to this person.

Got to say that's pretty good advice. Having said that legal fees will certainly increase costs. It might be cheaper just to write it off as green craziness and simply move on. The one thing I would do, for the cost of a phone call, is to see if a settlement can be negotiated.

[CL-Skadoo!]

I recommend this guy, he got me out of my little jam with JetsGo:

[godsrcrazy]

The company he signed the bond with doesn't exist anymore. If he stayed, he would have been layoffed a couple of weeks later.

Even the parent company went under and still owes all previous employees a lot of money... the new owners are just trying to grab cash wherever they see opportunity.

Don't stress it out. Send them a letter stating that the bond was with Express... and unfortunately they do not operate any aircraft anymore.

I don't think its that easy. This guy is not different then any receivable. Even if this company is bankrupt if the receiver / bank whom ever smells money they will go after it just like if they were a company that didn't pay for flying.

Be a man pay your debt.

[dogone]

Why do people think they can break a legal contract on a whim? It is childish and irresponsible. You would get your shit in a knot if anyone tried to stiff you ; grow up.

[ragbagflyer]

First of all, you signed a bond and left early, presumably for a better job that I hope paid more than you were making before. You agreed to a prorated bond. You entered into a contract. The company is not being unreasonable by asking you to pay up.

Somebody mentioned the company isn't in existence any more. You said they aren't operating ATR's.... Can you be more specific.

You say they held back salary and per diems though? I thought that was an illegal move. You might be able to use that as a bargaining chip.

Have you actually tried negotiating a lower amount? You'd be surprised how reasonable people can actually be when you sit down and talk to them.