Can a training bond that was NOT signed be enforced?

[BrachioBleu]

(Trend deleted)

[Fly0nTheWall]

I'm not against compensating their loss, but 15000$ is excessive, especially since I didn't sign anything and that my king air "training" consisted mostly of flights with passengers or cargo. Another way of saying it is that the company only paid 2,4 hrs from their own pockets to train me. The rest was paid fot by customers, even my PPC!

King Air, so 704? No need to go to court, just tell TC that they're operating in contravention of CAR 704.108(1)(c) (703 version is 703.88(1)(c))...since you were flying passengers/revenue flights without a valid PPC. That'll probably get them off your back pretty quick

Just kidding though, I actually hate blackmail...but I'm just seriously amazed that this kinda stuff is still happening.

In response to your actual question though, I'm pretty sure that's not enforceable. At the very least, what are they going to bring to court with them? A blank unsigned contract? You probably wouldn't lose the case by not paying the King Air bond. There are others on here though who are pretty knowledgeable about contract enforcements/court/etc. so I'll let them chime in with better advice than I could suggest.

[digits_]

If they can't prove you agreed to it (written or verbal), they can't enforce it.

I'm even wondering if the full amount of the 5500 would be fully enforceable. But you signed it, and want to honor it, so that's all they should get.

And tell your colleague not to sign that bond retroactively. That's just silly.

If they keep giving you trouble, then definitely bring up that they trained you on revenue flights. And that TC would likely be very interested to know about that. Actually, SMS that anyway. Save your successors the trouble and make sure they get proper training.

[piperdriver]

You didn’t sign the contract so you are not legally bond by the conditions of said contract. Tell them to pound sand. Also who is the operator??

[cdnavater]

Hi, i would like to get an advice on my situation

My previous employer had me on TWO different bonds
The first one was for Navajo which is 5500$ for one year. There is no clause that says that the amount loses 1/12 each month. I have signed this bond and I am planning to honour it. I quit 9 months into the year

The second "bond" is for the King Air and the terms are normally 15 000$ that starts reducing when you're promoted to a captain position (1/12 each month) but the amount doesn't change if you stay as a copilot, which could be for many years if the company would choose so. The thing is, I HAVE NEVER SIGNED THIS BOND but they gave me the required training regardless.

Since I had signed the Navajo bond, I assumed that I did not have a King Air bond since they didn't make me sign it nor have they mentionned it. I must concede that the Employee's manual says very briefly that there will be a penalty of 15 000$ if the employee leaves before but in reality, everyone signs a different paper where the bond is detailled with all the terms and conditions, all of which are not present in the Employee's manual.

Now that I have given my two weeks notice, my employer wants me to pay the total amount of 20 500$ for the two bonds. I would like to get an advice on the situation.

I'm not against compensating their loss, but 15000$ is excessive, especially since I didn't sign anything and that my king air "training" consisted mostly of flights with passengers or cargo. Another way of saying it is that the company only paid 2,4 hrs from their own pockets to train me. The rest was paid fot by customers, even my PPC!

Also, the day I left, when they realized that I didn't sign a bond, they were very quick to coerce my coworker who had trained at the same time as me (who also didn't sign the King Air bond) to sign it, almost 6 months later.

How should I approach the situation? Should I just pay everything? Or should I go in court because the amount is excessive considering their expenses in training me?

Thank you!

I would kindly tell the company that you did not receive the training they are trying charge you for, the training in the aircraft for a PPC or even a PCC(703) cannot be done on a revenue flight, technically can’t be done on a return leg empty if the passengers were charged both directions, return leg even empty is still a revenue flight.
This is not blackmail, these are facts, you tell them you plan to honour the Navajo training, although I would still prorate it because that’s ridiculous but if you do pay the full amount make sure you advise them you would like the tuition t… form signed as you intend to claim it on your income tax.
PS, get the form signed before you hand over the money, otherwise tell them you’ll see them in court and in court you will be providing testimony under oath that your training was done during revenue flights and that transcript will go to Transport Canada.
Again, not blackmail, simple facts that you weren’t aware of before now, now that you are aware, well you know.
Also, I would not count your King air time since it doesn’t appear to be valid.
Caveat, see a lawyer because my advice is not based in law, simply in principle!

[digits_]

Also, I would not count your King air time since it doesn’t appear to be valid.

"valid" for what?

The time that is 'valid' depends on who's asking for your experience. An ATPL application? Possibly an issue if you take it too far. An application at an airline to demonstrate your experience? Likely won't matter a bit. You still got the experience.

[Dronepiper]

Company SMS programs are essentially useless in 703 operations. The company can still do whatever they feel like doing regardless of how many SMS reports they get. The only way change will occur is if TC gets involved. I hate that companies are allowed to manage themselves like this.

[cdnavater]

Also, I would not count your King air time since it doesn’t appear to be valid.

"valid" for what?

The time that is 'valid' depends on who's asking for your experience. An ATPL application? Possibly an issue if you take it too far. An application at an airline to demonstrate your experience? Likely won't matter a bit. You still got the experience.

Yes, should have been more clear, do not count those hours towards ATPL requirements.

[trey kule]

Let me see.
1. The company trained you on a Navajo
2. About 9 months later they trained you on a King Air
… and you pulled the pin

You sound exactly like the kind of person that companies require bonds for.

It seems the company trusted you for the King Air training, though I don’t suppose you mentioned you were sending out resumes and promising the future employer you had King Air training.

As to you claim you fully intend to pay the $5500 bond, will believe that when it happens

As to your coworker, why would he not sign a bond post training? He planning to ditch out as well. I do agree that was sloppy on the employers part but it seems there was trust on their part, which in retrospect was not warranted for you.

Move on. You got what you wanted. Screw the employer and their training costs, right?

[Fly0nTheWall]

Again, not blackmail, simple facts that you weren’t aware of before now, now that you are aware, well you know.

This is a good point. I was imagining it being blackmail in a more malicious/rage quit kinda of scenario, aha. Not sure why my mind went there It is a genuine issue/safety concern.

[Fly0nTheWall]

Let me see.
1. The company trained you on a Navajo
2. About 9 months later they trained you on a King Air
… and you pulled the pin

You sound exactly like the kind of person that companies require bonds for.

It seems the company trusted you for the King Air training, though I don’t suppose you mentioned you were sending out resumes and promising the future employer you had King Air training.

As to you claim you fully intend to pay the $5500 bond, will believe that when it happens

As to your coworker, why would he not sign a bond post training? He planning to ditch out as well. I do agree that was sloppy on the employers part but it seems there was trust on their part, which in retrospect was not warranted for you.

Move on. You got what you wanted. Screw the employer and their training costs, right?

It sounds like it didn't cost the employer all that much to "train" them. And it doesn't sound like trust runs too deep in this company either. If the operator can't be trusted to follow basic CARs requirements, why should the employee be expected to be "trusted" to follow through on a bond they didn't agree to? Suppose the employer required the bond letter be signed before the training, who's to say OP wouldn't have just walked off the job then? Also, OP sounds like a pretty respectable person given they have no issues paying out the Navajo bond. If they had signed a King Air bond prior to "training", it seems to me like they would've paid that out too.

[digits_]

Let me see.
1. The company trained you on a Navajo
2. About 9 months later they trained you on a King Air
… and you pulled the pin

You sound exactly like the kind of person that companies require bonds for.

It seems the company trusted you for the King Air training, though I don’t suppose you mentioned you were sending out resumes and promising the future employer you had King Air training.

It's also a perfect example as to why bonds are horrible.

If the OP signed a bond and noticed the 704 training on revenue flights, it would have been be quite costly to leave. Now he recognizes the BS going on, and has the power to leave.

You're also making quite a few assumptions on the timeline. Could be that he was trained on the king air in the second month, or in the 9th. That needs to be clarified if you want to attack him.

As to your coworker, why would he not sign a bond post training? He planning to ditch out as well. I do agree that was sloppy on the employers part but it seems there was trust on their part, which in retrospect was not warranted for you.

Well of course he is. I can guarantee you that 99% of pilots signing a bond will want to jump ship before it's up. Most probably won't due to costs. But if, as a company, you need to resort to bonds because the jobs you're offering are so shitty people want to leave after 9 months, then don't be surprised they will indeed want to leave when they have the chance!

Make the job more attractive and/or let the job market do it's job. And if you want to disturb that mechanic, at the very least make sure you actually make them sign the contracts you supposedly require!

[cdnavater]

Let me see.
1. The company trained you on a Navajo
2. About 9 months later they trained you on a King Air
… and you pulled the pin

You sound exactly like the kind of person that companies require bonds for.

It seems the company trusted you for the King Air training, though I don’t suppose you mentioned you were sending out resumes and promising the future employer you had King Air training.

As to you claim you fully intend to pay the $5500 bond, will believe that when it happens

As to your coworker, why would he not sign a bond post training? He planning to ditch out as well. I do agree that was sloppy on the employers part but it seems there was trust on their part, which in retrospect was not warranted for you.

Move on. You got what you wanted. Screw the employer and their training costs, right?

Regardless of when the “training” was done, it sounds like it didn’t cost the company anything since the “training” was done on revenue flights!

[trey kule]

He did not say all the training. Provided the employer did the required dedicated training and the captain had a single pilotPPC ,( and company Ops allowed it) nothing wrong with gaining experience on rev flights. Lots of parts missed out here.
How many hours dedicated ground school and training?

Lots of pilots sending out resumes while they are undergoing training with the clear intention of jumping ship . It is the prime reason for training bonds

[digits_]

Lots of pilots sending out resumes while they are undergoing training with the clear intention of jumping ship . It is the prime reason for training bonds

WJ and AC don't need training bonds.

Lots of private bizz jets don't need bonds.

Treat your pilots right and they will stay, even without bonds. It's not rocket science.

Yes, some will never be happy. But if 99% will move on asap nowadays, it should be possible to get it to more acceptable levels by making the job more attractive.

As mentioned in other threads, some pilots are making (less than) minimum wage. Can you honestly expect people to stick around in those conditions?

Let's be honest here. The majority (all?) of the older AC/WJ pilots that had to spend 10 years in the bush or in crappy medevac operations would have turned down an AC / WJ offer after 9 months of bush/medevac flying if they had a choice.

[Bede]

First off, are you in Quebec or somewhere else in Canada? I know nothing about Quebec's civil law system, so take that into account.

My previous employer had me on TWO different bonds
The first one was for Navajo which is 5500$ for one year. There is no clause that says that the amount loses 1/12 each month. I have signed this bond and I am planning to honour it. I quit 9 months into the year

Sounds shady.

The second "bond" is for the King Air and the terms are normally 15 000$ that starts reducing when you're promoted to a captain position (1/12 each month) but the amount doesn't change if you stay as a copilot, which could be for many years if the company would choose so. The thing is, I HAVE NEVER SIGNED THIS BOND but they gave me the required training regardless.

Since I had signed the Navajo bond, I assumed that I did not have a King Air bond since they didn't make me sign it nor have they mentionned it. I must concede that the Employee's manual says very briefly that there will be a penalty of 15 000$ if the employee leaves before but in reality, everyone signs a different paper where the bond is detailled with all the terms and conditions, all of which are not present in the Employee's manual.

Generally, contracts are still enforceable even if not signed. However, the party attempting to enforce the contract must provide evidence that there was "a meeting of the minds". This could be a text message, a conversation, etc. establishing that you agreed by the terms of the contract.

In this case, I would argue that you signed a bond, the Navajo bond, and there was no reason to consider to sign an additional bond, so there was no agreement.

Second, the employer could argue an equitable principle - you got something of value, namely, training, and it cost them money, and you should pay. In response, I would argue that the employer had no cost because the "training" was done on revenue flights and therefore the employer incurred no cost. I would argue that you quit once you found out that the training was illegal.

Now that I have given my two weeks notice, my employer wants me to pay the total amount of 20 500$ for the two bonds. I would like to get an advice on the situation.

How should I approach the situation? Should I just pay everything? Or should I go in court because the amount is excessive considering their expenses in training me?

On a without prejudice basis, offer to pay the first bond of $5500. As well, you'll agree to a confidentiality clause (ie you won't call TC enforcement.) If they accept, ensure that you have a clause that says they can't come after you for the remaining $15k. If they don't accept, let them come after you. If they take it to small claims court, again, offer to pay the $5500. You'll want to *gently* hint to them that you could go to TC with regards to the training on revenue flights issue. Don't say, "if you don't accept, I'll call TC". In conversation, mention something that you found out that training cannot be done on revenue flight. In your offer of settlement, write something like, "in exchange for the execution of this settlement, "me" agrees to keep the details of the operation confidential and shall not report anything to any regulatory body." Something like that.

There's also a nuclear option (which I'd be very reluctant to use). Tell them that you'll contact their clients and tell them that their training isn't in compliance with the CARs. Be careful as you could get sued for this and even though you may be justified, you likely can't afford the legal bills to defend yourself.

I hope this works out for you as it sounds like you got scammed by a shady operator. I also hope you learned your lesson. Never, ever get yourself into such a shady situation again.

[Donald]

Pilot goes to aviation forum to seek free legal advice.

This should end well.

[BrachioBleu]

(Trend deleted)

[Fly0nTheWall]

Just to clarify, the king airs are operated in 703.

You can refer to CAR 703.88(1)(c) then. Since (I'm assuming) you got a PPC and not a PCC, it's the same rule as 704 ops.

If you feel comfortable, let us know how it goes. It sucks you had to experience this, but would be a good lesson for the guys coming after you to be informed and get some insight on how they can approach the circumstances. If not for any other reason than to know not to get involved with operators such as this one. I know the allure of quick upgrades and multi time can be enticing, but imho it's not worth the risk. Both financially, but also from a safety standpoint. Who knows what other rules they're not following for maintenance, etc., etc. Not worth it in my books.

[5x5]

Obviously there's nowhere near enough background to truly assess this situation but I will admit that my eyebrows raised just a bit on the part that the timeline is less than a year from start to finish. And yet it seems most respondents think it's the operator that's the problem. Hmmm?!

[5x5]

Obviously there's nowhere near enough background to truly assess this situation but I will admit that my eyebrows raised just a bit on the part that the timeline is less than a year from start to finish. And yet it seems most respondents think it's the operator that's the problem. Hmmm?!

[5x5]

*unwanted duplicate*

[5x5]

*unwanted duplicate*

[5x5]

*unwanted duplicate*

[BrachioBleu]

(Trend deleted)