all about "bonds" when you get employed

[abcxyz]

how prevalent is this "bond" thing with companies that hire you? and what companies have these? in what industries? is this like true for most?

[abcxyz]

someone sent me a pm to ask what she will do with an offer for training but it has a "bond".

this person is already employed in her company for more than two years now. she was recently offered by her company to undergo 2 training sessions.

according to the company, these two training sessions are worth P100T or 1.5 years of stay.

not familiar with how these things go, i asked if this is what it meant : she needs to stay in the company for another 1.5 years. if she terminates or resigns from her job within that 1.5 years, she needs to pay P100T.

she told me yes, i understood it correctly.

she turned down the training offer. and i told her she made the right decision.

anyone know what might be the implication on her that she has turned down the trainings?

[abcxyz]

bonds i think are very unfair to employees. it's lopsided for the benefit of the employer and gives nothing to the employee. this is like prison for the employee or blackmail.

are these even legal? if they are legal, i think they are grossly unfair to employees and definetely immoral.

will post more of my opinion on this as more explain what "bonds" are and what types are being executed by companies.

[Yashiro]

no, bonds is fair, its just an assurance to the company that you will stay for awhile, not get like 1 month of pay and leave, thus wasting every bit of energy to interview, hire you, make you an account in the systems, make u a company email blah blah blah....

imagine if there's no bond, i can just attend the first 2 months so that i can train in whatever language they use, i then resign and use this knowledge and put it in my resume that i attended a certification training of some sort, wouldn't that be unfair to the company?..

companies want you for a long term, thats their optimistic goal.. and what they let u experience, they hope to get benefit from it.

anyway based on experience, bonds are not really strict, when you leave a company and your contract for the bond is still not over, its still depends on the exit interview (on some companies) if they will ask you to pay the bond or not...

hope this input helps

[Yashiro]

someone sent me a pm to ask what she will do with an offer for training but it has a "bond".

this person is already employed in her company for more than two years now. she was recently offered by her company to undergo 2 training sessions.

according to the company, these two training sessions are worth P100T or 1.5 years of stay.

not familiar with how these things go, i asked if this is what it meant : she needs to stay in the company for another 1.5 years. if she terminates or resigns from her job within that 1.5 years, she needs to pay P100T.

she told me yes, i understood it correctly.

she turned down the training offer. and i told her she made the right decision.

anyone know what might be the implication on her that she has turned down the trainings?


in my opinion, the implications will not be too high but it wont be low either, turning down trainings offered by the company because of a 'bond' will just show them that you dont intend to stay in the company for a long time or does not see any future on the company or he/she might be thinking that there might be a better offer somewhere.. it's not really big that they might fire you and the worst case scenario is that they will not give u many oppurtunities to go up the ladder...

[abcxyz]

no, bonds is fair, its just an assurance to the company that you will stay for awhile, not get like 1 month of pay and leave, thus wasting every bit of energy to interview, hire you, make you an account in the systems, make u a company email blah blah blah....

imagine if there's no bond, i can just attend the first 2 months so that i can train in whatever language they use, i then resign and use this knowledge and put it in my resume that i attended a certification training of some sort, wouldn't that be unfair to the company?..

companies want you for a long term, thats their optimistic goal.. and what they let u experience, they hope to get benefit from it.

anyway based on experience, bonds are not really strict, when you leave a company and your contract for the bond is still not over, its still depends on the exit interview (on some companies) if they will ask you to pay the bond or not...

hope this input helps

if companies want you to stay for the long term - then offer good salaries and benefits, good training, good working conditions and offer a good future.

companies should learn to treat their employees well, specially the newly hired ones. it's a competitive world out there. lousy employers will get lousy employees and good employers will get the best employees.

[Yashiro]

again,its just an assurance, and in the real world, its not always that optimistic. you're talking about the ideal world which is not the case when you work on a third world country..

and they show the bonds when you get a contract to sign anyway so its your choice if you wana go for it or not, if you don't want any bonds then better find a company that doesn't offer them.. thats like 10% of the companies.. hehe!

[abcxyz]

again,its just an assurance, and in the real world, its not always that optimistic. you're talking about the ideal world which is not the case when you work on a third world country..

and they show the bonds when you get a contract to sign anyway so its your choice if you wana go for it or not, if you don't want any bonds then better find a company that doesn't offer them.. thats like 10% of the companies.. hehe!

no, thats not true. MOST companies do not ask bonds from people they will hire, and that includes the big ones and multinational companies.

again, in the real world, the assurance for employees to stay is to at least offer fair if not best compensation. i do not think you will ever find an employee who resigns from a job if that person is happy in his/her job and the company she works for. that's the plain simple truth. employees resign from their jobs and companies because they are no longer happy there or they have a better offer. that is another simple plain truth.

this is a lopsided arrangement - what assurance do employees get that the employer will be fair and deliver what they promised at contract? what if you have an abusive boss?

here's a fact -if the company you work for some reason suffers a loss, you can be fired before you serve out the timeframe of your bond. why is it then that it is only he employee who is duty bound to deliver on the terms and the company isn't?