Should quick quitting result in training repayments

Should quick quitting result in training repayments?

A friend recently sent me an article about training repayment agreement provisions known as TRAPs. Under these arrangements, workers must reimburse their employer for training if they leave their job within a year or so, or even sometimes if they’re laid off. TRAPs were used mainly for very specialized types of roles like an engineer or pilot. But they’ve spread to other jobs. Fewer than 10% of U.S. workers now owe some sort of debt to their employer. I think it’s more than fair and reasonable to expect reimbursement under the right circumstances.

If an employee takes specialized knowledge to a competitor, then the jilted employer will be dealing with much more than training and turnover expenses. Our staffing company worked for a time with a manufacturer that required our candidates to obtain a boiler license. Which would allow them to easily demand more money from an employer. We’ve all been hearing a lot lately about the quiet-quitting phenomenon but there’s also an increase in quick quitting. I see more people job hopping in gigs that last just three to nine months.

So, this is a challenging climate for employers that need to invest time and money training new hires who are difficult to attract and retain in the first place. At the same time, it’s important to take a deeper dive into the actual training that’s being conducted. People could possibly be coming in with a particular skill that that they were already trained in that’s highly relevant to what they’re learning, and they may not need the training. Employers that have a TRAP must be upfront and transparent with team members about this arrangement so that there are no surprises.

Pondering a safe return to offices as we transition to an endemic
Why gig-work is so appealing to so many working Americans

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *