Employment Term - Bond

Patta Hara and other supporters of the "bond theory"....

As much as I wish that you were right, I hate to say that your statements couldn\'t be farther from the truth.

First, it is not a "bond", but simply an agreement between you and the company, that you will be liable for GC costs, should you decide to leave within the stipulated period of time. The company is well within its rights to require such an agreement. This isn\'t any different from other agreements that many of us sign - tuition reimbursement, sign-on bonuses, relocation reimbursements, etc., that require us to stay with the employer for a stipulated amount of time. Neither of these is a pre-condition for initiating employment nor are we required to accept them to continue the employment. If you don\'t like them, continue with the same employer without entering the agreement or simply leave the job.

Secondly, don\'t confuse "Employment At-Will" with an agreement. Your signing of the agreement neither precludes you from leaving the employer, nor stops your employer from firing you. The employment is still at-will. In fact, most agreements take the trouble to point out that the stipulated time in the agreement does not imply guaranteed employment, it is still “at-will”.

Thirdly, the link in message #6 titled "little something of the same…" simply states that the employer is obliged to pay all the earned wages, a fact that does not preclude the employer from demanding a reimbursement.

Finally, as many posters have noted, if these agreements (GC costs, sign-on bonus, relocation bonus, etc.) violated any US employment laws, the employers would know better not to require them. In most cases, employers chose not to pursue the case as a matter of choice, and not because of any risk of violating labor laws.

For the record, I have signed a similar agreement, and my company requires us to work for two years after the gc approval.

Amen.
 
gcDrone Question is not about money

It is about Indentured work... If you read the posting above again you will see that all of us "supporters" are agreeing to company claiming monetary damages for expenses in getting your GC.... All we are saying is they CANNOT MAKE YOU WORK FOR THEM FOR 1-2 YEARS on an Indentured bond.
in fact your statement supports what we are talking

"Secondly, don\'t confuse "Employment At-Will" with an agreement. Your signing of the agreement neither precludes you from leaving the employer, nor stops your employer from firing you. "

my apologies if any of my posting was not clear
 
Indentured bond...

PattaHara:

No need to apologize. Let the pleasure be all mine :)

I do concur that an agreement based exclusively on indentured labor would be difficult to implement. What surprises me is that a large company (Fortune 100) or its lawyers overlooked this fact while drafting it. In most cases, there is a clause that quantifies the penalty for breaking the agreement.

In my case, the alternative to two years requirement is prorated cost of the GC process. Our company has retained one of the largest (and expensive) immigration law firms, so the legal costs encourage us to continue :)
 
Different States in US have different Rules !!!

I understand that in CA , you have employee has an advantage , in other states you dont.

Employers sometimes put a clause saying that any dispute will be handled in XXX state. This screws things up .

This is a really sick situation.
Loopholes can be found and used. That is all I want to say.

Try talking with a Laywer, They will discourage you to go to court, they will ask you to settle it yourself, before even seeing your "contract" . Why ??
 
i am sure i will find my ans here...

To all Gurus,

Plz. advice me with the following situation, i am into:

* in short:
J=client.
a=preferred vendor
b=middle-man
c=current co.(my employer)

c has paper work / middleman agreement with b
b has paper work with a
i work for c (c is my emplyer)
i want to join 'a', 'H1B transfer' (on the ground that c is not paying promised salary)

with following 2 clause in picture, what should be my best line of action? what if c ever try to get things/my account(salary) right/ straighten-out for himself? (also, i dont know how will he do this, I am just imagining if he can do this!!?) (he has never paid me the promised amount)

clause1: if i leave his co. before 2 years, i have to pay 15,000 as damages/expenses he has incurred on me(he spent some money on trg. but he has already deducted it from my salary - whatever he giev me)
clause2: i can not join any middle-man/client, whome he has placed me with/thru.

+my intention is not to go after 'c', but just to defend myself if he comes after me.

your expert advice is very much appreciated.

thank you,

k
 
Top