{"id":10145,"date":"2023-04-17T14:39:36","date_gmt":"2023-04-17T12:39:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/dev.patchwork.law\/non-classifiee\/dedit-formation-rupture-conventionnelle\/"},"modified":"2024-01-06T13:05:51","modified_gmt":"2024-01-06T12:05:51","slug":"no-reimbursement-after-a-conventional-termination","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/news-labor-lawyers\/no-reimbursement-after-a-conventional-termination\/","title":{"rendered":"No reimbursement of the cost of training after a conventional termination"},"content":{"rendered":"

To ensure the loyalty of an employee for whom the company has financed costly training, certain contracts contain a so-called \u201ctraining waiver<\/strong>\u201d clause.<\/p>\n

Reminder of the principle:<\/strong><\/p>\n

The training forfeiture clause provides that the employee leaving the company before a date set by the parties must reimburse their employer for the costs incurred by their training.<\/p>\n

It meets specific validity conditions and in particular:<\/p>\n\n

\n
\n
\n
\n <\/span> \n
\n
\n

<\/use><\/svg><\/i><\/span>Signature<\/strong>
\n(in the initial contract or amendments) before the training<\/p>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n <\/span> \n
\n
\n

<\/use><\/svg><\/i><\/span>Exclusively paid training<\/strong>
\nby the employer, and more costly than required by law or collective agreement<\/p>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n <\/span> \n
\n
\n

<\/use><\/svg><\/i><\/span>Proportional reimbursement amount<\/strong>
\nat the costs incurred by the employer, and exposed to the employee<\/p>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n <\/span> \n
\n
\n

<\/use><\/svg><\/i><\/span>Time limitation<\/strong>
\nin general the training forfeiture clause is valid between 2 and 5 years<\/p>\n <\/div>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n

\n
\n
\n \n
\n
\n

How to activate the training forfeiture clause?<\/h2>

In a recent judgment of the Social Chamber of the Court of Cassation, it recalls that the forfeiture-training clause can only be implemented in the event of departure at the initiative of the employee.<\/p>

It had already been ruled that an employee who left the company due to acts committed by the employer could not have the forfeiture training clause applied.<\/p>

In this case, an employee requested a conventional termination of her employment contract. Her employer, considering that the employee had initiated the termination, had requested reimbursement for the training in accordance with the forfeiture clause.<\/p>

The Court of Cassation recalls that, in accordance with article L.1237-11 of the Labor Code<\/a>, conventional termination is exclusive of dismissal or resignation and cannot therefore be imposed by either party.<\/p>

As the contractual termination is not attributable to either party, a forfeiture clause cannot be applied in this departure case. It is therefore recommended to foresee the fate of the forfeiture clause as part of the negotiation of the conventional termination.<\/p> <\/div>\n<\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

To ensure the loyalty of an employee for whom the company has financed costly training, certain contracts contain a so-called \u201ctraining waiver\u201d clause. Reminder of the principle: The training forfeiture clause provides that the employee leaving the company before a date set by the parties must reimburse their employer for the costs incurred by their […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":6,"featured_media":9724,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[26],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-10145","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-news-labor-lawyers","has-post-title","has-post-date","has-post-category","has-post-tag","has-post-comment","has-post-author",""],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10145","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/6"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=10145"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/10145\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9724"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=10145"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=10145"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patchwork.law\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=10145"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}