letter of appointment.

[floralpeace]

I hv gt their biz file .. I searched on the net it seems tat got one person on sgforum gt letter of demand regarding a 11 month payment of skipping bond term but the pursuer could not come out with writs of dummon coz the clause is invalid as the coy cannot provide evidence that that amount of money hv been spent in training...
Actually im ok with the company until I considered properly the terms attached and found it shady.

Originally Posted by floralpeace

I hv gt their biz file .. I searched on the net it seems tat got one person on sgforum gt letter of demand regarding a 11 month payment of skipping bond term but the pursuer could not come out with writs of dummon coz the clause is invalid as the coy cannot provide evidence that that amount of money hv been spent in training...
Actually im ok with the company until I considered properly the terms attached and found it shady.

hence, it's not enforceable, precisely because it's an unfair clause. LOD is nothing. lawyers charge $200 to write an LOD letter - which greedy lawyer doesn't what to earn money from stupid company directors?

[aplover]

The only way the company can sue you in court for those 3 mths is the company must prove that it suffered financial damages as a result of you leaving before 3 yrs. Maybe they are investing heavily in some form of training for you which costs a lot or similar to 3 mths of your salary. Otherwise it will not hold in court.and 3 mths salary is not worth for the company to pull you to court over.

I'm surprised many of you here don't know this. Yes TS may hv signed the contract but not all terms are really enforceable under the eyes of the law. Any commercial or employment legal cases only holds weight if the applicant can show and prove grounds of loss of commercial value, money, goodwill or anything that is tangible.

With regards to serving number of years in employment contract, only scholarship bonds are able to be enforced in court if the scholar breaks the bond before a stipulated period of time. This is because the company is and has invested money upfront to be amortized over a certain number of years. Normal employment contracts will not hold such weight as I hv mentioned previously.

TS, in fact you really should ask why the company ha such stupid n weak clauses? It shows fear in the mgmt and that they can't keep their staff which means you better not stay unless you hv a good reason.

[floralpeace]

Ok great. Cz in fact im oni 1 week there...
The company seems to be good but I dun know the intention of them hving to write such clauses which makes me uncomfortable will they compel me by amending working conditions.
In fact some of the terms which are not very lawful are made using sentence like "you are compelled to..."

Originally Posted by floralpeace

Ok great. Cz in fact im oni 1 week there...
The company seems to be good but I dun know the intention of them hving to write such clauses which makes me uncomfortable will they compel me by amending working conditions.
In fact some of the terms which are not very lawful are made using sentence like "you are compelled to..."

if you want to be mischievous, go and question the most senior company director or CEO, and claim that your father, who is a big lawyer, says that the clauses are ILLEGAL.

[floralpeace]

Aplover. Does the above mean that he is unable to proceed with writs of summon?

now, if you can name the company here, it will be even better. or post the said contract on stomp or one of those popular websites that fight for citizen rights.

maybe you can even sue the company for the psychological damage that this contract has caused you.

[floralpeace]

Lol will I kena sue for defamation if I post... later more n more complicated.

Originally Posted by floralpeace

Lol will I kena sue for defamation if I post... later more n more complicated.

you just need to post: XYZ Pte Ltd has this unfair employment clause, which is a FACT.

it's not defamation.

and if you see all the company directors living in HDB addresses, they most likely don't have the money to sue.

one more retaliatory action: if the company has EVER made a late salary payment to any employee protected by the employment act (pay is less than $2,500), you can report the boss and he faces ARREST. for more information, google for: "Bosses who don't pay staff face arrest on the spot"

[floralpeace]

Y ah these ppl. Dun wna do decent biz.