letter of appointment.
 

Is it legal for a clause to pay 3 months to the coy if the person left the company before 3 years? If contract has been signed.

yes, if you/"the person" executed the contract.

i'm sure there are other legal recourse but may not be worth the time, $$ and effort to fight it. the best solution is to negotiate with your boss/HR/legal to come to an amicable compromise.

The term is very weird. It puts 2 week notice during probation and 3 months notice after probation.
Den last page put payback 3 months salary if contract is terminated before 3 years. ( I nv notice this clause)
Does it mean if I quit after probation oso nd pay 3 months???
I initially signed wen I see the 2 weeks notice probation. Never think so much. Now tat I really read thru the contract it seems to make me stay for 3 years???

it's not weird. sounds like they put you through some kind of training and it's a 3 year bond. can't believe that you signed on the dotted line without looking through the details! go seek legal advise or talk to your boss. no one in a forum can help you.

good luck.

There's no training. Its an executive position n my replacement is on one month notice and never heard of the policy before.

cant blame anyone, u didnt read ur contract carefully before u signed. it seems that u signed a 3-years bond. almost no case against ur company..

Hi there. Yep I did sign but it seems that the contract terms are not valid either with mom rules or contract law. Im comtemplating legal advice n im still on probation just curious anyone hu signed a contract with clauses that only protects one party.
If after seeking advice it is invalid then I will quit.

i aint lawyer, but i highly doubt u have any case against ur employer. sorry to say, u deserve this cause u didnt read before u sign. this is basic..

nonetheless, how's the job so far? if it's not that bad, and u think u can stay for 3 years, then nth to worry isnt it? rather to go complicate matters. if u're really uncomfortable, go speak to ur HR better, legal advice/action is def > ur 3 months salary + lots of unpleasant moments.

you can take the risk of them suing you. then you can challenge them in court.

first, dig out all their particulars. step 1: pay $5 at .bizfile.com.sg to buy their company profile. you can counter sue the directors of the company for any violation.

even if you receive a letter of demand (LOD) from their lawyer, you still don't have to pay. you can reply nicely asking if such a contract is even enforceable. also, if you are protected by MOM regulations (i.e. income less than $2,500, i think), you can approach MOM for help. furnish MOM with all the company's particulars - office address, names & residential addresses of all the directors, contact numbers, etc.

careful: lawyers are always the winners. if things worsen to the level where you must get a lawyer, try to get a pro bono one to help you.

my take on this (caveat emptor): you can walk away from the job.

further, if you know of any wrongdoing in this company, be a whistleblower and take the 1st retaliatory step. examples: tax evasion, software piracy, illegal PIC claims, illegal activities, sexual harassment.

for taxes and PIC-related matters, call IRAS.

for illegal activities, call CPIB or CAD.

for sexual harassment, call 999.

start collecting evidence. bad people need to have a taste of their own medicine.

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?

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.

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.

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. :)

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"

Y ah these ppl. Dun wna do decent biz.

he may or may not be able to proceed with a writ of summons. Writ of summons is just the start, whether the case has any legal grounds in the eyes of the law and whether the company can win is another qn.

I was applying for a company previously. I went for 2nd round interview. the boss mentioned that if i were to get the job, i must sign a bond to stay with the company for 2 yrs. The moment i heard this, i knew the company got issues. I told the boss nicely in a professional way that if the company and job is exciting enough, i don't see why would people want to leave, in fact they would want to stay as they can grow in this company.

In the end i knew the company had issues and didn't proceed further with the interview in an enthusiastic way. Later i heard the boss himself left/got fired also.

I tot writ of summon mean the person nd to go to court to defend him/herself already.
Thanks for the advice. I know wad to do liao.

why is it "shady" and "unfair"? don't forget that floralpeace in your own moment of greed or eagerness signed on the dotted line. no one forced you to but you did even after reviewing the contract terms.

Ok take it that im too eager to sign.
Im keen to know if ppl signed sth like dat n ltr on realised the coy needs u to do sth nt very legal but unenforced. What will be your course of action.

these are 2 very separate issues... one being your employment contract and the other being an ethical issue. end of the day i still think u should talk to your boss, whether this is grounds for you to break the bond amicably.

judging from ur posts, it seems like u're unwilling to take responsibilities for your own foolishness and action. it is you yourself who signed a contract without reading the terms. and now, you're framing your company of being "unethical" and involved with "illegal" matters. grow up please, this attitude and mentality of yours will not get you far in life. all the best.

Thanks for the input.

In the case of said contract, there does not seem to be any losses for the company based on what little information we have here. However, does it really negate the contracts validity and hence render it unenforceable? Or is this considered a case of unconscionability?

We can all gain something from understanding contract law better...

Negotiated and removed the bond frm my contract w my employer.
So is verbally commit for that period without compensation clause.
Unethical issue persists, I will see hw it goes.

Thanks all for advice.

Regarding that. Company can sue but they could nt claim bk the said amount unless they could prove regarding amount. Usually they could oni claim bk few hundred on losses. So no point for civil suit.

if it helps i left 1 month before my 90 days notice period and had to pay my co the difference. didn't matter to me as my next employer paid for it and even wanted to buy me out of the full 90 days.

Hi. Can I know the sector? Mnc is it? And ur experience level.
Thanks.

Hi guys, I dunno to set up new thread or to gather for response here. I try here first dun want to set up so many threads.
As mentioned I have discussed bond term with my director n he has removed the term of bond amount and signed on it. Meaning no need pay penalty if leave but he expected 2 yr commitment verbally which I say ok since he removed bond term.
Ethical issue remain which is legal but not ethical. Im doing products registration towards many countries n some of the products are banned in certain prominent countries due to health hazard in human but not banned in certain developing country because their regulatory is lax....im concerned abt bringing them into those countries since its health hazard.. what should I tell my boss or any amicable way to go abt doing. V headache. ..

I dun relly mind dun hv the job ( I would say without bond term work conditions r v gd including flexible hr work life balance nice envt etc .. however the ethical issue) . I dun want to cause harm to ppl anywhr in the world.

Actually 80% of products r safe oni the 20% which will hv to do sooner or later. Im thinking the possibility to nego nt to do biz for the 20% which will cause loss. . . Like not likely he will agree.

Florapeace, what kind of company is that? bank?

Is nt bank. Hw will bank cause harm?

then which kind? small trading firm?

Yep trading firm

Anyone has inputs on hw to resolve. My stand is I cant do.