Comments on: You’ll Pay to Quit This Job! One Company’s Nightmare Hiring Policy…

By: Brad Isaac

Brad Isaac — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 13:17:32 +0000

I agree, most employees will not see your business the way you envision it. It’s up to YOU to make that vision clear. Not just so they understand, but so your company’s goals are met.

The burden is on the leader of the company to do that, not the employee. So this hiring policy is still bunk.

By: Dubai Venture

Dubai Venture — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 04:22:28 +0000

Mo Dubai raised an important point here. I'd also like to add that employees will never see your business in your own eyes. They do what's best for their own interest and while some rare diamonds do shine through, every now and then, most will never. Dubai Ventures last blog post..Dubai attracts British holidaymakers

By: July 4th Happiness & June Article Reminiscence » Persistence Unlimited - Goal Setting Blog

Fri, 04 Jul 2008 17:38:24 +0000

[...] You’ll Pay to Quit This Job! One Company’s Nightmare Hiring Policy… [...]

By: Mo Dubai

Mo Dubai — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 23:58:04 +0000

Hi Brad, I think a distinction has to be drawn between your contractor (who is working for his own business, so he is self motivated) and employees (and often we are not). As Andrew said, loyalty is hard to find these days, which means higher employee turnover and higher costs. No matter what incentive scheme you come up with, as soon as your new employee has finished the training period, he can probably get much more with your competitor (you believed in them, you chose them, you took the risk, you trained them). And no one can force a recruit to sign an agreement they don’t like…likewise, the employer is free to keep looking if the conditions of the employment contract are not met.

By: Kenken

Kenken — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 12:08:50 +0000

Not quite sure if I follow this, but is it the same as recruitment companies (headhunters) demanding that the new recruits they found for clients, sign a contract with them saying that if they quit the client within a certain amount of time, the recruit has to pay back the amount of money the recruitment company would have to reimburse the client for the bad hire?

By: What do you think? — You’ll Pay to Quit This Job! One Company’s Nightmare Hiring Policy…

Fri, 20 Jun 2008 05:43:31 +0000

[...] You can leave both text and video comments by using the Comments link below. You’ll Pay to Quit This Job! One Company’s Nightmare Hiring Policy… [...]

By: Ricky Spears

Ricky Spears — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 23:00:08 +0000

That’s a strong contrast to companies like Zappos that pay their new hires to quit. They’ve found that they spend less money to pay people to quit early than they spend training them. The employees that don’t take the cash payout are people that really like thier jobs and are worth a bigger investment of time and resources. Here is more:
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2008/06/05/get-paid-to-quit-your-job.aspx

By: Andrew Seltz

Andrew Seltz — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:11:57 +0000

Brad,

My brother is both good at his job AND a good salesman, but his skills are not highly specialized – he just knows how to deal with people.

You make an excellent distinction between recruiting expenses and hiring perks. Trying to reclaim recruiting costs is a bad precedent to set – what’s next, demanding you repay them for the money they spent on help wanted ads? I wouldn’t do it.

My challenge is trying to harness my brother’s skills in my own business…

Andrew Seltz
The Go-To Guy!
http://www.GoToGuyEnterprises.com

By: B. Riley

B. Riley — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:48:23 +0000

Unfortunately this is a trend in many businesses. Think about the cell phone company who makes you sign a contract saying you won’t leave. You should expect the service to be bad if they have to bind you to a contract with penalties. Same with this company. Expect the worst.

When I read this in Nick’s newsletter the other day, it literally made me nauseous!

Nick brings up a good point too that there are many people who believe they must sign anything an employer puts in front of them. This is another disturbing trend in our society today where people blindly follow orders from anyone without question. It happens too often, and I don’t need to explain to the intelligent readers of this site what the consequences are of living in a society that defaults to deference.

By: Nick Corcodilos

Nick Corcodilos — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 13:19:27 +0000

Brad draws the important distinction. When a company invests in a new hire’s education (or even relocation), that’s a negotiating point when an offer is made. It’s not unreasonable for a company to protect its investment — but only to the extent this involves a transaction directly between the employer and the new hire. A recruiting fee, however, is between the employer and a third party. To sharpen the point, it’s less like an agreement whereby the new hire reimburses the company for an education investment if he or she leaves early; and more like asking the employee to reimburse the company when a customer returns a product for a refund. Certain expenses are company overhead. The real problem is people who seem to believe that they must sign anything an employer puts in front of them.