Legal Question in Employment Law in Minnesota

Re: Training Expenses

I am a COlorado employment attorney (managment defense) and therefore unfamiliar with your state law on this subject,but there are statutes which address this type of action in other states, (Colorado has one), and they have been enforceable.

This is not the interesting issue however. If this is now a condition of employmetn , there must be consideration for giving up a right. Some courts have held that continued employement is not adequate consideration for a contract, other have held it is sufficient consideration. Next, consider the issue of duress. the employee could claim that they were forced to sign the agreement, or lose thier job, and therefore it may be unenforceable. Given the mis-managment involved by the company failur et o timely present the agreement, a court could enforce this. Further, there is an argument that the company may be altering its employemtn at will relationship due to the restriction palced on the employees freedom to terminate employment. The on-going nature of the agreement would not be enforceable in OClorado under the specific terms of the statute (which limits trainig expenses to two years form the date of hire) the rational being that only expenses needed to enable a new employee to perform a job for the employer should be recoverable. I suggest that if the training primarily benefit that company and not the employee (consider promotions, transferablity, etc.) this could affect the enforceablility as well. I offer no legal opinion, bu tit appears ethical behavior is alos an issue. I would counsel the employee to give written protest to the training. This could preserve the right to shift the burden to the company as to why they required the training. Was it essential to the job performance? this is too complaex to address here, but it is critical to see if your state addresses the issue in a statute.