Should Companies Ask Jr. Employees To Sign 2 Year Bond?
Many leading companies, I've come to know, are asking engineering grads to join 2 year contract at the time of joining. The contract abides the new employees to continue the job with the employer for a minimum of 2 years. It's one-sided bond; meaning the employer can terminate the employment but the candidate cannot.
I've heard that this is done because the employers spend considerable money and efforts on new joinees in training them for projects. Lot of recruiters eye these 'trained employees' and offer them a slightly higher package and thus save the whole cost of training them.
But this may work against the candidates in many cases. For example, if the employer doesn't offer work in the domain of candidate's interest, the employee is bound to get frustrated and stuck up in job for minimum 2 years. Or worse, if the employer does not have a project the candidate is made to be 'on bench' for months! That ruins future career prospects for the candidate.
What's your take on this?
I've heard that this is done because the employers spend considerable money and efforts on new joinees in training them for projects. Lot of recruiters eye these 'trained employees' and offer them a slightly higher package and thus save the whole cost of training them.
But this may work against the candidates in many cases. For example, if the employer doesn't offer work in the domain of candidate's interest, the employee is bound to get frustrated and stuck up in job for minimum 2 years. Or worse, if the employer does not have a project the candidate is made to be 'on bench' for months! That ruins future career prospects for the candidate.
What's your take on this?
0
