Background: 

The claimant was employed as an apprentice beauty therapist by the respondent from April 2021 until September 2022.   The issue arose from an alleged underpayment of wages relating to the cost of training courses undertaken while employed. 

The claimant’s contract stated: 

‘We shall be entitled to deduct from your wage or other payments due to you, any money which you may owe to the Company at any time.  This includes without limitation any overpayment of pay, commission or expenses, repayment of training costs…’ 

The claimant raised a grievance about her final pay relating to the amount paid.  Part of this was resolved in relation to outstanding Day Release payments meaning her pay changed from £432.08 to £978.99.  However, there were sums deducted in line with the Employee Handbook and Contract of Employment.  The claimant asserts that she had never read her contract and that she had never read the Employee Handbook which she did say was kept in the staff room.   The claimant did sign the contract.   The respondent asserted that the claimant was liable for 50% of the cost of the training courses because she left her employment before the stipulated period of one year.    

Outcome: 

The Tribunal found that the term in the contract had been accepted by the claimant’s signature.  However, on the deductions each had to be examined.   One of the deductions was relating to a gel nail course. The Tribunal held this was in line with the contractual term.  The second was in relation to an eyelash course.   An issue arose about the training due to a technical issue and the claimant said that there should have been more assistance from the respondent.  The Tribunal found that the claimant had demonstrated little effort in resolving the issue but found that as the issue arose with both parties that the deduction should be halved.  The last course was a piercing course. The respondent stated that the salon was closed to facilitate the claimant’s training yet the claimant said it was part of a team-building event.   The Tribunal found that the claimant was more credible citing that the other staff members were also in attendance at the salon that day.  The Tribunal did recognise the training aspect though and stated that it should be 50% of one third of the overall cost of the course.  

Practical Guidance for Employers: 

When it comes to training employers would rightly want to protect themselves by being able to claw back funds paid on a staff member who leaves shortly after the training.  Where that is the case, then the nature of the training, the date of the training and its cost should be noted by the employer.  This would provide an evidential basis should there be a deduction from the final pay relating to training as shown in this case.  

NI Tribunal decisions are available on the OITFET website:  
http://www.employmenttribunalsni.co.uk/