Does this Employment Contract Look Fine to You?

[stoker]

Hi all.

I've recently graduated from university and have had a hard time finding a job but I have recently been offered a role at a very small engineering consultancy. I have some questions regarding their employment contract.

Does the employment contract look ok to you? More importantly, I am wondering whether it is normal for employers to demand employees to pay for their training if they decide to leave within 2 years of joining (point 7). It is not something I am obviously planning to do, considering that I currently do have an interest to work for this company. However, I would like to keep my options open and if I am to be offered a better paying job at a larger company with better opportunities for progression, then I would rather not be forced to stay at this job for 2 years.

Also, point 4.1 states the normal working hours, yet 4.3 states that I will be required to work additional hours as they deem necessary but will not be entitled to further remuneration. Doesn't this mean they can make me work for as long as they want, or am I covered by the 48-hour week law?

Sorry if my worries and questions seem ignorant but this is the first full-time employment contract I have had to look through and would rather negotiate my conditions prior to signing it.

Thank you for the help!

Google drive link for contract (as it does not let me attach it to the post):
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1WHh...ew?usp=sharing

[ULA]

In respect of the clauses you have specifically asked about:

Many jobs have a clause about being prepared to work as necessary to do the job even if that is more than the contractual hours. Unless you are asked to opt out of the 48 hour working week you are covered by these regulations, however this clause means you can work more than 48 hours one week, as long as the average over 17 weeks is less than 48 hours a week.

Clause 7 often referred to as repayment of training cost is again often either a standard clause in an employment contract or a separate agreement is drawn up for a specific training course. So not unusual and neither is the 2 year period over which they expect you to remain without having to repay anything. The good thing is that they have a sliding scale over the two year period which recognises the benefit they get from the training.
However 7.2 seems to infer that once you get beyond two years and you then do some training you will be "out of any period" for having to make a repayment. It may be just bad wording but i think you need to check this is the actual interpretation and that if you attend a training course in say month 26 and you decide to leave at month 30, will you be liable for the full costs as you are still in the first 12 months of having attended that specific course.

[EnglandPi]

The short answer is, They can put anything they like in an employment contract you don't agree with it unless you want the job.