As a small company of around 10, we recruited a graduate around 6 months ago. He needed to move to our location and set himself up with a place, so we offered a relocation allowance. (not a huge sum).
He's resigned now and is moving to a new job elsewhere. I'm after advice on our approach to him about repaying a portion of that relocation allowance. We were perhaps a little relaxed in our contract, in that there is no stipulation about repayment of the relocation allowance in there. Training expenses incurred in acquiring skills necessary to complete the job are covered, and there are details of the expected repayments in the staff handbook.
He has not incurred expenses involved in moving locally, as he rents a room in a shared house, and has not moved a significant amount of possessions here. He has had to pay a deposit, but provided he has been a reasonable tenant he should expect to have that returned.
I've offered to pay for his listed expenses incurred in relocating instead of pro-rating the allowance for the months of his first year that he has worked. He is concerned that this is 'not fair', as he has incurred few expenses that could be categorised as directly involved in relocation.
I recognise that as an employer, we could have been clearer about guidance regarding the type of expenses that could be funded, even through the money was clearly identified as a relocation allowance. We could also have been clearer that the allowance was not cash in his pocket that wouldn't need to be repaid.
He has now made written a letter of grievance, and I need to sit with him and talk this through in the next few days. Am I being unreasonable in requiring some of the relocation to be returned ?
He's resigned now and is moving to a new job elsewhere. I'm after advice on our approach to him about repaying a portion of that relocation allowance. We were perhaps a little relaxed in our contract, in that there is no stipulation about repayment of the relocation allowance in there. Training expenses incurred in acquiring skills necessary to complete the job are covered, and there are details of the expected repayments in the staff handbook.
He has not incurred expenses involved in moving locally, as he rents a room in a shared house, and has not moved a significant amount of possessions here. He has had to pay a deposit, but provided he has been a reasonable tenant he should expect to have that returned.
I've offered to pay for his listed expenses incurred in relocating instead of pro-rating the allowance for the months of his first year that he has worked. He is concerned that this is 'not fair', as he has incurred few expenses that could be categorised as directly involved in relocation.
I recognise that as an employer, we could have been clearer about guidance regarding the type of expenses that could be funded, even through the money was clearly identified as a relocation allowance. We could also have been clearer that the allowance was not cash in his pocket that wouldn't need to be repaid.
He has now made written a letter of grievance, and I need to sit with him and talk this through in the next few days. Am I being unreasonable in requiring some of the relocation to be returned ?
Comment