The International Schools Review Forum

Hi,
Is it normal for international teaching contracts to require the employee to make payment in lieu if they leave within the notice period? I'm really excited about joining this school and obviously have no intention of breaking my contract, but the inclusion of the point below makes me a little nervous. I have asked the school for clarification, but would like to know if those of you who are more experienced have seen this sort of clause before? Does it mean that in the (unlikely) circumstance that I wanted to leave at short notice I would be required to pay them two terms' salary? I understand that schools expect staff to commit and there should be some penalty for leaving without sufficient notice, but this seems extreme!
Thanks

"The Employee may terminate the Employment after giving the Head Master an advance written notice of two full terms, or payment in lieu of whole or part of the notice period"

Many contracts have a clause of a similar nature. The two terms penalty is pretty steep though. I'm not sure I've seen that specific penalty before.

It's very unlikely such a clause would ever be enforced in full.

I do tend to prefer contracts that are rather balanced in terms of notice, whether it's the employer or employee giving notice. So, if an employee has to give 2 terms notice or pay in lieu, than the employer would also be bound to the same notice/penalty if they want to terminate early. This kind of balance shows that the school is as committed to you as they expect you to be to them. If the school is not being balanced about this, what does that mean about how they do business? So, if your school has a similar clause about them serving notice to you, I would be more at ease with signing this contract, even if it is a high penalty. If there is no balance, that is more of a red flag.
Some countries also require this sort of balance, by law. Makes it easier.

Thanks for your thoughts on this, sid.
The notice clauses in the contract are balanced for employer & employee, so I guess it is fair.

Its common, but only in so far as its what you typically find in third tier ISs. The only thing @sid and I agree on is that two terms is pretty steep, though its not the steepest, Ive seen some that are 6 months payment in lieu. We disagree on everything else.

First, the idea that this cant be enforced is bunk. This is very easy to enforce, the IS will just withhold your final/most recent salary dismemberment, and any return benefits. I would closely read the contract and the policy, if the IS provides for air or relocation reimbursement but holds them until the end of the year or some other time, than getting two terms wont be difficult for them, they wont pay you anything.

Second, there is nothing in fair about this arrangement. Any reason you would give to leave is going to be breech of contract. Any reason they give to you, is going to be for cause. If they dismiss you for cause they arent required to give you anything but your salary/wages earned to date, they wont be required to give you 2 terms salary. Dismissal for cause can be anything. Any IS that presents this as fair, is ignoring the vast power difference between employer and employee and hoping you dont notice it either.

Well I suppose that's why if you're going to do a runner you do it right after payday so they can't withhold anything.

@joe30

Yes, unless they withhold more than one months salary, your start the Middle of August your first salary disbursement isnt until October, is not uncommon. But yes, you will want to plan your runner after receiving your coin.