My company is willing to pay for an expensive conference, but I'm planning to leave the job within 1-6 months after the seminar. When companies pay for conferences it's because they want well trained employees, but if I leave right after, I am afraid they will all be angry because I knew I wasn't staying and attended the conference anyway.
The conference is expensive, but would be a great learning experience anyway. Also, I get paid decent for my work, so I don't feel they owe me anything, just in case some think this might make up for a low paycheck.
That is just part of business. People come and people go, sometimes they are well trained sometimes they suck. Sometimes they learn a great deal at a conference and leave. Its all part of the game.
Knowing your plans, it would be unethical to attend the conference on your employer's nickel - unless you're willing to reimburse them a pro-rata amount when you resign.
Presumably, you'd like to have this employer as a reference for the future.
Let me be clear, I don't actually have another job, just desperately looking for one. It's our plan to be moved to another state within 6 months, but just because that's our plan doesn't mean it will work that way. We just can't stay where we're at for family reasons, and I don't much like who I'm working for anyway. So I'm not sticking around at the job just to get a free conference. In re-reading my post, it came across that way.
By the way, I really love that my first responses were a "yes", "no", and "maybe"! I'm actually really glad to see that it wasn't just me that thought this was a gray area.
I did exactly this for my last employer. In fact I even closed the deal with my new employer while at the conference in question. I see no issue. Regardless of what the people with the cheque book may say, the sort of money involved in sending people to a conference has zero impact on the bottom line of a company. Grab these opportunities - they are also important occasions for networking aside from learning (on the note of keeping in good standing w previous office etc)
IMO, empea is wrong. By the OP's own admission, this is an "expensive" conference - not just some 'lunch and learn' at the local AIA.
Firms send staff to conferences with a reasonable expectation that the firm will derive some benefit from the investment. As an employer, I'd be royally pissed if I'd sent a member of my staff to an expensive conference, only to have him/her resign a week later - I'd interpret such behavior as a selfish disregard for the professional relationship.
To me, this is all about timing and character. If you were to leave immediately after the conference, I'd feel sorely abused. If you leave a year later, not so much. If you leave somewhere between 'immediately' and 'a year later' my attitude would depend on how you handle the situation.
I can appreciate file's 'pro-rata' suggestion above - i.e. if you leave 6-months after the conference, you offer to reimburse the firm 50% of the cost of sending you to the conference. The firm may, or may not, take you up on this offer. But, if they don't, at least they know that you recognize the substantial investment they made in your professional development.
Yes. A local AIA brown bag event. That's what I meant. If you don't make up for that $35 they invested in you learning about the latest code changes they are in their right to pursue you to the ends of the earth..:)
Actually (and still "expensive" is a very relative term), in my case it was in another country, cost in the couple 1000$ range and me and my colleague were expected to do training of others of what we learned once back. Which we did. About a month and a half after that I left "for family reasons" and moved abroad. If you're going to the competitor down the road most people will get pissed. If you're - as OP states - leaving because you're moving far away with your family, then only a quite childish employer would hold a grudge, conference or no conference. At that, leaving after as much as 6 months as you say should ammortisize any possible conference cost, unless it's a $7k ticket for TED and you're in a 2 people office. IMHO.
I agree with empea. I would go to the conference without a second thought. Kind of like how your employer probably doesn't think twice about the ethical implications of getting free overtime from employees.
If you elect not to attend, your employer is probably going to ask why. What will you tell them? Assuming you tell them the truth, it is going to be a de facto resignation and you might get "laid off" prematurely before you have your replacement job lined up.
Apr 1, 14 11:55 am ·
·
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.
Attend conference before leaving?
My company is willing to pay for an expensive conference, but I'm planning to leave the job within 1-6 months after the seminar. When companies pay for conferences it's because they want well trained employees, but if I leave right after, I am afraid they will all be angry because I knew I wasn't staying and attended the conference anyway.
The conference is expensive, but would be a great learning experience anyway. Also, I get paid decent for my work, so I don't feel they owe me anything, just in case some think this might make up for a low paycheck.
Your thoughts?
go to the conference.
That is just part of business. People come and people go, sometimes they are well trained sometimes they suck. Sometimes they learn a great deal at a conference and leave. Its all part of the game.
Knowing your plans, it would be unethical to attend the conference on your employer's nickel - unless you're willing to reimburse them a pro-rata amount when you resign.
Presumably, you'd like to have this employer as a reference for the future.
My thoughts are simple; Go with your gut and don't overthink it.
Let me be clear, I don't actually have another job, just desperately looking for one. It's our plan to be moved to another state within 6 months, but just because that's our plan doesn't mean it will work that way. We just can't stay where we're at for family reasons, and I don't much like who I'm working for anyway. So I'm not sticking around at the job just to get a free conference. In re-reading my post, it came across that way.
By the way, I really love that my first responses were a "yes", "no", and "maybe"! I'm actually really glad to see that it wasn't just me that thought this was a gray area.
IMO, empea is wrong. By the OP's own admission, this is an "expensive" conference - not just some 'lunch and learn' at the local AIA.
Firms send staff to conferences with a reasonable expectation that the firm will derive some benefit from the investment. As an employer, I'd be royally pissed if I'd sent a member of my staff to an expensive conference, only to have him/her resign a week later - I'd interpret such behavior as a selfish disregard for the professional relationship.
To me, this is all about timing and character. If you were to leave immediately after the conference, I'd feel sorely abused. If you leave a year later, not so much. If you leave somewhere between 'immediately' and 'a year later' my attitude would depend on how you handle the situation.
I can appreciate file's 'pro-rata' suggestion above - i.e. if you leave 6-months after the conference, you offer to reimburse the firm 50% of the cost of sending you to the conference. The firm may, or may not, take you up on this offer. But, if they don't, at least they know that you recognize the substantial investment they made in your professional development.
Actually (and still "expensive" is a very relative term), in my case it was in another country, cost in the couple 1000$ range and me and my colleague were expected to do training of others of what we learned once back. Which we did. About a month and a half after that I left "for family reasons" and moved abroad. If you're going to the competitor down the road most people will get pissed. If you're - as OP states - leaving because you're moving far away with your family, then only a quite childish employer would hold a grudge, conference or no conference. At that, leaving after as much as 6 months as you say should ammortisize any possible conference cost, unless it's a $7k ticket for TED and you're in a 2 people office. IMHO.
I agree with empea. I would go to the conference without a second thought. Kind of like how your employer probably doesn't think twice about the ethical implications of getting free overtime from employees.
I guess the answer to your question depends; are you requesting to go to said conference, or is your company asking you to attend?
If you elect not to attend, your employer is probably going to ask why. What will you tell them? Assuming you tell them the truth, it is going to be a de facto resignation and you might get "laid off" prematurely before you have your replacement job lined up.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.