The 34-year-old captain submitted his resignation to Air China and was even claimed 10.66 million yuan. This is certainly unreasonable and illegal, so the court has made a judgment on this matter.

1. Air China's claim of 654.38+0066 million is reasonable. In 2006, Mr. Lin received training from Air China and entered the Flying Academy. After graduation, Mr. Lin went to China International Airlines as a pilot. On September 25th, 2008, both parties signed an open-ended labor contract. Mr. Lin went through initial training, modification training of various models, follow-up training and retraining at Air China, and became a captain.

2020129 October 65438, 34-year-old Mr. Lin applied for resignation for personal reasons. On February 2, 2020, 65438, both parties dissolved the labor relationship. However, Air China brought it to court with a complaint, claiming10.66 million yuan.

According to Air China, according to the training law, pilots generally have to study undergraduate courses in aviation schools, receive two months of pre-job training and modification after arriving at airlines, and then receive secondary co-pilot training for at least half a year after passing the qualification, and then conduct secondary driving assessment. Then there are the first co-pilot, driving training, assessment and other levels, and then the captain can be tested. It takes more than ten years to really train a pilot.

In addition, pilots have to take part in training in special circumstances and weather every year, and receive annual retraining and knowledge training in meteorology, geography and management. If pilots switch to other types of aircraft, they also need modification training. This long-term systematic training process determines that the training cost of flight personnel is surprisingly high. It costs an airline at least 6-8 million yuan to train a captain.

According to the relevant laws and policies, the cost of pilot training is inevitable, and the loss of the airline is inevitable when the pilot leaves the airline. Lin Moumou needs to pay Air China a training penalty of 5.33 million yuan and a training fee of 5.33 million yuan, with a total compensation of 6.5438+0066 million yuan.

Second, the court held that the compensation of 6.5438+0066 million was unreasonable and even more illegal. Mr. Lin argued that the so-called training did not sign a professional technical training contract with Air China, nor did it stipulate the corresponding service period. The term of the labor contract is not equal to the service period of the training contract.

In addition, Air China did not provide any payment vouchers such as training invoices and transfer vouchers, which could not prove that Air China paid any fees for the training advocated by Lin Moumou.

Thirdly, according to relevant regulations, training pilots by Air China is both a legal obligation and an inevitable requirement of normal business. There is no legal basis for asking workers to return training fees. According to the court of first instance, Lin should pay Air China training fee of 265,438+10,000 yuan. Both parties refused to accept the judgment of the court of first instance and appealed to the Beijing No.3 Intermediate People's Court.

The court of second instance held that the focus of the dispute in this case was whether Lin should pay the training fee for Air China, and if so, how to determine the training fee.

Lin joined China International Airlines on September 25th, 2008 as a flight officer. During his work in Air China, Air China must have conducted continuous training and paid the corresponding training fee. Lin also recognized the flight record book submitted by Air China, which showed that Lin participated in the training activities arranged by Air China. Therefore, Lin proposed to terminate the labor relationship with Air China and pay the corresponding training fee to Air China.

Due to Air China's failure to submit enough original documents of actual training expenses, the court could not accurately verify and further confirm the amount of training expenses claimed by Air China. Combined with the facts of this case and referring to the relevant regulations of the Civil Aviation Administration of China, the court of first instance decided that Lin should pay Air China training fee of 26,543,800 yuan. Judgment: the appeal was dismissed and the original judgment was upheld.