I hope the rest of the world doesn't get any ideas.

Like having your stock options to vest over a five year period?

Also, in many many fields less meritocratic than software, you typically gain privileges as you accrue seniority with little regard to experience or actual contribution.

I meant having bonds on employment - imagine having to pay your employer when you quit because they had no idea what they were doing or flat out lied about what the job would entail? The thought is horrific.

The fact that you don't have to take actual cash out of your pocket to do it makes it a much simpler/less disruptive thing to do, but the outcome is the same: You commit to work for the employer for a set number of years, and forfeit a sum of money if you renege on the commitment.

This assumes that you are guaranteed a promotion/autonomy/responsibility after a few years - how many contracts have promises of career advancement in them (not the "social contract")?

It's actually pretty common: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seniority

> how many contracts have promises of career advancement in them

It's extremely common in union contracts.

You can see why working in the USA and similar devloped economys with more "liberal" employment laws is so popular.

It's not different here. Bonds are illegal by labour law in India. They cannot be enforced in court. They only serve as a harassment tool, and they work because most young workers don't know better.

On the other hand, you can also see why working in a civilized place, like Western Europe with less liberal firing laws is also popular...

ah I was using it in the technical (political) sense to mean that the balance is slightly more towards the servant than the master.

More conservative employment laws would mean less employment rights for workers.

Less liberal in the UK would be the fringe torys who want to get rid of all employment protection.

I worked in Hong Kong for a major international bank and they have 3 month notice period. If you break it, you pay for the prorated time.

I've seen this in the US as well. It boggles my mind. How can someone get another job when they are in a contract like this? Not many employers will wait 3 months before you start. Can such contracts really be enforced in the US?

Do they provide a 3 month notice before firing someone?

These bonds work only in one direction.

Coming to giving a 3 month notice before firing some one, firstly when they ask you to leave they may not necessarily tell you that they are firing you for some socially acceptable reason like cost cutting. Instead they will give you two options, get fired for some fictional violation of company code or you can put in your resignation.

The choice is obvious, the person resigns, while he is actually fired. The quarterly results project this as attrition.

Having said this, the last I have heard about this bonds is that they are not valid in the court of law.

"last I have heard about this bonds is that they are not valid in the court of law"

Probably not. But what will you when they decide to not pay your final paycheck since you did not pay for breaking the bond. Heck, in some countries like HK again, you need to get tax clearance from your employer before you leave permanently, if you do. So the question is: do you just bite the bullet or go fight with the corporate giants regardless of who could win.