Professional further training can cost several thousand euros. If the employer covers the course fee, exam fee, travel or the salary continued to be paid during a leave of absence, a repayment agreement is often signed. At the latest upon resignation, the question then arises: Does the outstanding amount really have to be paid?
In Austria such a claim is neither automatically effective nor fundamentally impermissible. Decisive are the type of training, the concrete agreement, the time of signature, the actual costs, the monthly reduction and the way the employment relationship ends. Who Repay training costsshould therefore not only look at the amount on the final statement, but examine the entire legal chain. This guide shows the procedure for employees and applicants. It does not replace individual legal advice.
The first junction: mandatory further training or voluntary additional qualification?
Since 28 March 2024, it contains § 11b Employment Contract Law Adjustment Act an important basic rule. If a specific initial, further or continuing training is a prerequisite for the agreed activity due to a law, a regulation, the collective agreement, a works agreement or the employment contract, participation counts as working time. The costs must in principle be borne by the employer, unless they are covered by a third party.
This concerns, for example, mandatory qualifications without which the contractually agreed work may not or should not be carried out. The Chamber of Labour on the repayment of training costs makes clear that these costs must not be shifted onto employees. Before a classic training-costs clause is examined, it must first be clarified whether the training falls into this mandatory area at all.
It can be different for a voluntary additional qualification that goes beyond the current activity and increases professional market value. If a company finances, for example, an externally recognised specialist course, an additional leadership qualification or a marketable technical certification, reimbursement of training costs can be agreed under narrow conditions.
Training is not the same as onboarding
§ 2d AVRAG defines training costs as the actual expenses incurred for a successfully completed training. It must impart theoretical or practical specialised knowledge that can also be utilised by other employers. Internal onboarding does not fall under this.
The distinction is important in practice. Someone who only learns how to operate the company’s ordering system, an internal filing system or a specially adapted device does not necessarily acquire an additional qualification that is marketable on the labour market. The WKO on reimbursement of training costs describes, for example, a mere product presentation as onboarding that cannot be reclaimed.
A genuine training can, however, also exist if it takes place during the employment relationship and is useful for the company. The decisive factor is whether the acquired knowledge has real value outside the specific company. The name of the event alone helps little: a "training" can be a marketable qualification, while an internal appointment labelled "academy" may have only onboarding character.
Four questions for classification
- Was the qualification mandatory for the agreed role?
- Were skills imparted that another employer could also use?
- Was there a structured course, defined learning objectives and, if applicable, an exam?
- Or were mainly internal products, processes and systems explained?
When a repayment agreement can be effective
A general clause in the employment contract of the pattern "All training costs are to be repaid upon termination" is not sufficient. The agreement must be in writing and relate to a specific training. Content, costs and binding period must be so clear that employees can recognise the financial implications before the course begins.
The Supreme Court emphasised in the decision 9 ObA 97/22p, that the written agreement must be concluded before the specific training and should also contain the concrete amount of the costs to be reimbursed. A declaration presented after the course has started takes away employees' opportunity to freely decide for or against the training in advance.
For every major educational measure, a separate document should therefore be available. An old clause in the employment contract is not a blank cheque for courses booked later. Before signing, the same care is worthwhile as when checking the employment contract: Cost items, time frame, termination cases and calculation must be clear.
What should be comprehensible in the agreement
| Inspection point | What matters | Warning sign |
|---|---|---|
| Specific training | Course, provider, content and end date are determinable | Blanket clause for all future trainings |
| Costs | Actual items and amounts are transparent | Unlimited or only estimated total sum |
| Timing | Written agreement before the start of training | Signature during or after the course |
| Duration of commitment | Reasonable, clear period from the end of the training | Unclear period or automatic restart |
| Proration | Repayment amount decreases for each month | Annual steps or unchanged lump sum |
| Types of termination | Triggers correspond to legal limits | Repayment for every conceivable termination |
How long is the commitment allowed to last?
Under § 2d AVRAG, a repayment obligation must generally not extend beyond four years after the end of the training. Only in special cases is a commitment of up to eight years possible. A long maximum period is not automatically appropriate for every course. Scope, cost and benefit of the training play a role in the assessment.
Equally important is the starting point: the commitment runs from the end of the respective training, not generally from signing the employment contract. If several courses are financed, different end dates and residual amounts may exist. Employers should itemise these separately; employees should not accept that a later small course restarts all earlier deadlines without a clear agreement.
The amount must decrease month by month
The repayment obligation must decrease proportionally for each month elapsed after the end of the training. If this monthly reduction is missing, the agreement can be entirely invalid. The Supreme Court (OGH) confirmed in 9 ObA 85/24a again the importance of a transparent monthly proration.
A simple example: the employer demonstrably paid 3,600 euros for a course. The agreed commitment is 36 months with a reduction of one thirty-sixth per month. If the employment relationship ends 14 full months after the end of the training, 14 shares are used up. Mathematically 22 of 36 shares remain, i.e. 2,200 euros. A claim for the full 3,600 euros would not be compatible with this agreement.
When examining the claim, the actual costs count, not an invented course value. Request the course invoice, proof of payment and a calculation for each item. If salary paid during a leave of absence was included in the agreement, the specific contractual and legal basis for that must also be examined.
Which type of termination can trigger the repayment
Not every termination of the employment relationship leads to the same result. By law, reimbursement is excluded in particular for termination during the probationary period, unfounded dismissal, justified early withdrawal, dismissal due to permanent incapacity to work and generally for termination by the employer. An exception can exist if employees gave cause for the employer's dismissal through culpable behaviour. According to the law, the regular end of a fixed-term contract before the expiry of the commitment period also does not trigger repayment.
Typically, a valid agreement can become relevant in the case of resignation by the employee, justified dismissal or unjustified withdrawal. According to the Chamber of Labour, a mutual termination can also be covered. Those negotiating a mutual solution should therefore expressly and in writing include a waiver of reimbursement of training costs. A verbal "That will be fine" is not sufficient protection for a four-figure sum.
Before the termination meeting, the possible remaining amount should therefore be prepared just as thoroughly as notice period and handover. The jobspot.at guide to termination meeting in Austria helps with organisational planning; training costs additionally require their own written review.
What applies if the training was not completed?
§ 2d AVRAG ties reimbursement to a successfully completed training. If the course includes a final exam, passing it is regularly an essential part of the success. The Supreme Court (OGH) held in 8 ObA 82/23a that in principle there is no obligation to repay if the training was not completed. Something else can apply if the employee culpably prevented the training success. The employer bears the burden of proof for this; a failed exam alone does not yet establish fault.
A clause that automatically demands all costs even in the case of non-culpable failure can be invalid. Therefore document illness, cancelled exams, lack of preparation opportunities or other causes. The decisive factor is not only the result but why the completion did not occur.
Check the claim in eight steps
1. Determine whether training is mandatory
Check the employment contract, collective agreement, works agreement and professional regulations. If the training was a mandatory requirement for the agreed activity, § 11b AVRAG and the employer's obligation to bear the costs argue against passing them on.
2. Distinguish training from onboarding
Note learning objectives, final qualification and external usability. Internal systems and product processes speak more for onboarding; a recognised certificate and industry-wide usable knowledge more for training.
3. Look for a written individual agreement
Check whether a written agreement was concluded for this exact course before it started. A general clause in the employment contract is regularly not sufficient.
4. Have the actual costs substantiated
Request invoices and a breakdown. Internal fictitious prices, flat administrative fees or items that were not incurred should not be accepted without scrutiny.
5. Check the binding period and monthly calculation
Determine for each course the end of training, agreed months and full months already elapsed. Recalculate the reduction yourself.
6. Assign the reason for termination
Resignation by the employee, employer dismissal, expiry of term, dismissal, withdrawal and mutual termination are not interchangeable. Record the actual reason for termination in writing.
7. Document the success of the training
Check the certificate and exam result. If the training was not successfully completed, it must be clarified whether and why that happened.
8. Get advice before payment or admission of debt
Request the claim together with the calculation in writing and do not hastily sign an admission of debt or an instalment agreement. If in doubt, the Chamber of Labour, the union or employment-law advice can help. A AK Vorarlberg case study shows that even a claim of over 11,000 euros can fail due to an agreement presented only after the start of the training.
Three typical practical cases
Case 1: Mandatory training for the agreed role
An employee must obtain a specific certification due to a function specified in the employment contract. The employer organises the course and at the same time presents a three-year repayment clause. Because the qualification is a prerequisite for the already agreed activity, working time and costs must first be assessed under § 11b AVRAG. A classic shifting of costs onto the employee is not easily permissible.
Case 2: Marketable specialist course with a clear agreement
A technician voluntarily attends an externally recognised course. Before it starts, content, actual costs of 4,800 euros, a 48-month commitment and the monthly reduction are stipulated in writing. He resigns after 30 months. If all other requirements are met, the pro rata remaining amount of 18/48ths can be relevant. The full course fee may not be demanded.
Case 3: Blanket clause and internal onboarding
An employee learns the internal merchandise management system over three days. The employment contract only generally states that training costs are to be repaid on termination. After her resignation, 1,500 euros are charged. There is neither a concrete individual agreement nor an externally usable training. The claim should by no means be accepted without examination.
Frequently asked questions about training costs
Is a repayment clause in the employment contract sufficient?
A general advance clause is not enough. What is required is a written agreement for the specific training that provides transparency on costs and conditions before it begins.
Is the employer always allowed to demand money if the employee resigns?
No. Even with resignation by the employee, the training, the agreement, the costs, the binding period and the proration must be valid. Resignation alone does not cure a defective clause.
Can an internal onboarding be charged?
No, mere onboarding costs are not reclaimable training costs under § 2d AVRAG. The decisive factor is whether transferable specialised knowledge was acquired.
What happens in the case of mutual termination?
A valid repayment clause can also apply in that case. If you negotiate a waiver, it must be expressly included in the written termination agreement.
May the full amount be demanded up to the last day of the commitment?
No. The obligation must decrease for each month elapsed after the end of the training. A missing or unlawful proration can render the entire agreement invalid.
Should I accept the deduction from the final settlement immediately?
No. First request the agreement, cost evidence and monthly calculation. Whether a deduction is permissible depends on the concrete claim and other employment-law rules. Have disputed amounts reviewed promptly.
Conclusion: First review, then decide on resignation and payment
Training costs can become relevant when changing jobs, but only within clear limits. Mandatory training for the agreed activity, mere onboarding, blanket contractual clauses and claims without monthly reduction are not a solid basis. The type of termination and a successful completion of the training also change the outcome.
Anyone planning a change should therefore, before accepting the next job offer collect all training agreements and calculate the maximum remaining amount. If the employer demands money, ask for a written statement and have unclear clauses reviewed before you pay, allow an offset or sign an instalment agreement. This turns a surprising cost risk into a comprehensible decision.
Sources and further information
- RIS: § 2d AVRAG on reimbursement of training costs
- RIS: § 11b AVRAG on mandatory initial, further and continuing training
- Chamber of Labour: Repaying training costs
- WKO: Conditions for reimbursement of training costs, as of 1 January 2026
- OGH 9 ObA 97/22p: Agreement before the start of training and concrete costs
- OGH 8 ObA 82/23a: lack of training success and fault
- OGH 9 ObA 85/24a: monthly proration
- Chamber of Labour Vorarlberg: case study on a belated agreement
