Dave writes:
> I can see if any compensation took place at the time of hiring that the
> company may require a commitment in return (employment contract). However,
> usually the training received is a benefit to both the employee and
> employer. I find it rather shocking that employer would look at this as
> more than proper compensation for a professional staff..

Also there are some messy laws (especially in places like California) that
prevent you from implementing policies like the one suggested without the
agreement of the employee.  I'm told you generally can't inflict negative
changes without some compensation, and not firing the person doesn't count.
Of course you should consult your HR department and several hordes of
lawyers.

> I remember when I worked for a college, the fact that I could get a certain
> number of credit hours free each semester offset the fact that the college
> didn't pay as well as other employers. It kept me there longer and made me a
> better employee.

Maybe you never thought about it, but you'll notice you didn't have to
pay federal income tax on the value of those free classes you got.  There
is currently an exemption that covers that sort of thing.  Congress came
close last year to eliminating it, but all the Graduate Students working
as TAs in universities got together and lobbied to keep it from happening.
Free tuition apparently amounts to something like 2/3 of the compensation
they get, and if the exemption were removed they would have to start
paying income tax on the value of those classes, which would have had a
rather dramatic effect on the teaching structure in American higher
education, especially at the more expensive private schools.

G.