Don't be naive la. This kind of dato so lansi and ignorant because behind got support from dap. If not dah bankrupt lama.

Biar betik Clause 7 ... legal ke clause ni?

huh u guys never heard of such contracts apart from this?

if u quit before xx years then u need to compensate xxk amount because of the training provided.
I heard if they want to enforce it they need to prove that the training provided is indeed worth that much. which is a little hard to prove , and also usually training isnt really worth that much anyway, which course costs 1 year employee salary??

also, They cannot use it to penalize you, but can recoup costs incurred to train you etc . please correct me any lawyers?

regardless its the same intention. which is to bind you because they invested in you.
so im quite surprised that people seem to look at it like a rare pokemon
although whether legally enforceable or not im not sure. because its quite unfair, you train someone so that he can do the job better. plus, what kind of training costs 1 year of an employee's pay? if its that expensive then the employee pay should be high pay not pay someone 2k but ask him to attend a 24k course , doesnt make sense. 

unless he really kns , quit immediately upon completing the training, e.g company sponsor external paper but you cabut after getting it using company money. on the other hand, actually your company already benefitted a bit because when you are studying for external papr you can apply the knowledge to your work already.

any HR or lawyer got experience dealing with the above?

if u accept and sign, it’s legally binding

He’s garvy trying to defend BP

No wonder Malaysia so backward.
Such abusive employer and using system error to justify underpayment also got people protek.