[cleansy]

Time to learn about a relocation clause in the general employee agreement:

Clause [X]: Relocation Expenses and Redundancy Protection

The Company agrees to reimburse the Employee for reasonable and necessary relocation expenses incurred by the Employee in connection with the Employee's relocation to the work location specified in this Agreement, subject to the terms and conditions set forth herein ("Relocation Expenses").

The Relocation Expenses shall include, but not be limited to, the actual costs of moving the Employee's personal property, temporary housing expenses for up to [number] days, transportation costs for the Employee and their immediate family members, and any other reasonable and necessary expenses incurred as a direct result of the relocation, up to a maximum amount of $[amount].

The Employee shall provide the Company with receipts or other documentation evidencing the Relocation Expenses within [number] days of incurring such expenses. The Company shall reimburse the Employee for the Relocation Expenses within [number] days of receiving satisfactory documentation from the Employee.

In the event the Employee's role is made redundant before the Employee's start date, the Company shall still be liable for the reimbursement of the Relocation Expenses incurred by the Employee, provided that such expenses were incurred within [one (1) month] prior to the date the role is made redundant (the "Cut-Off Date").

The Company's obligation to reimburse the Employee's Relocation Expenses shall survive the termination of this Agreement for any reason, including but not limited to the Employee's role being made redundant before the Employee's start date.

If the Employee voluntarily terminates their employment with the Company within [one (1) year] of the Employee's start date, the Employee shall be required to repay to the Company, within [number] days of the termination date, a prorated portion of the Relocation Expenses reimbursed by the Company, calculated based on the percentage of the [one (1) year] period not completed by the Employee.

[zippergz]

Please get back to me once you've gotten a multinational corporation to agree to this (or any other candidate-provided clause) for a non-executive employee.

[cleansy]

I never had to deal with multinationals - not much of a corporate guy. I was reading through the comments here and it seemed to be common that "well, there's nothing you can do". Actually, there is, write it in your contract and see what comes back. If your new employer does not allow for this, at least a) you tried and b) you are fully aware of the risk that the employer might just leave you out cold. In which case, going all-in as the author did could have been avoided.

[ska]

I've seen similar clauses in a bunch of contracts, it can't be that rare. You are unlikely to be able to add your own language (as per your case of non-exec) but you may not have to.

[PragmaticPulp]

Getting a completely custom legal document from a big company is not going to happen outside of extraordinary circumstances.

That said, the relocation packages I’ve seen have been effectively similar to this. Having the offer revoked for cause (e.g. you lied) might cancel it, but getting laid off wouldn’t. Obviously not true everywhere though.

[brk]

As other commenters have mentioned, you're not going to be able to insert your own clauses into any standard employment agreement.

However, every large employer has already relocated hundreds, if not thousands, of employees. They have similar clauses that are approved, but as a candidate you may need to ask to have such a clause included.

Depending on the hiring market, the specific position, and your unique circumstances, you may or may not be able to get something added to the agreement, but it would rarely be unjustified to ask for some kind of relocation protection.

[dgrin91]

A much simpler solution I have seen to this that is _actually_ used in big companies is just relocation bonus paid on start. In short it basically goes 'Company agrees to pay you $X flat for your relocation. You are entitled to do whatever you want with this money, no questions asked. You may keep this money presuming you are not terminated for cause within Y months'

X and Y negotiable of course.

[PragmaticPulp]

The problem is that if you’re laid off before your start date, you wouldn’t get paid. Despite relocating.

[300bps]

All of my “paid on start” bonuses/reimbursements were paid weeks after I started, often with my first paycheck.

[Dave3of5]

Are you suggesting asking Google to add this to their contract ?

If that's the case then you are delusional.

These companies are "the law" and they will not change their contract for you. It's hard enough to even get a verbal offer from a company like Google far less get them to add relocation costs to a contract.

[HeyLaughingBoy]

You'd be surprised by what you can get by simply asking for it.

[ascar]

Relocation clauses are very common, often included right from the start in your initial offer and if not these big corps have prepared clauses that they can add upon request/negotiation.

[ghaff]

It sounds like he may not have actually incurred any non-reimbursable expenses though other than maybe canceling an airline ticket. He's obviously incurred lots of disruption with associated costs (quitting job, getting rid of most of his stuff) but these aren't the sort of things that qualify for relocation expenses.

[cleansy]

This is not a fully-complete clause, yes, getting rid of stuff hurts and might not be coverable, but at least in this Case Google would have guaranteed to pay for the relocation. Other clauses could be that in the event of a redundancy before employment start, the signing bonus stays with the employee, etc. In his case, it still covers the financial blow to a degree, and he would have probably enough time to find a replacement job. Relocation costs are also money spent on Realtors, etc.

[samwillis]

What's that from and in what jurisdiction?

[cleansy]

It's a general clause that any employee who is moving for a certain job should put into their contracts. If the company does not agree to cover at least the basics, then hey, maybe it's not a good idea to move for that job in the first place?

EDIT: to your point, this should be enforceable in any jurisdiction that generally holds up with the law?