Unfair management treatment on travel bonds

Hi,

I signed a travel bond with my company related to an out of the country trip to migrate the processes abroad to our Shared Services in Manila. The bond states that I need to render 1 year from the date of return or pay the total cost of travel should I want to leave the company. On our last week, the project was discontinued because we lack resources with the required skill, specifically language skills, for the project.
When we returned to Manila, two of us were asked to sign a personnel action form stating that the bond still is valid and we will just be transferred to another group, wherein we will never be able to use our language skill but still be paid for it. I signed the contract knowing that the treatment will be the same for everyone who traveled.
The next day, I was surprised to find out that one of our teammates was given an option to leave the company without paying the bond and with severance pay. I raised this concern to the management by sending an e-mail saying that in my opinion, the treatment should be the same and that I should also be released from our bond. Management replied and insisted that I should abide by the contract or pay for the cost if I want to leave. Now I'm feeling forced to work for the new group and would like to seek an opportunity from other companies where I could use the language skill.
My questions are these:
1. Should I decide to resign and they won't allow me unless I pay the bond, will they have claims against me?
2. Can I file legal complaints based on the grounds that the treatment for us was different? (One was given an option to leave with severance while the others are not)

Hoping for your response. Thanks!

n_vince_ble

1. Should you leave and they din't allow you, your company can charge you with AWOL and can file for monetary damages

2. IMO, you do not have a strong case since you don't know the circumstances why your co-worker was allowed to leave and you weren't. But if you wanted to try, you may.

Thanks for the response.

When I sent an email to the management, they responded that the reason they let go of my colleague, which is a foreign national, is that he refused the offer of becoming a bench or reserve staff. These are the exact words "He declined this from the very beginning and for that we agreed to forego the bond as in result we are saving the company resources by not having to maintain a high priced not productive asset. Further adding to this decision was the fact that we would not have to shoulder the cost and effort required in keeping him legally employed in the Philippines – our sponsorship of his work permit."
We were not given the same options given to him, because if we were, we would have chosen to do the same.
Is that reason valid or sufficient enough to justify their decisions?
Thanks again for your response.

Yes. Since the company is paying his working visa plus he is paid higher and they no longer see him as an asset, it is their prerogative to let him go. The company could always argue that they still see you as an asset while the other isn't. And your bond is only for a year. 1 year is not that long so if I were you, I will just resign after 1 year and stop making a fuzz about it.