This chapter examines whether lifelong learning constitutes a contractual obligation of the employer or merely an unenforceable attempt. The study examines the employment contract theory, analyses the interplay between explicit terms, implied obligations, and corporate self-regulation, highlighting the asymmetry of bargaining power and the role of state intervention. The paper distinguishes between mandatory job-related training—deriving from health, safety and operational needs—and broader skill development aimed at general employability. It argues that while implied terms, the duty of loyalty and promissory principles may partially embed training obligations, they cannot, in most legal systems, compel employers to finance or facilitate lifelong learning absent legislative or collective agreement frameworks. Comparative analysis of selected EU Member-States reveals divergent regulatory approaches, from Finland’s comprehensive statutory protections to Hungary’s minimal framework. The conclusion emphasises that lifelong learning is only available if it is enforced by public law intervention, shared cost allocation among the parties, and alignment with both economic realities and workforce adaptability goals.