Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

GAKBAG t1_je1hija wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in I Would Love to Have Enough Time and Money to Go to an Office to Work All Day - Perhaps Steven Rattner and the executives complaining to him about their remote employees could lend me a hand (or $50,000 more a year). by speckz

I don't owe them my labor, they are paying for my labor. There's a huge difference.

119

[deleted] t1_je1iweo wrote

[deleted]

−107

_catkin_ t1_je1jfn3 wrote

Yeah and if the plumber doesn’t want the job for any reason, or your house turns out to be hazardous, he or she can walk away. They don’t owe you anything.

59

[deleted] t1_je1jrmn wrote

[deleted]

−73

9-11GaveMe5G t1_je1n9zn wrote

>Not if they signed a contract. Which, is the same as an employment contract. You can’t break a contract without cause

"Dangerous work environment" is cause. You can't sign away your safety. Even if it's "in the contract" it's illegal and unenforceable

36

[deleted] t1_je1nxki wrote

[deleted]

−20

LocoTacosSupreme t1_je280aa wrote

You do know you're allowed to quit a job right?

33

gk99 t1_je28gf0 wrote

I agree, much better idea to focus on accident statistics regarding the commute that we now know is completely unnecessary.

The thing about a world-changing global pandemic is that everyone has a little more context about what is actually important.

13

Cannabrius_Rex t1_je3ejbv wrote

Please stop posting wildly ignorant stuff. You don’t HAVE to comment

6

AlericandAmadeus t1_je2hch3 wrote

What’s funny is that the vast majority of jobs in America very specifically state multiple times in the hiring process that your employment terms are not a contract lol.

That leaves the employers a lot more flexibility and outs when it comes to termination/how they treat you.

You’re so off base it’s amazing. Workers in America would benefit immensely from actual employment contracts. Those are usually what unions push for, actually.

23

GAKBAG t1_je1ln2w wrote

And if the contract changes without being able to make adjustments or you are unable to come to an agreement, that plumber can leave the contract. The person who created the contract does not get to make changes to the contract without the approval of the person they are contracting with. That is basic contract law.

Being allowed to do remote work but now being forced back into the office is changing the contract and now it needs to be approved again.

9

[deleted] t1_je1npj6 wrote

[deleted]

−2

GAKBAG t1_je1og3r wrote

I don't owe them my labor. I give them my labor under the assumption that I am being paid for it. It's a transaction. I don't say the cashier at the grocery store owes me my beer after I pay for it.

The minute my check bounces, I'm out and I'm burning the fucking company to the ground. The minute they don't allow me to expense some training I'm going through, I'm out the door. If the situation changes and I don't like it, I am allowed to leave. How do I owe them labor if I'm allowed to leave or they can fire me at any moment?

14

[deleted] t1_je1pvwp wrote

[deleted]

−1

GAKBAG t1_je1q7i7 wrote

I purchased the beer from the store not from the cashier. The cashier rings up my beer and tells me how much it costs and then puts my money in the register. Nowhere in there do they owe me the beer nor does the beer come into their possession at any point.

... are you a libertarian? Because you sound like a libertarian jerking off over contract law.

12

[deleted] t1_je1qt3t wrote

[deleted]

−1

GAKBAG t1_je1rky6 wrote

No I'm saying LIBERTARIANS think contract law is end-all be-all and you sound like one of them with how you are practically pleasuring yourself about contract law.

11

ImminentZero t1_je26kph wrote

My employer pays me for labor already done, not for labor yet to come. Anybody making an hourly wage has it the same.

Nobody this article or the other commenter is taking about is paid up front, they're paid according to the labor they've delivered. If they were paid first then you could argue something is owed.

6

cseckshun t1_je3kpqg wrote

You also typically can’t be punished for not completing work unless it is proven to have caused damages. If a plumber decides not to complete plumbing work and it causes your project to be delayed or your home to be damaged because you couldn’t hire a different plumber then yes, but if you just don’t pay them and hire a different plumber it’s not a big deal and courts treat it as such.

For the vast majority of an employees time at an employer they are actually OWED WAGES from the employer instead of owing the employer work. In North America and anywhere I have worked it is always a pay period ending in a paycheque and not a paycheque followed by me completing the work. On the second day of my pay period my employer owes me for the first day I worked but has not yet paid me for that time yet, I do not owe them work but they do owe me wages if that makes sense. It’s a wild way to look at you owing your employer work when they carefully structure almost all aspects of the job market to never make that true so they never have to go through the awkward process of forcing someone to work against their will or attempting to recoup money they paid for work in advance.

3

twistedLucidity t1_je24nzv wrote

In general the labour is provided before payment. They owe you/us, not the other way around.

20

--Nyxed-- t1_je2rdzq wrote

You have it hilariously backwards. You work and then they pay you. They owe you for your labour. Not the other way around.

20

poopoomergency4 t1_je2gmqt wrote

>if you’re say a plumber

you won't have to deal with these types of bosses in the first place

6