• @EatATaco@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    33 months ago

    I agree that it is wrong. However, in your example you were sold a bad car either way. Wage theft is stealing/keeping wages you are legally owed, while not sharing the profits, while again still wrong, nothing was stolen from you. You just weren’t given more.

    • @psud@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      23 months ago

      “you weren’t given more” is too weak. What happens is you are not given a fair share of the value of your work

      • skulblaka
        link
        fedilink
        43 months ago

        Correct, but, a contract was made. You agreed to work a certain amount of time doing a certain job for a certain pay. Upon completion of that work you’re paid what was agreed to in the contract.

        I don’t like it either but there’s a reason it’s not illegal. Immoral, maybe, but not illegal.

      • @spongebue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        33 months ago

        You and your employer agreed on what that value of your work is prior to you completing it. So long as they do their part, it’s not wage theft any more than making a low-ball offer on something you see on Craigslist is theft of product. In either case, one party is free to refuse. Both can renegotiate from there, or either one can walk away from it all.

      • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        23 months ago

        Well “fair” is subjective, I was just objectively describing what is happening.

    • Victoria Antoinette
      link
      fedilink
      03 months ago

      it is stealing, even if it is in accordance with a contract. those contracts are signed between unequal parties, effectively under duress

      • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13 months ago

        I’ve never signed an employment contract under duress. But this is exactly why I suggest to people to always be searching for another job, which means the next contract you sign absolutely does not need to be made under duress. Every job ive left I’ve had something lined up.

        But that being said, even if what you say is true, that doesn’t mean any arbitrary thing you think should have been included actually should have been included. So trying to paint increased profits for the owner as theft because still doesn’t hold water. Sure you should have gotten more, but was that it? Probably not because plenty of people take these jobs not under duress with no profit sharing.

        • Victoria Antoinette
          link
          fedilink
          13 months ago

          you’ve never been faced with homelessness or hunger or lack of medical care if you didn’t take a job?

          • @EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            13 months ago

            You claimed they were signed under duress, I pointed out that I know this isn’t always the case. But I even addressed your point assuming your claim was true.

            It doesn’t sound to me that you are approaching this in good faith.