3 ms·

Repeating a point that keeps getting downvoted for unclear reasons: "Wage theft" is an effective euphemism that misses the nuance of what's happening here. Not

Repeating a point that keeps getting downvoted for unclear reasons: "Wage theft" is an effective euphemism that misses the nuance of what's happening here. Not paying wages according to the letter of the law is not the same as stealing money from people, and employers, like most people who cheat on regulations, often can't or won't shoulder the extra cost if those regulations are suddenly enforced, and will cut hours or people instead. Workers are certainly being shafted but probably not anywhere near to the extent in reality as is being presented here in theory. In any event, it's very different problem than property theft and shouldn't be compared as such.

tomtimtall 8y ago
So a bank robber should not be compared with other property theft if he declares that he would have burned down the entire bank if he hadn’t been able to steel the money? Theft is theft, even if you have other relationships with the thief that might be endangered by enforcing the letter of the law.
49531 8y ago
Just because the act of theft happens under the veneer of corporate bureaucracy doesn't mean it isn't theft. The money goes somewhere, and if it isn't to the workers then it is to the employer. You're right that corporations won't follow regulations that aren't enforced, which is why workers need to be informed of their rights, given legal counsel, educated and enabled to organize.
crdoconnor 8y ago
>will cut hours or people instead. This is the exact same fallacious "threat" used against minimum wage hikes. I'm reality the employees don't get fired or have their hours cut (c.f. dube, Lester, Reich). Profit margins take the vast majority of the hit instead (c.f. draca, Machin, reenen).
pharrington 8y ago
You're talking about violation of contract. A potential employee often can't, or won't take a job if the compensation suddenly wasn't that which was agreed to when accepting the job. If you have figures that contradict those presented in the linked page, please present them.
glenstein 8y ago
>Not paying wages according to the letter of the law is not the same as stealing money from people I'll confess I don't understand this distinction. >and employers, like most people who cheat on regulations, often can't or won't shoulder the extra cost if those regulations are suddenly enforced I'm also confused by this transition from wage theft to the subject of sudden enforcement of regulation. Are you suggesting that the latter is the explanation for the former, and that this diminishes the ethical import of wage theft? Lastly I'm also not sure why you're claiming it's theoretical. They put forward a specific number: $933 million derived from federal and state data on wage-and-hour violation settlements.
ridgeguy 8y ago
I think efforts to distinguish between theft and "wage theft" are an unhelpful distraction. Theft and "wage theft" are both violations of law. The article shows that economic harm due to the latter far exceeds the former, yet penalties are light, spottily enforced, and usually involve no jail time for perpetrators. I don't see any nuance in "wage theft" that should shield those employers who do it from criminal prosecution and jail if found guilty. If they can't obey the law, take them off the board and leave it open for those who can. Finally, there's plenty of precedent for jail as a penalty in other economic crimes lacking any aspect of violence. Insider trading. Stock fraud. etc.
s73v3r_ 8y ago
"Not paying wages according to the letter of the law is not the same as stealing money from people" It absolutely, positively, is. "and employers, like most people who cheat on regulations, often can't or won't shoulder the extra cost if those regulations are suddenly enforced, and will cut hours or people instead." Why on earth does anyone think this is a valid argument? "If we don't let them cheat their employees and fuck them over, they won't offer a job so they can fuck employees over"? "Workers are certainly being shafted but probably not anywhere near to the extent in reality as is being presented here in theory." You're going to have to provide your own evidence for this statement. "In any event, it's very different problem than property theft and shouldn't be compared as such." Wrong. If anything, it's worse, because an employer committing wage theft is abusing a position of power over their employee.
megous 8y ago
Wage theft is technically fraud. A company agreed to some exchange (work <-> money) and is not delivering. Unless there are real reasons, and not just general mismanagement that was know/expected prior to hiring someone, it's just fraud.

tomtimtall 8y ago

So a bank robber should not be compared with other property theft if he declares that he would have burned down the entire bank if he hadn’t been able to steel the money? Theft is theft, even if you have other relationships with the thief that might be endangered by enforcing the letter of the law.

49531 8y ago

Just because the act of theft happens under the veneer of corporate bureaucracy doesn't mean it isn't theft. The money goes somewhere, and if it isn't to the workers then it is to the employer. You're right that corporations won't follow regulations that aren't enforced, which is why workers need to be informed of their rights, given legal counsel, educated and enabled to organize.

crdoconnor 8y ago

>will cut hours or people instead. This is the exact same fallacious "threat" used against minimum wage hikes. I'm reality the employees don't get fired or have their hours cut (c.f. dube, Lester, Reich). Profit margins take the vast majority of the hit instead (c.f. draca, Machin, reenen).

pharrington 8y ago

You're talking about violation of contract. A potential employee often can't, or won't take a job if the compensation suddenly wasn't that which was agreed to when accepting the job. If you have figures that contradict those presented in the linked page, please present them.

glenstein 8y ago

>Not paying wages according to the letter of the law is not the same as stealing money from people I'll confess I don't understand this distinction. >and employers, like most people who cheat on regulations, often can't or won't shoulder the extra cost if those regulations are suddenly enforced I'm also confused by this transition from wage theft to the subject of sudden enforcement of regulation. Are you suggesting that the latter is the explanation for the former, and that this diminishes the ethical import of wage theft? Lastly I'm also not sure why you're claiming it's theoretical. They put forward a specific number: $933 million derived from federal and state data on wage-and-hour violation settlements.

ridgeguy 8y ago

I think efforts to distinguish between theft and "wage theft" are an unhelpful distraction. Theft and "wage theft" are both violations of law. The article shows that economic harm due to the latter far exceeds the former, yet penalties are light, spottily enforced, and usually involve no jail time for perpetrators. I don't see any nuance in "wage theft" that should shield those employers who do it from criminal prosecution and jail if found guilty. If they can't obey the law, take them off the board and leave it open for those who can. Finally, there's plenty of precedent for jail as a penalty in other economic crimes lacking any aspect of violence. Insider trading. Stock fraud. etc.

s73v3r_ 8y ago

"Not paying wages according to the letter of the law is not the same as stealing money from people" It absolutely, positively, is. "and employers, like most people who cheat on regulations, often can't or won't shoulder the extra cost if those regulations are suddenly enforced, and will cut hours or people instead." Why on earth does anyone think this is a valid argument? "If we don't let them cheat their employees and fuck them over, they won't offer a job so they can fuck employees over"? "Workers are certainly being shafted but probably not anywhere near to the extent in reality as is being presented here in theory." You're going to have to provide your own evidence for this statement. "In any event, it's very different problem than property theft and shouldn't be compared as such." Wrong. If anything, it's worse, because an employer committing wage theft is abusing a position of power over their employee.

megous 8y ago

Wage theft is technically fraud. A company agreed to some exchange (work <-> money) and is not delivering. Unless there are real reasons, and not just general mismanagement that was know/expected prior to hiring someone, it's just fraud.