3 ms·
Should the reverse be treated the same way? That is, being on the clock but not working? I work a low wage job and have seen co-workers go to pretty extreme len
by missedthecue 6y ago
Should the reverse be treated the same way? That is, being on the clock but not working? I work a low wage job and have seen co-workers go to pretty extreme lengths to avoid having to actually work.
Time theft is estimated at $400 billion per year, much higher than unpaid wages.
- standardUser 6y agoNo, it should not. If an employer has an issue with the way an employee conducts themselves during working hours they can discuss it with the employee and take disciplinary action if needed. That discipline can include reduction in wages, withholding wage increases or bonuses or firing. Plenty of options for an employer to deal with the situation. If an employer denies legal wages they are thieves and should be held accountable by law enforcement for theft, just like any mugger or burglar would.
- sangnoir 6y ago> I work a low wage job and have seen co-workers go to pretty extreme lengths to avoid having to actually work. It's not as if employers don't have the means to remediate this. If we cut down to it, there is a fundamental tension - the average employer wants maximum productivity for the least amount they can get away paying, and the average employee want the maximum possible income with the least amount of work. As a thought experiment, if your employer were to offer to reduce the length of your work-week while maintaining your current salary, what is the minimum number would you agree to? Zero is acceptable with no consequences.