4 ms·
What you have said is true, but is misses a key element: it prevents the actual current victim getting paid. What is greater, other people's right to know abo
by LatteLazy 4y ago
What you have said is true, but is misses a key element: it prevents the actual current victim getting paid.
What is greater, other people's right to know about the victim, or the victims might right to get some redress?
- TheDong 4y agoLaws often have to make this tradeoff between an individual's rights or an individual's benefit, and what's good for society as a whole. Sure, it may be very convenient for you if you can toss garbage out your car's window instead of having to spend time carrying it around and finding a trash can, but if everyone tossed garbage from their vehicles, society would certainly not be a better place. Similarly, it is better if companies don't attach a price tag to such illegal (I assume?) behavior because, well, even if you individually would rather be paid off, normalizing that practice will probably be worse for society. At least that's the value call being made here. Instead of thinking "Well, I personally would rather have this", you can instead think "Would I like to live in a society that condones and expresses these values". I, personally, would rather frame things in terms of society, not individuals. I do not think victims have an infinite right to redress.
- Broken_Hippo 4y ago"it prevents the actual current victim getting paid." No, it doesn't. It just prevents a company from paying them and requiring them to sign away labor law rights as a condition of payment. And it would be in the company's best interest to do so as it changes the story from "X did this to me and Y company did nothing to take care of me" to "X did this, but the company made sure I was OK". If a company chooses to stop doing this, it is their decision and not a result of the law.