4 ms·

It's the prioritization of punishment vs restitution. If you can't have both, then which do you want first? For instance, we could have them pay $5000 in back w

It's the prioritization of punishment vs restitution. If you can't have both, then which do you want first? For instance, we could have them pay $5000 in back wages, and $140,000 in fines. Nor is it as simple as "well just toss them in prison instead of fines"... maybe not in this particular incident, but in many of those, incarcerating the offenders makes it even less likely that the employees receive restitution. (In this case, it probably would mean the restaurant closes, and they lose all employment.)

giraffe_lady 3y ago
The shocking thing isn't how this case is treated, it's how other cases with similar or lesser harms are. It's the social construction of crime thing. Stealing $140k is egregious. But because it's an employer stealing from their employees it's being treated as more of an administrative error than a great crime. Where like, we know that people are in prison on decades long sentences for thefts orders of magnitude smaller, or simple drug possession, or spitting on a cop.
- Volundr 3y ago
  Put another way, try working at Walmart. If you pop open the safe and walk out with $140k, do you really think the outcome will only be a $5k fine?
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
  > It's the social construction of crime thing. Stealing $140k is egregious. But because it's an employer stealing from their employees it's being treated as more of an administrative error than a great crime. It's not as if someone subtracted $140k off of one guy's single paycheck. This was nickeled-and-dimed, likely for years. And while I have no inclination to give the benefit of the doubt to a place that hires a fake priest to give confession about skimming the till, it's not that difficult for such a thing to be an administrative error. Rhonda in payroll keys in a wrong number somewhere, and you're getting the $8/month deduction for hemorrhoid insurance without actually getting that insurance. Or the punch on the mechanical time clock is bent, and shaving 5 minutes from the start of everyone's shift. Or a hundred other things. Hell, maybe that's even an excuse, and it was always deliberate. But good luck proving it. There are tradeoffs here, and if punitive justice is something you absolutely must have, then go for it. But don't start whining when the other stuff gets worse.
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    You're reading me upside down. I'm not arguing for retributive justice, I'm point out how our state and society are capable of a restorative approach when they want to be. People are often saying that such an approach is naive or idealistic, when in fact we already have it. But only for certain relationships between criminal and victim.
- emaginniss 3y ago
  Wait! Someone is in jail for a decade for just spitting on a cop? We need to protest this case. Who is it?
  - giraffe_lady 3y ago
    https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2023/04/14/texas-man-sentenced-to-70-years-in-prison-for-spitting-on-police-officers-reports-say/ https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2023/04/14/texas-man-sentenc...
    - emaginniss 3y ago
      Fair enough, although his sentence seemed to be based on being a habitual offender with armed robbery and domestic violence convictions. It's similar to how people in this thread think that repeat violators of wage theft should face higher penalties.
      - giraffe_lady 3y ago
        ok lol sure
frostburg 3y ago
I assume that the amount of back wages is the actual amount of back wages owed.
- NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
  Not necessarily. It might only be the amount that was settled on, because the labor board wants to do this administratively, and that's the most they can definitively prove. You know, some wiseass was keeping a diary of his start and stop times, but his three other coworkers didn't and they're left out of this. If they try to go after more, the company will balk, take it to trial and then there's the possibility of much less (or even $0) being the payout. Or it might only be what they can reasonably be expected to pay. What if they owe three quarters of a million, but there are no recoverable funds to pay that out? What if the restaurant goes tits up, and all those workers are out of a job permanently? Unless it's handed down by jury and judge, it's probably negotiated.

giraffe_lady 3y ago

The shocking thing isn't how this case is treated, it's how other cases with similar or lesser harms are. It's the social construction of crime thing. Stealing $140k is egregious. But because it's an employer stealing from their employees it's being treated as more of an administrative error than a great crime. Where like, we know that people are in prison on decades long sentences for thefts orders of magnitude smaller, or simple drug possession, or spitting on a cop.

Volundr 3y ago
Put another way, try working at Walmart. If you pop open the safe and walk out with $140k, do you really think the outcome will only be a $5k fine?
NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
> It's the social construction of crime thing. Stealing $140k is egregious. But because it's an employer stealing from their employees it's being treated as more of an administrative error than a great crime. It's not as if someone subtracted $140k off of one guy's single paycheck. This was nickeled-and-dimed, likely for years. And while I have no inclination to give the benefit of the doubt to a place that hires a fake priest to give confession about skimming the till, it's not that difficult for such a thing to be an administrative error. Rhonda in payroll keys in a wrong number somewhere, and you're getting the $8/month deduction for hemorrhoid insurance without actually getting that insurance. Or the punch on the mechanical time clock is bent, and shaving 5 minutes from the start of everyone's shift. Or a hundred other things. Hell, maybe that's even an excuse, and it was always deliberate. But good luck proving it. There are tradeoffs here, and if punitive justice is something you absolutely must have, then go for it. But don't start whining when the other stuff gets worse.
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  You're reading me upside down. I'm not arguing for retributive justice, I'm point out how our state and society are capable of a restorative approach when they want to be. People are often saying that such an approach is naive or idealistic, when in fact we already have it. But only for certain relationships between criminal and victim.
emaginniss 3y ago
Wait! Someone is in jail for a decade for just spitting on a cop? We need to protest this case. Who is it?
- giraffe_lady 3y ago
  https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2023/04/14/texas-man-sentenced-to-70-years-in-prison-for-spitting-on-police-officers-reports-say/ https://www.ksat.com/news/local/2023/04/14/texas-man-sentenc...
  - emaginniss 3y ago
    Fair enough, although his sentence seemed to be based on being a habitual offender with armed robbery and domestic violence convictions. It's similar to how people in this thread think that repeat violators of wage theft should face higher penalties.
    - giraffe_lady 3y ago
      ok lol sure

frostburg 3y ago

I assume that the amount of back wages is the actual amount of back wages owed.

NoMoreNicksLeft 3y ago
Not necessarily. It might only be the amount that was settled on, because the labor board wants to do this administratively, and that's the most they can definitively prove. You know, some wiseass was keeping a diary of his start and stop times, but his three other coworkers didn't and they're left out of this. If they try to go after more, the company will balk, take it to trial and then there's the possibility of much less (or even $0) being the payout. Or it might only be what they can reasonably be expected to pay. What if they owe three quarters of a million, but there are no recoverable funds to pay that out? What if the restaurant goes tits up, and all those workers are out of a job permanently? Unless it's handed down by jury and judge, it's probably negotiated.