3 ms·

> Legally, yes. Practically, many employers bounce paycheques and get away with it. It’s tedious to enforce worker rights in a way it isn’t for consumers. (In m

> Legally, yes. Practically, many employers bounce paycheques and get away with it. It’s tedious to enforce worker rights in a way it isn’t for consumers. (In most states, you can get the AG basically working for you by copying their office on a complaint to the company.) Not sure what the point of your argument is. Many employers get away with bouncing paychecks but you can get the state AG working for you by CCing them on email? The above comment claimed the law favored consumers and investors over employees and I gave a common case where they are not. Not the practicality of enforcing the law. The same goes for employers too where employees steal or skip work and they are just fired instead of paying a lawyer (if they are incorporated a small business the owner can not represent the company usually) or going through the hassle of collecting proof, filing a factual police report and showing up in court to testify. Doesn't change what the law is when it is worth it to pursue, and it was worth it to pursue against Meta for withholding material info to investors.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> Many employers get away with bouncing paychecks but you can get the state AG working for you by CCing them on email Yes, this is the practical reality of the law. What the law says on paper that isn’t enforced isn’t relevant to one’s day to day experience of it. > going through the hassle of collecting proof, filing a factual police report and showing up in court to testify The point is as a consumer various public bodies will do this for you. As an employee (or investor) you have to do it for yourself.
- csdreamer7 2y ago
  > Yes, this is the practical reality of the law. What the law says on paper that isn’t enforced isn’t relevant to one’s day to day experience of it. You can say that about any law. It is a negative argument. The law not being enforced has no relevance to my earlier statement; you incorrectly arguing employees have far fewer rights over consumers. > The point is as a consumer various public bodies will do this for you. As an employee (or investor) you have to do it for yourself. Once again, not true. Investor protection is literally the job of the SEC. OSHA protects employees from hazard workplaces. Every state has an agency that investigates wage theft. Many states governments make most of their money from personal incomes-they have an incentive to prevent wage theft. Honestly, I would argue consumer protection is the weakest in the US of the three.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> Many employers get away with bouncing paychecks but you can get the state AG working for you by CCing them on email Yes, this is the practical reality of the law. What the law says on paper that isn’t enforced isn’t relevant to one’s day to day experience of it. > going through the hassle of collecting proof, filing a factual police report and showing up in court to testify The point is as a consumer various public bodies will do this for you. As an employee (or investor) you have to do it for yourself.

csdreamer7 2y ago
> Yes, this is the practical reality of the law. What the law says on paper that isn’t enforced isn’t relevant to one’s day to day experience of it. You can say that about any law. It is a negative argument. The law not being enforced has no relevance to my earlier statement; you incorrectly arguing employees have far fewer rights over consumers. > The point is as a consumer various public bodies will do this for you. As an employee (or investor) you have to do it for yourself. Once again, not true. Investor protection is literally the job of the SEC. OSHA protects employees from hazard workplaces. Every state has an agency that investigates wage theft. Many states governments make most of their money from personal incomes-they have an incentive to prevent wage theft. Honestly, I would argue consumer protection is the weakest in the US of the three.