4 ms·

That isn't theft. If an employee completes all the work assigned to them and passes performance reviews then what you're describing is a suboptimal use of the

by Teever 1y ago

That isn't theft. If an employee completes all the work assigned to them and passes performance reviews then what you're describing is a suboptimal use of the employees on the part of the employer.

SoftTalker 1y ago
Real theft by employees is also extremely common. Especially in retail and food service.
- triceratops 1y ago
  And is treated as a criminal matter. But the manager telling employees to clock out before their shift ends is a civil matter.
  - SoftTalker 1y ago
    Most often an employee caught stealing is just fired. If there's significant value involved perhaps the police would get a call. Telling an employee to clock out and keep working is a labor law violation, that's not just a civil matter. It happens, but often with the agreement of the employee. I.e. "I know you're about to hit overtime, so if you clock out I'll give you cash, otherwise I have to send you home."
    - triceratops 1y ago
      The point is the police will take a complaint in the case of employee theft. And the "agreement" of the employee is utterly meaningless because it's not a negotiation between equals. Coercion is more accurate. > labor law violation, that's not just a civil matter So people go to jail over it? It goes on their criminal record and comes up in background checks? > I'll give you cash This part sounds like pure fantasy. And the cash would be less than overtime pay (otherwise why even make the offer) so it's still wage theft.
    - exe34 1y ago
      > if you clock out I'll give you cash Yes, but on what planet?
- lostlogin 1y ago
  > retail and food service. Two industries that typically pay significantly less than a living wage and which have a reputation for treating their employees like absolute dirt. Would you respect your employer if they didn’t respect you?
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
  - Auracle 1y ago
    My sister was a waitress at Red Lobster in somewhat of a tourism city and made absolute bank. She still stole stuff like cutlery, salt shakers, etc. Let’s not pretend that most people that are stealing are Robin Hood types.
    - lostlogin 1y ago
      I don’t think what you and I have said is in opposition? It’s mutual distain between employee and employer.
- reactordev 1y ago
  Target has a whole surveillance department just for this
- Teever 1y ago
  When this conversation comes up it is typically mentioned that employers have mechanisms of enforcement that are tied to their basic accounting required for taxes as well as surveillance cameras that are also meant to watch customers for theft. They also have the ability to contact law enforcement and have their employees arrested for theft. There is an asymmetry in this relationship however where employees don't practically have recourse when their employers steal from them.
try_the_bass 1y ago
> If an employee completes all the work assigned to them I don't think this was implied in their statement?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- const_cast 1y ago
  Even if it wasn't, being a poor worker still isn't theft, and it's the companies responsibility to both measure and correct employee performance. If they're bad at that and these things go under the radar, that's still on the employer. The only way employees can steal is if they steal time, like clocking in then going home. Salary employees are not paid by time, so they cannot steal time. Employers want to have their cake and eat it too - they want to consider salary employees not time based when it comes to OT, but when it comes to day-to-day they DO want them to be considered time-based. Not how it works. Your workers being bad at their job is not theft, it's just incompetence.
  - try_the_bass 1y ago
    Deliberately putting in less than the asked for effort in an attempt to extract more pay for less work is theft in the same way that attempting to minimize pay and maximize effort is "wage theft". It's a knife that cuts both ways. If companies attempting to maximally exploit their employee's time is wage theft, so too is an employee's attempt to get a paycheck without doing work.
    - const_cast 1y ago
      Right, but it's not - because salary paid workers are not paid for their time spent, but rather for their quantity and quality of work. Which is up to employers to measure. Me spending 5 minutes filling up my water is not stealing. Me taking a nice 15 minute walk is also not stealing. Presumably you're going to draw the line somewhere, but the implication of salary jobs is that productivity is not linear. Me spending an extra hour working on something does not translate into an extra unit of work done. Me taking that 15 minute walk doesn't translate to 1/4th less unit of work, either. In fact, it might translate to 1 extra unit of work done. Look at that, I am now bending time into the negative. Human productivity is complicated, and we're not assembly line workers. Also, even the concept of "less work" is dubious. The level of work being done varies from person to person, and nobody actually knows what the minimum is. Everybody should be optimizing for the minimum work necessary to get their pay, because that's just obvious. No hourly worker is going to spend even 1 minute working off the clock. But alas, we have no clock, and we're just kind of... estimating... what level of work really needs to be done, and then calculating that in with our own levels of accomplishment we want, and then convenience. I might work a bit extra to find a nice stopping point, or because I really want to conquer a bug. If a worker decides to work less than whatever their current level of work is, and they don't get fired or even reprimanded, I have to conclude they were previously working above the level of work expected of them. Which means that, overall, not only is this worker not stealing, they've actually been giving.

by Teever 1y ago

That isn't theft. If an employee completes all the work assigned to them and passes performance reviews then what you're describing is a suboptimal use of the employees on the part of the employer.

SoftTalker 1y ago

Real theft by employees is also extremely common. Especially in retail and food service.

triceratops 1y ago
And is treated as a criminal matter. But the manager telling employees to clock out before their shift ends is a civil matter.
- SoftTalker 1y ago
  Most often an employee caught stealing is just fired. If there's significant value involved perhaps the police would get a call. Telling an employee to clock out and keep working is a labor law violation, that's not just a civil matter. It happens, but often with the agreement of the employee. I.e. "I know you're about to hit overtime, so if you clock out I'll give you cash, otherwise I have to send you home."
  - triceratops 1y ago
    The point is the police will take a complaint in the case of employee theft. And the "agreement" of the employee is utterly meaningless because it's not a negotiation between equals. Coercion is more accurate. > labor law violation, that's not just a civil matter So people go to jail over it? It goes on their criminal record and comes up in background checks? > I'll give you cash This part sounds like pure fantasy. And the cash would be less than overtime pay (otherwise why even make the offer) so it's still wage theft.
  - exe34 1y ago
    > if you clock out I'll give you cash Yes, but on what planet?
lostlogin 1y ago
> retail and food service. Two industries that typically pay significantly less than a living wage and which have a reputation for treating their employees like absolute dirt. Would you respect your employer if they didn’t respect you?
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- Auracle 1y ago
  My sister was a waitress at Red Lobster in somewhat of a tourism city and made absolute bank. She still stole stuff like cutlery, salt shakers, etc. Let’s not pretend that most people that are stealing are Robin Hood types.
  - lostlogin 1y ago
    I don’t think what you and I have said is in opposition? It’s mutual distain between employee and employer.
reactordev 1y ago
Target has a whole surveillance department just for this
Teever 1y ago
When this conversation comes up it is typically mentioned that employers have mechanisms of enforcement that are tied to their basic accounting required for taxes as well as surveillance cameras that are also meant to watch customers for theft. They also have the ability to contact law enforcement and have their employees arrested for theft. There is an asymmetry in this relationship however where employees don't practically have recourse when their employers steal from them.

try_the_bass 1y ago

> If an employee completes all the work assigned to them I don't think this was implied in their statement?

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
const_cast 1y ago
Even if it wasn't, being a poor worker still isn't theft, and it's the companies responsibility to both measure and correct employee performance. If they're bad at that and these things go under the radar, that's still on the employer. The only way employees can steal is if they steal time, like clocking in then going home. Salary employees are not paid by time, so they cannot steal time. Employers want to have their cake and eat it too - they want to consider salary employees not time based when it comes to OT, but when it comes to day-to-day they DO want them to be considered time-based. Not how it works. Your workers being bad at their job is not theft, it's just incompetence.
- try_the_bass 1y ago
  Deliberately putting in less than the asked for effort in an attempt to extract more pay for less work is theft in the same way that attempting to minimize pay and maximize effort is "wage theft". It's a knife that cuts both ways. If companies attempting to maximally exploit their employee's time is wage theft, so too is an employee's attempt to get a paycheck without doing work.
  - const_cast 1y ago
    Right, but it's not - because salary paid workers are not paid for their time spent, but rather for their quantity and quality of work. Which is up to employers to measure. Me spending 5 minutes filling up my water is not stealing. Me taking a nice 15 minute walk is also not stealing. Presumably you're going to draw the line somewhere, but the implication of salary jobs is that productivity is not linear. Me spending an extra hour working on something does not translate into an extra unit of work done. Me taking that 15 minute walk doesn't translate to 1/4th less unit of work, either. In fact, it might translate to 1 extra unit of work done. Look at that, I am now bending time into the negative. Human productivity is complicated, and we're not assembly line workers. Also, even the concept of "less work" is dubious. The level of work being done varies from person to person, and nobody actually knows what the minimum is. Everybody should be optimizing for the minimum work necessary to get their pay, because that's just obvious. No hourly worker is going to spend even 1 minute working off the clock. But alas, we have no clock, and we're just kind of... estimating... what level of work really needs to be done, and then calculating that in with our own levels of accomplishment we want, and then convenience. I might work a bit extra to find a nice stopping point, or because I really want to conquer a bug. If a worker decides to work less than whatever their current level of work is, and they don't get fired or even reprimanded, I have to conclude they were previously working above the level of work expected of them. Which means that, overall, not only is this worker not stealing, they've actually been giving.