• StrikerOP
    link
    611 year ago

    Yes but which one leads to worse consequences despite taking the same value of currency?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      641 year ago

      So let’s see… Here in Denmark:

      • If I steal the equivalent of $100 from a store, they will call the police, the police will apprehend me, take back the $100, and give me a fine. If the robbery seems to be professional, then it could also result in jail time up to 1 year and 6 months.

      • If my employer shorts my paycheck by the equivalent of $100, then I contact my union. The union contacts the company and tells the company to pay me within a week or two. If the company doesn’t pay me within the deadline, the union will declare the company bankrupt, and the bankruptcy proceedings start by liquidating the company and paying me my missing wages along with the guaranteed pay that relates to being fired, which depends on how long I have been employed. (1 month pay if I have been employed less than 6 months, 3 months pay if employed 6 months to 3 years, 4 months pay if employed for 3 to 6 years, 5 months pay if employed 6 to 9 years, and 6 months pay if employed more than 9 years.)

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        371 year ago

        Well fuck Denmark is civilized.

        The USA version is different, and likely what is being complained about.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        211 year ago

        Even in this situation it’s uneven. If the company pays you the right amount within a couple weeks, nothing happens. It’s as if they never shorted you.

        If you take the money from the company, you - at least - pay an additional fine. And/or go to prison. The company doesn’t have either consequence for attempting to steal from you.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          71 year ago

          I see where you’re coming from, but if the company repeatedly holds back your salary, then the union can still start bankruptcy proceedings.

          It is assumed that being late with paying wages might have been a mistake, and you don’t want to punish people or companies for a mistake.

          You can’t really assume that people stealing money from a store is a mistake.

          • Copatus
            link
            21 year ago

            You see your honour, I meant to grab a stick of gum next to the till but accidentally reached inside it and took $100

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        21 year ago

        What happens if an employer empties the business’s bank account and runs to avoid consequences? Does anyone compensate the employee in that case?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          31 year ago

          I’m not entirely sure… At the very least you would be able to immediately collect unemployment (~12.000 DKK if you don’t have kids, ~16.000 DKK if you have kids), and if you’re in an “a-kasse” you would be able to collect up to 90% of your old salary.

          I’m pretty sure thought, that anyone who ran away with the bank account would pretty much have to leave the country, as otherwise they would be apprehended by police, personal belongings would be repossessed, and they would not be allowed to start a new business.

      • @jimbo
        link
        1
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        deleted by creator

      • @Thrillhouse
        link
        41
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Not familiar with the laws of California but I think the spirit of the post is that the cops will be on your ass immediately and you will be put in jail if you walk with $100.

        If your boss steals $100 from you it then becomes a matter for the courts before anyone in the company faces even the slightest threat of jail.

        I’d add Wilhoit’s Law: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect”

        But I’d adjust: “North American Democracy consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups (the rich) whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups (workers) whom the law binds but does not protect

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          No no no! Let me continue to be obtuse, a felony against an LLC ( like, ohhhhh, I dunno this little mom and pop startup) is a damning life ending thing that will forever alter the trajectory of the poor business owner’s life and livelihood. They could’ve had a bright future, free to do anything, go anywhere, hell even go to the stars all of that jeapordized by one measly little honest mistake of an accounting error that was multiplied thousands of times across the workforce spanning years summing entire lifetimes of earnings . Surely you can’t mean that they would be held to no recourse while the overly empowered and emboldened working class holds it’s jack boot stranglehold on poor honest golden parachute equipped hedge fund daddies who raised money from their well to do friends and family to buy a house outright for the optics of starting out of a garage with nothing…

          God damned delusional liberals

        • deweydecibel
          link
          English
          31 year ago

          Not familiar with the laws of California but I think the spirit of the post is that the cops will be on your ass immediately and you will be put in jail if you walk with $100.

          If your boss steals $100 from you it then becomes a matter for the courts before anyone in the company faces even the slightest threat of jail.

          Because one of these things is stealing a possession, and one of these things is failing to pay a debt. And.we generally don’t jail people for failing to pay debts, at least not immediately. And that’s a good thing to, otherwise the poor would be getting jailed all the time.

          • Snot Flickerman
            link
            fedilink
            English
            30
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s not perfectly fine, but they’re weighing it against Wage Theft, which outweighs all other types of theft in the US based on sheer dollar-value of how much is stolen.

            No, it’s not okay to just steal from the till, but the point is the business owner can call the cops on us if we do that, which results in our immediate arrest, yet conversely if they steal from our paychecks we have to take them to small claims court and we better have the receipts to prove it, and usually (except maybe places like California) all the business has to do is… pay back what they owe you. Nothing for damages or lost opportunities due to having less money. Nope, just pay back what they already owed you to begin with. What a joke of a slap on the wrist.

            Theft is theft, should be the same penalties for either side and business owners shouldn’t get such free range to fuck over people with no consequences. Some of us would just like to see an equal playing field where wage theft meant I could call the fucking cops and have the asshat who stole my fucking legally owed money arrested.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              Today I learned that wage theft actually refers to a crime, and is not just a word for paying people less than the value they create.

          • @Thrillhouse
            link
            15
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Crime is ABSOLUTELY a social construct. Why was it legal several months ago to have an abortion across the US but now several states are criminalizing the same? Have abortions changed? No - politics did, I would argue spurred on by the desire for capitalists to keep a steady supply of low wage uneducated exploitable desperate workers.

            Why is it suddenly criminal in the state of Georgia to give food and water to people lining up at polling stations? Because one class wants to make it uncomfortable and inconvenient for another class, and I would argue race, of people to vote.

            For more, from Harper’s Magazine “Legalize It All” (How to Win the War on Drugs):

            At the time, I was writing a book about the politics of drug prohibition. I started to ask Ehrlichman a series of earnest, wonky questions that he impatiently waved away. “You want to know what this was really all about?” he asked with the bluntness of a man who, after public disgrace and a stretch in federal prison, had little left to protect. “The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying? We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.

            Same as it ever was - criminalizing social classes to disempower them is the name of the game. If you aren’t wise to this you haven’t been paying attention.

            Adding - it’s illegal in Japan for me to possess and consume cannabis but perfectly legal in Canada for me to do the same.

            It would be illegal for me to walk around in certain countries without a headscarf, how is that not a social law?

            It’s illegal in Russia to speak against the war, and people have been imprisoned for the softest infractions of this. In North America I have free speech in this regard.

          • @jimbo
            link
            1
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            deleted by creator

      • @FlickOfTheBean
        link
        201 year ago

        Does anyone really go to jail for wage theft though? Especially at the same severity that walking out with $100 till bucks would?

        From my perspective, it seems like the boss gets a slap on the wrist the first time, while the worker gets fired and carted off to jail the first time.

        I think that’s the point of this meme, but there are some nuances involved (aka why does the law treat these people differently? I think there may be a reason having to do with intent here, but that is discussion outside of the scope of what this meme is getting at.)

      • @EatYouWell
        link
        81 year ago

        It might be a felony, but is it enforced?

        If something is illegal but isn’t enforced, it’s not illegal.

    • @xkforce
      link
      141 year ago

      This is an argument for punishing wage theft not that crime is a made up concept.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        01 year ago

        To paraphrase my favorite author:

        THEN TAKE THE UNIVERSE AND GRIND IT DOWN TO THE FINEST POWDER AND SIEVE IT THROUGH THE FINEST SIEVE AND THEN SHOW ME ONE ATOM OF [LAW], ONE MOLECULE OF [CRIME]…

        • @aesthelete
          link
          7
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          To call something a social construct doesn’t diminish the impact of that thing. Race is a social construct as well, and that too has very real impacts on people. Much of what humans interact with on a daily basis are social constructs. That doesn’t make those things meaningless or trivial.

          Marriage is a social construct, but that doesn’t mean I can go around acting like I’m single without consequence.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          61 year ago

          One crime has far less harsh sentences, far less enforcement, and a much more significant impact. Yet harm is the same by the money amounts.

          • @jimbo
            link
            2
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            deleted by creator