Often a lawyer that doesn't want the case because the pay is lower than private work, and also if the defendant loses their case they must pay both the lawyer and the court their fees and hours.
By the way, the stat you mention counts consensual arrangements as wage theft, probably the large majority of it (e.g. hiring illegal immigrants for under the minimum wage). Calling that "theft" is a rhetorical move, much like libertarians calling taxation "theft": it borrows the moral weight of stealing for something that's legally and morally quite different. If the stat had been calculated from asking workers, "does your employer owe you money that they refuse to pay?", I suspect the number would drop dramatically.
I'm saying that much of what's called "wage theft" isn't theft in any normal sense of the word. It's the equivalent of calling employees who take long bathroom breaks or slack off on the clock "wage thieves." Do employees slack off on the job? Yes. Do corporations hire contractors when labor regulations forbids them to? Yes. Is either one comparable to theft? No.
Almost never. The larger the corporation the more strictly the rules are followed. I have worked for fintech startups and have some horrifying stories that would absolutely never fly at a larger company.
Wage theft is a real crime and you don't get to rename it because your feelings are somehow hurt. Calling taxation "theft" is just vapid right wing mccarythism. Rich people paid mccarthy money to lie over and over again because at the time it was illegal to broadcast those lies on tv or radio. But a senator was immune and could lie all they wanted.
You are never going to be right about anything if you actually think what you posted makes any sense.
Sure, I was just pointing out why the stat is misleading. People unfamiliar with the study or the term would assume it refers to employers outright withholding agreed-upon pay.
If you only counted cases that meet the legal definition of the crime of "wage theft," the figure would much lower.
To be clear, you're claiming that wrongdoing by one party justifies wrongdoing by another, and your enabling of the latter because you're ideologically aligned with it?
I'd also be interested to know what the crime they were trying to get a lead on was. If it's another case of minor tagging then I can empathize more with the concerns about the prosecution, but if it's something more dire then frankly using judicial leverage strikes me as entirely appropriate.
Im saying they are wasting everybodies time and money and by spending large resources on petty crime like graffiti instead of spending that time and money on prosecuting systemic crime and theft by employers that occurs far more frequently.
If someone gets stabbed outside my house every day with no charges filed, yeah im going to say spending resources prosecuting a fist fight at a bar is a waste of resources.
But GP made it clear that the graffiti charge wasn't the target, it was intended to pressure the person involved into turning on a different criminal associate. Ignoring that reality in favor of focusing exclusively on the charge itself seems unhelpful to me.
"25 to life for jaywalking, but you'll walk free if you snitch" sounds like extortion to me.
If he's an accomplice, them charge him with that, and turn it into a classical prisoner's dilemma. Don't just make up bullshit charges, that's abuse of the justice system.
Except they're not trumping up penalties, it's just "Pay the fine for Jaywalking or snitch."
In this case the person did a little more than Jaywalking so they're on the hook for more. It's also possible to have information on a criminal act or conspiracy without being an accomplice.
I appreciate the extremely... principled morality of some here, but the law isn't an ethical framework, it's a practical one informed by ethical principles. It's also not a computer program, people are involved who make decisions based on a number of factors ranging from professional and selfless, to careerist and selfish. That's life.
A really easy way to avoid all of this is to stay out of the system, it's not as though he's in for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his starving child.
“Protections against compelled speech are for numbskulls” I write, sweat dripping from my brow “Extortion is good you idiot, read a book” and the crowd goes wild. Michelangelo wipes the tears from his eyes and begins chiseling my face onto Mount Genius
I would agree except jail time is what all us peons face for all sorts of far more benign charges. So until poor people's punishments are lessened they are going to advocate for greater punishment for these crimes.
I would not be betting on trade jobs for the future. Many people right now who are capable and skilled in trades left and stayed out of the industry because of crap pay and working conditions, im one of them. And not only are we likely to see a further reduction in pay because of everyone thinking trades is a good path right now and pushing it, despite decades of evidence to the contrary, if people start losing their jobs elsewhere even more people are going to try and get into trades and further depress wages.
Yeah you can point out a handful of people across the nation who do really well, but you can do the same thing for jobs that are all but obsolete and worthless. Blacksmithing and tailoring and paper making also has handfuls of well paid professionals, but 99% of people with those skills will never make any meaningful money from it and it would be a foolish path to guide people towards.
The best bet you can go for in trades is union work, but that is far from all encompassing. Go to any part of the poorest parts of the country and you will find swathes of people who can do trade work, and yet they are still poor.
Don't get me wrong, having trade and tool skills is still useful, but it is a long way from a slam dunk into a great future.
Nurse salaries are already pretty high in a lot of places, but imo the American healthcare system has a longstanding issue with asking too much work from doctors and nurses.
Almost nobody would say that a shift longer than 12h is a good idea for skilled work. It's certainly longer than the allowed work periods for pilots and truckers.
Yet doctors and nurses routinely work 16, 18 and even 24 hour shifts. This is seen as normal, but it makes very little sense.
Remote monitoring by itself is not a problem, but remote control is and has no benefits. You can't change the temperature of or defrost a freezer without removing everything from it, and if you can remove everything from it someone is already there the change the settings. And it takes extra work to enable remote controlling of a refrigerator system over just providing temperature readings.
And it still isn't going to save electricity. The only thing it can do is warn of a failure and tell you that you got like 20 minutes to start moving food before it has to be trashed for exceeding safe food handling temperatures.
I mean, say you have 30 grocery stores, are you saying you shouldn't be able to build templates to deploy? You gonna have a guy drive all over the place updating schedules 24/7?
>are you saying you shouldn't be able to build templates to deploy
There's making a meeting out of something that should have been an email and then there's making a software project out of something that should have been an email.
The email is gonna go to the managers DL and it's gonna say "hey assholes the new temp is X set your shit to that" but in professional corporate speak and the managers will use their screwdrivers, take off one access panel and turn a dial ever so slightly" and I'll be able to see they've all done it right from my read-only monitoring system. And this has the side effect of keeping food from going bad in bulk because of a bug or fat finger or "Russian hackers" or whatever. The cost of the labor will almost certainly be cheaper than the cost of the software project amortized over its life.
Because the things you have in the fridge change. The opening and closing of the doors change. The actual equipment changes. Store hours change. Holidays happen. Sports games happen. Weather happens.
To be honest, a grocery store is one of the most dynamic systems I can think of.
Edit: A bang-bang thermostat is not an appropriate solution for a grocery store.
That's called a thermostat and doesn't require remote control. The frozen food needs to be at the correct temperature all the time, regardless of external factors.
reply