No. That sounds like wage theft. If my boss pulled something like that I'd be on the phone with my state's department of labor so freakin' fast. If you worked the hours they have to pay you for it.
Even if it weren't illegal, it'd be a big flashing neon sign saying, "We will screw you over every chance we get, and you will be nothing but miserable working here."
No, this both uncommon and illegal (assuming it's from the US). They're trying to couch their wage theft in legal jargon to scare the unwitting into accepting it
I don't think it holds up in court even if you sign it. It's why contracts usually have clauses that if part of it is found void the whole contract is not void. You can't do something illegal because you made someone sign a contract for it.
Others have heavily covered the legality portion of this but I want to point out one other key factor: any employer that tries to pull this kind of shit clearly has a significant employee retention problem, and they're trying to fix it by trapping their employees financially rather than getting to the root of the problem.
Refuse to sign this agreement and find another job. If they let you join without signing this agreement keep applying elsewhere because you'll almost certainly learn very quickly why they have such a bad employee retention problem
That's probably only worth if your state has damages above and beyond what's stolen from you; otherwise a lot of life hassle for a shitty job, which is what the deal was in the first place
At my last company, when I joined they gave me an employee agreement to sign that not only granted to them the rights over any software that I developed while working for them even if it was personal projects that I did for myself on my own time (which is standard corporate bullshittery) but also granted to them rights over anything that I had developed in my entire life previous to working for them. I told them they had to be fucking kidding me (like, surely they should have understood that at a minimum that would conflict with the rights of my previous employers who I had developed stuff for) and refused to sign it. They ended up hiring me anyway, without my ever having signed any employee agreement at all - I got like weekly email reminders from HR about it for a year until they finally just stopped.
It’s blatantly illegal, and the fact that they were dumb enough to put it in writing means you have a slam dunk case for your local department of labor. File a complaint, and let the DoL take it from there; The entire department exists to deal with bullshit like this, but they only act on complaints.
Yup, this is highly illegal, and I'll bet as soon as they crack open this company's books, they'll start finding all sorts of OTHER illegal shit. Companies dumb enough to put this in writing are also dumb enough to not stop at committing one crime at a time.
Not to mention, if the company has to implement such practices, it means it has a problem retaining staff.
If it has problems retaining staff and solves it not by addressing the underlying issues but by extortion, why would you work for such a company? Their management is clearly incompetent.
Okay so first off if this a job you are thinking about taking just don't. Legal or not I have never had a job do anything like this or anything close. At the very best they are looking to screw you, at worst they are stealing.
As for if this is legal (nal) my understanding is that for no reason can a company in the US dock, fine or in any other way deny you wages for any work already performed. It doesn't matter if you did the work you need to be paid at the agreed rate. They can come up to you and just say that from this point forward the pay will be different, but only for future work.
The one exception to this that I am aware of is if you sign an agreement with them that lets them do this. Such as fines for lost uniforms. Often this will end up in a legal grey area though very few good businesses will do this.
TLDR business have to pay you for time worked. Crash the company truck they can fire you, but that last check has to be in full.
The vast majority of employment is not under contract. That is why employment can be severed by either party at any time. So an employer could change a wage on an employee but there is nothing saying the employee has to accept it.
No there is an employment agreement, but not a contract. So the employee and employer both agree to the terms of the work. This is just no requirement for the agreement to continue if either party wants to sever the agreement.
We don’t get employment contracts anymore, ever since every state passed “at will” employment laws. Companies can drop you at any time for any reason that isn’t one of a very small list ( racial discrimination, union retaliation, etc) with no notice to you beforehand. They also don’t need to provide any real proof for their reasons unless you file a lawsuit, there are plenty of stories of companies getting wind of possible unionism and they fire groups of people for being late occasionally or the location was underperforming when really it wasn’t.
I think you might be confusing at will and right to work.
At will has been the basic format of employment for the 20th century. It in its most basic form said that the possible employer relationship can be severed by either party at any time. When this is coupled with both protected classes and unions seem to work okay to protect the worker. It is the system of employment seen during the post WWII boom. It is not without its flaws, but seems to work okay.
Right to work is a classic case of misnaming to confuse voters, because everyone likes the idea of having the idea of having the "right to work" but all it really is a way to reduce union power. In a right to work state, workers cannot be compelled to join a union even if they are working at a union shop. In the short run this seems great to any individual worker. They are getting union pay without the dues. But overtime removes the protections that come with unions too by reducing the power of a union strike.
Workers are much better off in an at will state than a right to work state.
Edit in right to work states you can still be fired without cause.
No. It is legal and usual to pay in arrears (you work 2 weeks then get your check a week later) but it's not legal (even here in Florida where workers have few protections) to withhold pay for hours worked. That's wage theft, and it's epidemic in the United States.
In certain specific cases when one is working as a contractor, but never an employee, one may be required to put down a security deposit that would be returned upon completion of the contract.
This sounds more like someone is comparing housing lease agreements to employment to make a point about how shitty lease agreements are and that they are basically legal, but wouldn't be for employment.
I truly believe it is plausible because I worked somewhere that tried crap like that frequently.
Someone posted a scathing review on Glassdoor and one of the owners responded by threatening to kill himself if they didn't take the post down. Not, like in an email, no as a post. And gave his name and phone number.
That tells you that people often want to leave that company, and they try to force people to stay. It also speaks volumes about the management culture that rather than entice people to stay they try to make it difficult to leave and punish people for doing so.
Also it's likely illegal - if you work the hours it's your money.
It depends what your situation is - I'd only take that job if absolutely desperate and no choice, and keep searching for something better. I'd write off the half month salary but consider options on making complaints to get the money after I had something better lined up.
Even if everything else about the company is fine, I'd be very wary of the management culture long term.
Reminds me of this one place a buddy of mine used to work. They lease the building they operate out of, so that if the workforce decides to organize, they'll just let the lease run out. There's also only one entrance from the shop floor to the management offices, and it's got an armed guard posted at it.
Close. The company was called Schneider Electric. The only good thing about them is that they offer extremely good healthcare to their employees, what's referred to here in the US as a "Cadillac Plan", because it covers the families of the employees, and it doesn't come out of the employees check.
I've had plenty of jobs where you don't get a check for like the first 3 weeks while they setup the payroll system. Or so they say. Frankly, in the modern day, I don't see how it's that hard or takes that long. It should be near instant via an electronic system. Pop my fuckin' info into it and start tracking my hours from day 1.
So apparently, payroll processors will charge you for each TIME you add a new record, rather than each new record added, because they're the ones actually adding you in. So instead, they send batches of new records to add every two or four weeks.
My gut reaction is to say "that's blatantly illegal", but maybe local law is different... I'm pretty sure it's not legal in the US at the very least though
If a company needs byzantine rules around compensation, don't engage. This was a solved problem centuries ago through much more straightforward means, and these casino-like rules only favor the house.
On top of what others are saying, this text does not adequately describe the conditions of resignation and "if you leave". This is also clearly not legal copy which suggests it's not a part of any contract, or is at best paraphrasing the intent of an actual contract of dubious legal standing. Either way, a lawyer would probably have a field day with this.
Also, a resignation can be coerced by giving you a false choice, usually to the tune of "sign this or else". Combined with the "you didn't complete your grace period" language, they are more or less incentivized to do this to all but their top performers.
It sounds like this job pays monthly, is that correct?
Does the "security deposit" take you below minimum wage for the month (or portion of the month if you start between the 2nd and the 10th)?
If you agree to it and it doesn't take you below minimum wage it might be legal depending on your location. If it goes below minimum wage and you're in the US I'm pretty sure it's illegal. Definitely if you go below federal minimum wage, but if you're somewhere with a higher minimum wage there could be exceptions to the local law this falls under.
It would get more complicated if you're an exempt salaried employee and this takes you below the level where you can be exempt but keeps you above minimum wage for 40hrs/week. They would have to make sure they're in compliance with regulations for hourly workers and I doubt they'd bother with that.
But, as others have said, unless you're desperate don't work for these assholes.
No. That sounds like wage theft. If my boss pulled something like that I'd be on the phone with my state's department of labor so freakin' fast. If you worked the hours they have to pay you for it.
Even if it weren't illegal, it'd be a big flashing neon sign saying, "We will screw you over every chance we get, and you will be nothing but miserable working here."
Security deposit had me reeling. This was written by a moron trying to form legal words and failing
the Employer version of SovCit language
Refer to your boss in all capitals to indicate interaction with their corporate entity, not the person
Throw in blue wax and a silver coin 😁
lol I'd seen the silver coins settle all debt bullshit, what's up with the wax?
genuinely afraid of what lists I'll end up on when I start searching for sovcit shit
Like in this post: https://lemmy.world/post/12782844
One of the ways they pretend to be official 🙄
TY!
No, this both uncommon and illegal (assuming it's from the US). They're trying to couch their wage theft in legal jargon to scare the unwitting into accepting it
I don't think it holds up in court even if you sign it. It's why contracts usually have clauses that if part of it is found void the whole contract is not void. You can't do something illegal because you made someone sign a contract for it.
Others have heavily covered the legality portion of this but I want to point out one other key factor: any employer that tries to pull this kind of shit clearly has a significant employee retention problem, and they're trying to fix it by trapping their employees financially rather than getting to the root of the problem.
Refuse to sign this agreement and find another job. If they let you join without signing this agreement keep applying elsewhere because you'll almost certainly learn very quickly why they have such a bad employee retention problem
Or sign it, work a few days, and quit. Then report to the state and sue.
That's probably only worth if your state has damages above and beyond what's stolen from you; otherwise a lot of life hassle for a shitty job, which is what the deal was in the first place
At my last company, when I joined they gave me an employee agreement to sign that not only granted to them the rights over any software that I developed while working for them even if it was personal projects that I did for myself on my own time (which is standard corporate bullshittery) but also granted to them rights over anything that I had developed in my entire life previous to working for them. I told them they had to be fucking kidding me (like, surely they should have understood that at a minimum that would conflict with the rights of my previous employers who I had developed stuff for) and refused to sign it. They ended up hiring me anyway, without my ever having signed any employee agreement at all - I got like weekly email reminders from HR about it for a year until they finally just stopped.
That's surprising that instead of striking the two clauses you objected to that just didn't have you sign an employment agreement at all
FYI: All the Simple Mobile Tools apps were sold to a really scummy company. The good news is the open source community forked them and they are now known as Fossify.
It’s blatantly illegal, and the fact that they were dumb enough to put it in writing means you have a slam dunk case for your local department of labor. File a complaint, and let the DoL take it from there; The entire department exists to deal with bullshit like this, but they only act on complaints.
Yup, this is highly illegal, and I'll bet as soon as they crack open this company's books, they'll start finding all sorts of OTHER illegal shit. Companies dumb enough to put this in writing are also dumb enough to not stop at committing one crime at a time.
Nope, that's illegal.
Definetly not legal where I live (Europe).
It's not legal anywhere in the US either. Yet.
As many have said, this is not legal if you are in the US. You can, and should, file a complaint online. Here is the process: https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/contact/complaints
Check out my ornamental slicing machine. It's from France.
Sorry, totally brain fart. You were saying?
I'll just point out that 2000 North Koreans in China killed their managers and occupied a factory for weeks over something similar.
Oh wow, maybe North Korea is secretly enlightened after all
Very much illegal where I live.
Not to mention, if the company has to implement such practices, it means it has a problem retaining staff.
If it has problems retaining staff and solves it not by addressing the underlying issues but by extortion, why would you work for such a company? Their management is clearly incompetent.
Okay so first off if this a job you are thinking about taking just don't. Legal or not I have never had a job do anything like this or anything close. At the very best they are looking to screw you, at worst they are stealing.
As for if this is legal (nal) my understanding is that for no reason can a company in the US dock, fine or in any other way deny you wages for any work already performed. It doesn't matter if you did the work you need to be paid at the agreed rate. They can come up to you and just say that from this point forward the pay will be different, but only for future work.
The one exception to this that I am aware of is if you sign an agreement with them that lets them do this. Such as fines for lost uniforms. Often this will end up in a legal grey area though very few good businesses will do this.
TLDR business have to pay you for time worked. Crash the company truck they can fire you, but that last check has to be in full.
Businesses can tell you from this point onward your wage will lower in the US?
That can't be legal can it? That's a one sided change of contract.
The vast majority of employment is not under contract. That is why employment can be severed by either party at any time. So an employer could change a wage on an employee but there is nothing saying the employee has to accept it.
Not under contract? What does that mean? Do people just walk in and work there whenever?
No there is an employment agreement, but not a contract. So the employee and employer both agree to the terms of the work. This is just no requirement for the agreement to continue if either party wants to sever the agreement.
We don’t get employment contracts anymore, ever since every state passed “at will” employment laws. Companies can drop you at any time for any reason that isn’t one of a very small list ( racial discrimination, union retaliation, etc) with no notice to you beforehand. They also don’t need to provide any real proof for their reasons unless you file a lawsuit, there are plenty of stories of companies getting wind of possible unionism and they fire groups of people for being late occasionally or the location was underperforming when really it wasn’t.
I think you might be confusing at will and right to work.
At will has been the basic format of employment for the 20th century. It in its most basic form said that the possible employer relationship can be severed by either party at any time. When this is coupled with both protected classes and unions seem to work okay to protect the worker. It is the system of employment seen during the post WWII boom. It is not without its flaws, but seems to work okay.
Right to work is a classic case of misnaming to confuse voters, because everyone likes the idea of having the idea of having the "right to work" but all it really is a way to reduce union power. In a right to work state, workers cannot be compelled to join a union even if they are working at a union shop. In the short run this seems great to any individual worker. They are getting union pay without the dues. But overtime removes the protections that come with unions too by reducing the power of a union strike.
Workers are much better off in an at will state than a right to work state.
Edit in right to work states you can still be fired without cause.
No. It is legal and usual to pay in arrears (you work 2 weeks then get your check a week later) but it's not legal (even here in Florida where workers have few protections) to withhold pay for hours worked. That's wage theft, and it's epidemic in the United States.
What job requires a security deposit?
In certain specific cases when one is working as a contractor, but never an employee, one may be required to put down a security deposit that would be returned upon completion of the contract.
If you are in the US, that’s likely very illegal. Wherever you are, talk to your state, Providence, federal, etc. labor board.
Depending on where you are it’s probably illegal
Super illegal
Super ultra mega illegal
Extremely illegal. Every minute you work must be unconditionally paid in full or they're committing wage theft.
Those paragraphs read like a monetary version of a slave's collar... disturbing.
It's a red flag if I never saw one! Better not take that job...
Holy fuck no! That's not normal, and I can't possibly believe that's legal.
Note: my experience is based on living primarily in liberal cities in the US.
No, that's wage theft.
a. no.
B. FUCK NO.
This.
If you work an hour, you are paid an hour. Full stop.
There's no such thing as a security deposit or withholding. Maybe if this was in some sort of backwards ass country.
Like the USA?
This is next level shit, even the US isn't this bad. And that's saying something..
Everytime I learn more about their "right to work" laws I die a little inside
This sounds more like someone is comparing housing lease agreements to employment to make a point about how shitty lease agreements are and that they are basically legal, but wouldn't be for employment.
Is it even real ?
I truly believe it is plausible because I worked somewhere that tried crap like that frequently.
Someone posted a scathing review on Glassdoor and one of the owners responded by threatening to kill himself if they didn't take the post down. Not, like in an email, no as a post. And gave his name and phone number.
The person that posted the review should have taken the owner up on that.
Omg that’s horrible
Hope he did it on site so the employees could throw rocks at him after
Yeah, where did this actually come from? So far, nothing has been said to that effect
Most likely illegal, but that depends on the "where". But I think this might even be illegal in the US.
This is what the kids are calling a “red flag”.
Also, "very sus".
Fr, fr. No Cap.
Why does it have to be this complicated? See flow chart for sanity:
Did employee work? Yes -> pay them in full
That us a big red flag.
That tells you that people often want to leave that company, and they try to force people to stay. It also speaks volumes about the management culture that rather than entice people to stay they try to make it difficult to leave and punish people for doing so.
Also it's likely illegal - if you work the hours it's your money.
It depends what your situation is - I'd only take that job if absolutely desperate and no choice, and keep searching for something better. I'd write off the half month salary but consider options on making complaints to get the money after I had something better lined up.
Even if everything else about the company is fine, I'd be very wary of the management culture long term.
Reminds me of this one place a buddy of mine used to work. They lease the building they operate out of, so that if the workforce decides to organize, they'll just let the lease run out. There's also only one entrance from the shop floor to the management offices, and it's got an armed guard posted at it.
Jesus Christ, did he work in the Gulag?
Close. The company was called Schneider Electric. The only good thing about them is that they offer extremely good healthcare to their employees, what's referred to here in the US as a "Cadillac Plan", because it covers the families of the employees, and it doesn't come out of the employees check.
Many employment law attorneys offer free consultations and work on contingency.
"Works on contingency? No, money down!"
Probably shouldn't have that Bar logo on there either.
Normal? Yeah. Too common. Wage theft is the most common type of theft.
Legal? No.
Labor board. Especially if this has been provided in writing.
Ohhh, I wish this was real and WAS in writing. The damages would be insane
I don't know about the rest of the world, but it seems like this could be legal in Canada if the employee agrees in writing: https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/programs/laws-regulations/labour/interpretations-policies/deductions-wages.html
That said, I'd nope the hell out of that contract, legal or not.
I've had plenty of jobs where you don't get a check for like the first 3 weeks while they setup the payroll system. Or so they say. Frankly, in the modern day, I don't see how it's that hard or takes that long. It should be near instant via an electronic system. Pop my fuckin' info into it and start tracking my hours from day 1.
So apparently, payroll processors will charge you for each TIME you add a new record, rather than each new record added, because they're the ones actually adding you in. So instead, they send batches of new records to add every two or four weeks.
oh please tell me where this company is so I can call them and tell them they're fucking morons. please
I'd rather apply so I can class action sue them
Pretty sure that's illegal.
must be a shithole country if that's legal.
So most probably the US of A
Was pretty sure this was satire
Nope, not legal.
Believe it or not, straight to jail.
Or, that's a paddlin'.
Both applicable. Take your pick.
No this is really fucking weird and authoritarian. I'd leave ASAP.
Pretty sure that is wage theft in the United States. But you could only action it if you left early and they refused to give you your wage afaik.
OP appears to be a anti-wage theft advocate, not a potential employee looking for legal advice, based on their post history.
So you work 20 days and get paid 15?
Nope : you work 20 days and get paid 5
That's a paddlin'
My gut reaction is to say "that's blatantly illegal", but maybe local law is different... I'm pretty sure it's not legal in the US at the very least though
If a company needs byzantine rules around compensation, don't engage. This was a solved problem centuries ago through much more straightforward means, and these casino-like rules only favor the house.
On top of what others are saying, this text does not adequately describe the conditions of resignation and "if you leave". This is also clearly not legal copy which suggests it's not a part of any contract, or is at best paraphrasing the intent of an actual contract of dubious legal standing. Either way, a lawyer would probably have a field day with this.
Also, a resignation can be coerced by giving you a false choice, usually to the tune of "sign this or else". Combined with the "you didn't complete your grace period" language, they are more or less incentivized to do this to all but their top performers.
No it's not normal and it doean't look legal either
Forward this, along with any relevant contact information to your state's labor board, your state's Attorney General & the Federal Dept of Labor.
"At-will employment for me but not for thee", eh? Very cheeky.
Normal for some companies to enact policies that are batshit crazy? Yes.
Legal? Not a chance in hell.
Never had anything like that in the US.
It sounds like this job pays monthly, is that correct?
Does the "security deposit" take you below minimum wage for the month (or portion of the month if you start between the 2nd and the 10th)?
If you agree to it and it doesn't take you below minimum wage it might be legal depending on your location. If it goes below minimum wage and you're in the US I'm pretty sure it's illegal. Definitely if you go below federal minimum wage, but if you're somewhere with a higher minimum wage there could be exceptions to the local law this falls under.
It would get more complicated if you're an exempt salaried employee and this takes you below the level where you can be exempt but keeps you above minimum wage for 40hrs/week. They would have to make sure they're in compliance with regulations for hourly workers and I doubt they'd bother with that.
But, as others have said, unless you're desperate don't work for these assholes.
:-D