this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
859 points (98.5% liked)

Antiwork

8275 readers
2 users here now

  1. We're trying to improving working conditions and pay.

  2. We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.

  3. We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.

Partnerships:

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 95 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Wouldn't matter if they did. Unless you agree to the pay cut, you're getting the written amount. If they insist it's supposed to be 24k, stay quiet on it. Especially if they ask what you were offered. They can't force you to tell them, and the right to silence is one of those that you get regardless of who you are or where you're from.

If they try to change your wage, or fire you for not accepting the correction, that would be breach of contract or at least wrongful termination at least.... and that turns into a sizable settlement.

[–] psud@lemmy.world 30 points 1 year ago

"I don't recall" is a reasonable response

[–] ryathal@sh.itjust.works 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Generally you only have a right to silence in self incrimination, just answering if the agreement was 24 or 42 likely wouldn't apply.

[–] ItsMeSpez@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

What you really do here is play it dumb as hell. Oh, I'm being over-payed? Really? Wow.

The key to keeping this up is not posting that you know about being over-payed and are doing nothing about it on the internet.

[–] Ashelyn@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 year ago

In a court of law, for sure. But for discussion between an employee and boss, I don't think that works the same way. I don't think your boss would have the right to compel speech out of you like that.

Unless it works differently in the UK?

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Well, nobody can force you to speak, that's something you'll have to do willingly. So IMO, the right to silence is one of the things that is universal to existence, regardless of law.

[–] RealJoL@feddit.de 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yes, but in a civil case this may turn the favours against you. Even though you may not incriminate yourself, the judge may rule for the other party, as there is no burden of proof, but only of probability.

Of course, a paper contract especially ruling 42k in black and white will be of more weight than a verbal contract.

[–] MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca 1 points 1 year ago