this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
859 points (98.5% liked)
Antiwork
8275 readers
2 users here now
-
We're trying to reduce the numbers of hours a person has to work.
-
We talk about the end of paid work being mandatory for survival.
Partnerships:
- Matrix/Element chatroom
- Discord (channel: #antiwork)
- IRC: #antiwork on IRCNow.org (i.e., connect to ircs://irc.ircnow.org and
/join #antiwork) - Your facebook group link here
- Your x link here
- lemmy.ca/c/antiwork
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Generally you only have a right to silence in self incrimination, just answering if the agreement was 24 or 42 likely wouldn't apply.
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.
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?
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.
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.
Fair enough.