this post was submitted on 21 Sep 2023
915 points (98.7% liked)

Antiwork

8277 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
[–] Gork@lemm.ee 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In the event that they do require the employee to pay it all back, what I would have done was try to make the original wage work on the budget and stash the other £18k into low risk index funds to get some dividends and increased return. That way if paying it back were necessary, you'd at least make some money from the excess capital.

[–] bdonvr@thelemmy.club 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If the paperwork says £42k then not much the company could possibly argue.

[–] Gork@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

True. Legally binding contacts definitely supersede their vocal claims to the contrary.

[–] AllonzeeLV@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Thats the part where an employee should do what employers do all day every day like breathing: lie your ass off.

"I recall the verbal agreement being for 42k, just as it is in the contract. Stop lying."

Probably should look for other work once the error found out though regardless of how you handle it. They'll invent a reason to fire you for failing to be a good lil wage slave, cowering and signing an hr document obligating you to pay the difference back. A month later it will be some "not a team player" dismissal.

Fortunately though, it might never be discovered. Corporate malice is matched only by corporate incompetence.