Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/332

Paragraph 1- If one told his agent to go and hire workers for him for three and he went and hired them for four and the agent had told the workers responsibility for their pay was on him, the agent must pay them four and he would take three from the employer, losing one out of pocket. There are those who say that if all the workers are only hired at four, the employer would give the agent the amount that he benefited. If the agent said responsibility for their wages was on the employer, the employer would pay them whatever the city custom is. If the city had people who would be hired at three and those who would be hired at four, he would only have to pay them three and the workers will have complaints on the agent. When is this true? Where their work is not apparent. If their work was apparent, however, and it was worth four, the employer must give them four because had the agent not told them four they would not have troubled themselves to perform work worth four.

Paragraph 2- If the employer said to hire them at four, and the agent went and hired them at three, even if their work was worth four, they would only receive three because they accepted that condition. They would have complaints on the agent. It makes no difference whether the agent said responsibility for their wages was on him or the employer.

Paragraph 3- If the employer told the agent three, and the agent told the workers four, and the workers said “we agree as the homeowner said,” their intent was only in the event the employer had said more than four. Thus, we would appraise what they did and if their work was worth four they would take four from the employer. If was not worth four or it was unknown, they would only receive three. If the agent said responsibility for their wages was on him, in all cases he would give them four. The same is true where the workers would only be hired at four.

Paragraph 4- If the employer said four and the agent went and said three, and the workers said “as the employer said,” even if the work was worth four, they would only receive three, because they heard three and accepted it. If the employer told workers to work for him at four just as their colleagues did, and they said “just as our colleagues did,” and it turned out that the employer gave them more, he must give them the same amount he gave those colleagues. If the employer mislead the workers and said to work for him at four just like other workers hire themselves out at and it turned out that they are hired for more, or the workers mislead the employer in this manner, it is as if the employer never hired them and he could pay them the minimum amount workers are paid. If an employer hired workers and they said to give them an item as payment, the employer may give its value because since the worker did not pull the item he has not acquired it.

Paragraph 5- If the employer hired the workers himself for a sela and the cost of labor went down and the employer showed his frustration and the workers verbally appeased him, the employer cannot say he was only appeased with the understanding that they would lower their wages based on the decrease, because they can say that only appeased him with the understanding that we would do a good job and that is what we did. There are those who differentiate in a case where the employer explicitly said he is only give such lower amount and he could have retracted without the workers having the right to complain, and even if they subsequently appeased them he would only give what he said. Similarly, if the cost of labor went up and the workers showed their frustration and the employer verbally appeased them, the workers cannot say we were only appeased with the understanding that the employer would add to our wages based on the amount the value went up, because he can respond that he only appeased them with the understanding that he will provide food and drink, which he did.

Paragraph 6- If the work was worth five and the employer hired them for four, and the cost of labor went down and was now worth four, he would give them four. He cannot say that they should now take a dinar less than their worth. Similarly, if hired them for an extra dinar, and the cost of labor went up, they workers cannot say that the employer should add a dinar extra to what they are worth now.