|
Bright Bart posted:Is there a fancy term in Latin for such situations or the defence that you only broke the law as a result of such a situation? I'm not seriously in need of answers but I do find it darkly comical. For the first scenario (law from the same jurisdiction bans speeds below or above 5mph), you can generally raise an impossibility defense. For the second, where your problems are caused by the fact that two different jurisdictions have imposed conflicting obligations, the Latin is something like sugit vos esse (sucks to be you).
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Personalis defectum
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 20:13
|
|
|
I have never been in an accident. Wreckless driving
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2023 21:38
|
|
|
It is a criminal offense to neglect your patriotic duty and not be incarcerated in a private for-profit prison for at least 2 years in every 15 year period. How you end up in there is up to you!ulmont posted:For the first scenario (law from the same jurisdiction bans speeds below or above 5mph), you can generally raise an impossibility defense. I could have given a better example where it's not the same law mandating an impossible speed. Like say you have a court-ordered appointment with your parole officer at 4:30 PM but there's a curfew starting at 4:00 PM. Bright Bart fucked around with this message at 03:21 on Aug 13, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 00:13
|
|
|
Bright Bart posted:I could have given a better example where it's not the same law mandating an impossible speed. Like say you have a court-ordered appointment with your parol officer at 4:30 PM but there's a curfew starting at 4:00 PM. That doesn’t matter here, my note was that it was the same sovereign entity creating your conflict. It’s when it’s two sovereigns that you’re proper hosed and dual citizens have this sort of issue periodically, mostly relating to conscription.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 00:36
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:I mean the original reason for the rule against self-incrimination was 'the defendant will just lie, and so in addition to being convicted we are forcing them to imperil their immortal soul'. Cite? Would like to learn more
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 00:52
|
|
|
Organza Quiz posted:What I am suggesting is that you challenge their fees which will at worst annoy them and possibly make them offer you more to go away, and at best get you back your money if they can't justify their fees. It might be the best lever to pull out of the ones you have available. There is a reason why costs disclosures are legally required to include information about how to do it. So I looked into this and it costs money to do so I'm just gonna take the payment and go away
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 01:49
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:The people that wrote accounts of trials way back when were mostly priests or other members of the church so of course they’d claim that. No one knows what the “average” medieval peasant thought Oh, but we do! A professional historian has cleared this up for us! A World Lit Only By Fire posted:The most baffling, elusive, yet in many ways the most significant dimensions of the medieval mind were invisible and silent. One was the medieval man’s total lack of ego. Even those with creative powers had no sense of self. To them their identity in this life was irrelevant. Manchester wrote the book while taking a break from a 3-part biography of Winston Churchill, and all his previous books were on 20th century figures (Mecken, McArthur, Kennedy). Professional yes, historian maybe.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 03:33
|
|
|
Jean-Paul Shartre posted:We do have enough evidence across geography and time of people of all social strata doing other seemingly irrational things to our eyes on the basis of religion, though, that it lends strength to the hypothesis. We also have a lot of stories about the pope having orgies. None of it has any bearing on whether the average person put any stock into it (since the average person didn’t understand Latin and didn’t understand the church service, or probably didn’t speak whatever language the courts worked in, and who knows whether they even made it to any sort of court proceedings and whether it was just handled summarily by whatever authority figure was present.) I’m sure it meant a lot to some people. Still does. And people still lie under oath today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 05:10
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Cite? Would like to learn more I probably overstated things Langbein posted:The Anglo-American adversary system repackaged doctrinal baggage that started its journey in the medieval law of the Roman church. The maxim nemo tenetur prodere seipsum, liberally translated as "no one is obliged to accuse himself," helped clarify the line between two spheres of Christian obligation. The believer's duty of penitential confession did not entail instituting criminal proceedings against himself. He could confess sin to a priest without being obliged to confess punishable offenses to judges and prosecutors.115 This is what my frantic googling to find a source that backed up my hazy recollection from law school remarks dragged up: https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/pdf/Faculty/Langbein_Privilege_Against_Self_Incrimination.pdf Important to clarify there's not a direct line between the classical origins of the ideas about what Justice meant and the beginnings of the modern system, rather it looks like people took those hazy ideas about what was right and used arguments we would recognise to gradually change the system.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2023 09:04
|
|
|
I know that laws differ from country to country and where I live (Canada) province to province, but can a legal expert let me know if I have reason see a lawyer? I was terminated for just cause recently... e: too much specific info, got the advice I needed Huggybear fucked around with this message at 21:53 on Aug 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 03:08
|
|
|
I'm not canadian and I don't know Canadian law but the universal theory of this thread is "If you are asking yourself, "should I talk to a lawyer?" the only answer anyone else can give you is yes."
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 03:32
|
|
|
I am Canadian and I agree with HA. If you have to ask, you need to ask a lawyer yourself. (Is this joinder? Oh no I hope not.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 03:41
|
|
|
okay thanks good call. Will do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 05:10
|
|
|
Huggybear posted:I was terminated for just cause recently, for absenteeism, but they falsified the evidence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 07:40
|
|
|
Trapick posted:Maybe I'm dumb, but do you mean you were in fact justifiably fired for absenteeism but they got the dates wrong/didn't have proof somehow? Or you weren't absent and they (falsely) claimed that you were? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 17:11
|
|
|
I think they're saying that they were fired for cause, but the cause did not actually exist, and they were actually fired for whistleblowing or something
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 17:17
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:I think they're saying that they were fired for cause, but the cause did not actually exist, and they were actually fired for whistleblowing or something Yes, this. That said, I was occasionally gone from work but I had a legitimate reason - in the two weeks they reviewed, I went over my calendar - I had two unpaid sick days, a few scheduled and allowable medical appointments, daily lunch breaks, a couple of meetings with clients. I realize that I also had the habit of answering the company phone outside, so it might look like I leave a lot to talk on my personal phone regularly (the store received about a dozen calls per day, and I am hard of hearing so I need to talk on speaker - multiple lengthy phone calls per day). Crunching the numbers, it looks like what they did was look at two weeks of normal work days and extrapolate what that adds up to in a year, and accuse me of that amount of absenteeism. e: do they have the right to refer to sick time off as absenteeism? I guess two days in two weeks is more than usual but I had disclosed I was dealing with a health issue and otherwise had worked the entire year without a sick day or holiday Huggybear fucked around with this message at 22:09 on Aug 14, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 22:05
|
|
|
EwokEntourage posted:We also have a lot of stories about the pope having orgies. None of it has any bearing on whether the average person put any stock into it (since the average person didn’t understand Latin and didn’t understand the church service, or probably didn’t speak whatever language the courts worked in, and who knows whether they even made it to any sort of court proceedings and whether it was just handled summarily by whatever authority figure was present.) Religious oaths in the Middle Ages are not just a court thing. I myself swore 'do fidem' to the corporation of my mediaeval university when I graduated. Guilds have the same deal, so do feudal oaths of fealty. Oaths very much do matter and are taken seriously. Also who is 'average person' here? Peasants don't go to court but also to a first approximation they simply don't matter in society.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2023 22:43
|
|
|
Huggybear posted:Yes, this. These are great questions for employment lawyers in your particular jurisdiction!
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 03:56
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean there absolutely were some witches. If you tell a thousand people witchcraft is a thing they can try, some fraction are gonna try it. According to Malleus Maleficarum, for someone to be a witch requires a pact with the devil and the permission of God. Merely reciting spells is not enough. So either the devil and God are real, or there are no witches.
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 12:50
|
|
|
has god considered not giving permission
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 15:36
|
|
|
Turns out that guy's a dick. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 17:17
|
|
|
I heard he died?
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2023 20:28
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I mean there absolutely were some witches. If you tell a thousand people witchcraft is a thing they can try, some fraction are gonna try it. It only counts as witchcraft if it works otherwise it's just a revenge fantasy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 01:31
|
|
|
Huggybear posted:Yes, this. Definitely talk to an employment lawyer. The logic from your employer sounds completely insane. How do they think being sick works? If you get the flu and are sick for 4 days, you don't get to choose to spread those 4 days out once every 3 months or whatever the gently caress. Also talk to your lawyer about the phone calls. If you're in trouble for taking calls like that due to being hard of hearing, your employer might be violating the CHRA.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
Dopilsya posted:Definitely talk to an employment lawyer. Edit vvv: sure, it sounds like the employer is just making up bullshit in this case, I'm just raising the general idea that taking "too much" sick leave (even unpaid) can get you fired. Trapick fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Aug 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 18:56
|
|
|
I believe the issue in question is wrongful termination, not unpaid sick leave.
|
|
#
?
Aug 17, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
Dopilsya posted:Definitely talk to an employment lawyer. You, and everyone, excellent advice and thank you. It didn't even occur to me that being hard of hearing is a disability and I should have asked for accommodation. And yes, my former boss is completely and scarily insane, hardcore libertarian, I am pretty sure the main reason he fired me with cause is because he hates, among other things, the concept of EI. I don't know if I mentioned it but he was withholding my owed pay (one week salary, two week's vacation), until I sent him and the owners a link that expressly forbids this with no exception in my province regardless of the terms of termination, and they transferred the lump sum within the hour. And yes, I don't care about the sick time, but upon review I was paid those days. I mean, I was salaried but I know that they adjust for unpaid time off, so that's weird. Huggybear fucked around with this message at 02:41 on Aug 18, 2023 |
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 02:35
|
|
|
My favourite quirk of Canadian employment law is that it’s a provincial domain, unless you work in a federally regulated industry in which case the federal labor code apply. Except where it doesn’t and worker’s comp is still provincial.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 13:02
|
|
|
Huggybear posted:You, and everyone, excellent advice and thank you. It didn't even occur to me that being hard of hearing is a disability and I should have asked for accommodation. Good luck. Sometimes those kinds of whacko libertarians can functionally be turned into legal piñatas because they keep doubling down on stupid.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:My favourite quirk of Canadian employment law is that it’s a provincial domain, unless you work in a federally regulated industry in which case the federal labor code apply. Huggybear posted:...until I sent him and the owners a link ... Good luck Huggybear, gently caress him up.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 21:25
|
|
|
Trapick posted:and Quebec is doing it's own thing in a bunch of ways. Any bit of legal advice in Canada generally has a big asterisk next to it that says "offer may not be valid in Quebec", yeah.
|
|
#
?
Aug 18, 2023 21:57
|
|
|
Hey, thread. I live and work in New York state, but not in or near New York City. It's recently come to light that my employer, is rounding our punch times in a very biased way, in favor of the company. A lot of us have begun to take pictures of, and otherwise track, our clock-in and clock-out times. Once word got up to management that that was going on, they held a meeting with all of us to discuss the relevant policies. During the meeting, they clarified that if we clock in up to 14 minutes early, then our time will be rounded to the beginning of the hour. So, if our start time is 7am, and we clock in at any time between 6:46am and 6:59am, then our punch will be rounded to 7am. They also clarified that if we clock out up to 14 minutes late, then our time will be rounded back to the beginning of the hour. So, if our end time is 3pm, and we clock out at any time between 3:01pm and 3:14pm, then our punch will be rounded back to 3pm. They also told us that if our department supervisors need us to begin early, or stay late, that they have the authority to override the rounding and pay us for our time. Further, they told us that if we clock in or out beyond that 14 minute window, and we were not authorized to do so by our supervisor, that we will be subject to disciplinary action. They did not clarify any other scenario in this meeting. After the meeting, I asked our HR person directly if I could see the relevant company policy that lays out these rules. HR pointed me to our employee handbook, and printed out the relevant section of the appendix for me. Said section has exactly one sentence in it pertaining to what I asked about, which was, paraphrased, 'do not punch in more than 14 minutes before the start of your shift without manager approval.' Well, that did not clarify it for me at all, so I emailed HR to ask for further clarification. I asked if there's any rules regarding punch rounding if we clock in late, or clock out early, or clock in or out outside of the 14 minute window. HR's response was, again paraphrased, 'Go ask the site manager, I'm working remote the rest of the week'. So, someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that in NY state, clock punches are allowed to be rounded, but they must be rounded in a way that is unbiased, and favors neither the employer nor the employee. Further, the maximum time allowed for a punch to be rounded is to the nearest 15 minutes increment. So, in the examples they provided in the meeting, if I were to clock in between 6:46am and 6:52am, then my time would need to be rounded to 6:45am. Similarly, if I clocked in between 7:08am and 7:14am, my time would need to be rounded to 7:15am. And if I clocked in any time between 6:53am and 7:07am, then my time would need to be rounded to 7am. Now, I've got several pictures of my clock times, and they show pretty clearly how the rounding rules as applied are currently biased in favor of the company. I've got the copy of the "policy" that was printed for me, and I've got the email exchange. What do I do from here? Obviously I'd like to get this corrected, and I'd like to be paid properly for my time. Do I need to get a specific type of lawyer? Is there like, a whistleblower link I can dump this all into anonymously? Or a number to call? Do I have to go downtown to the local Department Of Labor office and hand them this stuff in person? What do I do here? I tried to google up a link or relevant page in the NY.gov site and I couldn't find it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:17
|
|
|
That's a super specific question no lawyer will answer here other than to tell you to contact a local employment attorney for a consultation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:22
|
|
|
Line up another job no matter what though, because if you do move forward with this your work life is likely to become real unpleasant.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:24
|
|
|
It already is, yeah. This specific issue is just one of many, and is the most clearly-legal one. Mr. Nice! posted:That's a super specific question no lawyer will answer here other than to tell you to contact a local employment attorney for a consultation. So the answer is "call a lawyer" then. I will head along that route, thank you.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:27
|
|
|
neogeo0823 posted:So the answer is "call a lawyer" then. I will head along that route, thank you. Note: I am not saying you have a case or are correct in your interpretation of time clock issues and whatnot. I have no clue. I'm just saying that no one here whose job it is to give legal advice will give legal advice on such a specific question. A consultation with a local employment attorney will clarify the rules for you while also providing you potential avenues going forward. If you do have a valid claim, they'll layout the process and potential recovery.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:29
|
|
|
Mr. Nice! posted:Note: I am not saying you have a case or are correct in your interpretation of time clock issues and whatnot. I have no clue. I'm just saying that no one here whose job it is to give legal advice will give legal advice on such a specific question. A consultation with a local employment attorney will clarify the rules for you while also providing you potential avenues going forward. If you do have a valid claim, they'll layout the process and potential recovery. Right, yeah, that's how I interpenetrated your reply. I'm not trying to get some huge payday from this or anything, I just want it to stop. I don't care if they round our punches as long as they do it fairly, and per the law. I was hoping that there was like, an anonymous whistleblower form or something I could dump all this into have the DoL look into it on their own, but I couldn't find anything like that. The closest I got was a bunch of law firm websites, and a letter from 2009. EDIT: Oh hey, I found a form to fill out. Uh, should I still go consult with the lawyer, or should I dump my info into this? Or both? Or something else?
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 13:13 |
|
|
Call employment lawyers and show them your documentary proof. Ask them what else you should do.
|
|
#
?
Aug 19, 2023 18:56
|
|