Reply to comment by Silver_ in Toys R Us' bankruptcy lawyers get $56 million while laid-off workers get $2 million by ziq
Why does the original agreement matter so much? They made a new agreement. Most of the workers probably would have left had they known they wouldn't get severance. The company got them to stay under false pretenses. That in and of itself is an agreement. "I will continue working for you if you give me severance when the company goes bankrupt"
Promising something is not a contract !
Most of the workers probably would have left had they known they wouldn't get severance.
Yup, It's like cancelling a meetup or a soccer match, people wouldn't have bought their plane/train tickets. From a moral perspective, It's better to compensate, even though It's not mandatory.
That in and of itself is an agreement. "I will continue working for you if you give me severance when the company goes bankrupt"
I agree, but have they agreed to this ?
Why are you so into this soccer match metaphor? Are you salty cause your ex-wife got mad at you for not coming to your kid's games?
Anyway, to make that actually comparable to the situation at hand would require a few changes
The person flaking owns the train company and thus directly profits from the sale of the tickets
The person flaking fully intends to flake and is deliberately decieving the other person for their own profit
The cost of the train ticket is several months of labor
Where exactly do you draw the line between a "promise" and a "contract"?
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments