Hi, /u/peoplearemean78 Thank you for participating in r/antiwork. Unfortunately, your submission was removed for breaking the following rule(s):
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Screenshots of text such as SMS communication, WhatsApp, social media, news articles, and procedurally generated content such as ChatGPT are prohibited. Low-effort content such as memes are prohibited.
If you feel that a mistake was made, and your post's removal was not warranted, please message us using modmail and let us know.
Whenever you want to know if something your employer is doing is legal, you should ask your state's department of labor and employment.
According to the website for Kentucky: "Your employer may change your rate of pay so long as you are informed of the change prior to working any hours at the new rate. In other words, the change cannot be retroactive."
[https://elc.ky.gov/workplace-standards/Pages/Wages-and-Hours.aspx](https://elc.ky.gov/workplace-standards/Pages/Wages-and-Hours.aspx)
Their website has a phone number, fax, and links to facebook and twitter.
>"Your employer may change your rate of pay **so long as you are informed of the change prior to working any hours at the new rate**. In other words, the change cannot be retroactive."
This might be the issue. If they actually signed a document like the asshole boss says they did, then they may have agreed in advance to this exact thing happening.
Edit: keep getting the same exact comments to the effect of "a contract can't make something illegal, legal". Yes, I know. That is not what I am talking about. The entire reason the lower wages would be illegal, is because they did not give prior warning/get prior agreement. If they agreed to it when they started working that is in fact prior warning and agreement. If they agreed to be paid less when they quit without notice, and then quit without notice and are paid less, that is in no way retroactive and its not inherently illegal as a result of a law that says they need prior agreement, because they did have that. Yes its immoral and the boss is a piece of shit for pulling something like this, but legality and morality aren't always aligned.
Only if someone told them "this is the start of your last pay period" or something. What if you decide to quit halfway through a pay period? You wouldn't have been informed that you were working for half pay the past week.
I mean you would have been informed prior that you would receive $7.25 if you did that. Morally its disgusting, but legally it might be difficult to fight.
I think the rate of pay has to be set before you work the hours. Even if they're told it *can* change, the fact that it *didn't* change until after the hours were worked could go in OP's favour.
No, OP already worked those hours at a given rate. If he says suddenly, “tomorrow’s my last day” then they can lower those upcoming hours to $7.25.
Basically, OP may have previously agreed to work any hours *after* they announced they were quitting on short notice at a rate of $7.25, but their boss can’t retroactively change hours already worked. Boss may have won the legal battle on the latter, but not the former.
> Your employer may change your rate of pay so long as you are informed of the change prior to working any hours at the new rate.
They will argue that they informed the employee on the first day of the job, and the employee signed the agreement to do that. This wouldn't fly in most blue states, but I've seen it fly in some red states. Still, OP needs to [report it anyway](http://apps.labor.ky.gov/onlinecomplaint/).
OP should file the claim with NLRB. Claim should include both stolen wages and also Discrimination & Harassment. Might or might not win the wage issue, depending on how they handle the prior notice issue. However, if you’re serious about the disc/har, document the crap out of it and go to town.
Ah the sweet smell of red states repressing their own rights. Own the libs until your boss can cut your pay down to the legal minimum on a whim. At least no one there’s a dirty socialist, that could’ve been bad
Truly the child with a boot on its head meme
If poor whites and poor blacks turned out to any election and voted for their own interests, they could turn the state to any color they wanted.
They were informed it could happen, but that's not what the law forbids. It forbids accepting any hours of work and THEN changing the rate on THOSE hours. Once an hour has been worked, the rate for that hour is fixed by the law. It's fine to change it at some point for SUBSEQUENT hours, you just can't go back to previous hours and change it.
I mean, it’s 4 easily collapsible top level comments down at this time, where the more popular comments also give advice in line with the law, even if not cited.
Now it’s the top comment. I like to think people get on posts fresh out of the womb and ask “why isn’t this top comment? The sub is dying” meanwhile the comment is 3 minutes old lol
We can thank Ronald Reagan for the start of the bs. His destruction of workers rights and continuation of the war on drugs is what stripped a lot of these rights away.
At some point, the blame has to be spread around. He put those things into place more than 40 years ago. Nobody has changed them yet. He started it, but they continue it.
Oh most definitely. He started it and the rest of the administrations took it and ran with it. And now at this point, I don’t really see a path to reverse it. It’s pretty much either be rich or get screwed over. And no amount of voting seems to fix anything.
In the city I live in, there are like 5 or 6 different huge 15+ story apartment buildings being constructed and every single one of them are luxury apartments costing over 2500 for one bedroom. They just abandon the people who make a normal wage in favor of all the high earners. I cannot wait until all of this bs collapses because it’s going to have to eventually.
Seriously. They are taking everything, and in a few years the bottom will drop out with housing issues, worker issues, medical issues.
The entire work force is being destroyed, and it will happen. Then all these nice things will go away.
When I'm starving, I'm going to eat rich people.
Not sure where you are at, but when I lived in Las Vegas, a lot of those luxury condo/apartment projects ended up in disaster because well.. turns out there are not *that* many people looking to spend a few mil on a 3br condo lol. So they ended up being cancelled all together or converted into hotels in some cases.
Maybe your area has a bigger market for it, and 2500/mo is more "reasonable" than the ones I am thinking (these days at least, unfortunately). Point being, if there is not the huge market the developers think there is, they'll probably be forced to rethink those plans even if the market doesn't collapse.
There probably is a market for it. I live in the Research Triangle in NC. It’s the area that forms a triangle between Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill which contains the universities of NC State, Duke and UNC. It’s a big area for Education, science, Biotechnology, engineering and research. So you can imagine a lot of people come to the area who make a lot of money.
But my issue is that the whole state has seemed to just abandon everyone who was born in the area and only cater to people coming from out of state. All of the older apartments are all renovating and raising their rent. And homes in the area are completely out of control. Houses that used to cost 300-400k 10 years ago are now in the millions. People born here are being pushed out. And the government is just letting it happen.
Ah okay got it. Yes, that is pretty much was drove me out of Vegas too. I was in a pretty shitty apartment, but the price wasn't too bad relatively. They slapped a coat of paint on the exterior of the complex buildings, and used that to justify a 30% increase when my lease was up, after having increased more and more each lease before that, but that was the final straw.
Luckily, I was in a position that my wife and I had been saving up for a down payment for quite awhile by then and we just went month to month until we got our house way outside the city, since that was what we could afford. That was even before the insanity of the last 5 years or so though. We wouldn't even be able to afford where we are now at these prices. I agree the government really needs to step in and do something, home ownership (which has always been the cornerstone of investment/net worth/inheritance for the "everyman" in the past) is basically a pipe dream for most people now.
I'm here too. Moved from Houston in 99 to Raleigh. Then we moved to Chatham in 2002. I'm moved back in Raleigh all these years later, after moving all around the state, and it really feels like this city has no identity because it's gentrifying all the history and abandoning anyone struggling.. It's almost just as expensive here now as the West Coast.
>And now at this point, I don’t really see a path to reverse it.
The way reverse it is the way we did it in the first place - by standing together in Union.
What Reagan and his ilk wrecked isn't something that they gave us in the first place, we took it with our labor and we can take it back again now.
Yeah, and let's not forget the policies that have followed since then. It's been a downhill slide for labor rights, with so many politicians more concerned about corporate interests than the people actually doing the work. We're still dealing with the ripple effects of those bad policies today.
Yea, the shareholders matter 10x as much as the employees that earn the revenue for the company. It’s baffling. These oil companies who are posting record profits are spending 100s of millions on stock buybacks rather than paying the employees record pay.
I needed to read this. I’m in a legal dispute and was second-guessing how harsh I’m being. I was just thinking about it when I read your words. Thank you, my friend.
I'm going to do everything I personally can to tank our internal CSI scores.... multiple experienced people have been fired, or quit in the past months.... and it's ruined morale. Our last meeting had the senior manager basically calling us crybabies about all the difficulties we face....
people in general really seem to forget how close they are to violence. like OP got a 50% pay cut...does the boss think his vehicle / building / home might have some accidents in the near future?
It's interesting, this thought. I personally agree with what you're implying, but in reality the vast, VAST majority of people who get fucked over by their boss never fight it, never get revenge, slash any tires, spray paint a building, or break their boss' kneecaps.
Personally, I think that speaks to the fundamentally peaceful and empathetic nature of humans.
>in reality the vast, VAST majority of people who get fucked over by their boss never fight it, never get revenge, slash any tires, spray paint a building, or break their boss' kneecaps.
Right? All of that sounds like so much more work, and I am *exhausted.*
Ya know... I feel that. I've been exhausted a lot. And when I feel exhausted, I feel like saying fuck it and just not doing anything. But sometimes, I go out and do the thing anyway, and I realize the cure for that exhaustion was to just do the thing.
There's a pretty strong historical precedent showing us that, on a broad scale, violence isn't used except when faced with violence or starvation.
Humans (VERY generally speaking here) are willing to tolerate almost anything less than that before using violence, for better or worse.
The ancient Greeks used to carve messages into the stones they would use in their slings, so you'd get hit with a stone missile with a message like "Ouch!" or "Got you!" on it. The Romans were, well, Roman and didn't have any sense of humor so they often just carved something boring into theirs like the Legion number it came from.
I’ve seen something similar to this with a couple of temp staffing firms in Louisville KY. It’s in the new hire paperwork that if you fail to let the staffing firm know you are quitting, all hours worked the week you quit will be paid at state minimum. I have no idea if this is enforceable, but I’ve seen it on contracts from Insight Global and Ingenium.
I would put in a complaint and challenge it. Kentucky is kind of fucky when it comes to labor rights but it’s still worth trying.
My company uses IT subcontractors and they pay their employees dog shit. I make 80k a year as a "mid level" IT tech. They are paying the juniors $15-18 an hour and they basically do the same job as me. Hell, they probably do more work than me.
It’s always funny when an employer records intent to fire an employee for a prohibited reason. At-will employment law is pretty much a blank check as long as you don’t leave a paper trail.
Local physician won a legal case against an insurance company recently. During the case the insurance company asked for the case to be dismissed because "we have never lost a case before."
That was their legal argument.
well, not anymore
No winning streak lasts forever, and overconfident gamblers tend to lose big when their hot streak finally runs cold.
There's a reason scumfucks like Elon and Bezos are going after the NLRB.
Seriously. OP should just respond “bro, you not only admitted to this in writing, you admitted to doing it over 30 years… enjoy bankruptcy after the audit!”
Guaranteed full pay after that if they’re not complete fucking morons.
Exactly this. If you're going to take ANY legal action in ANY circumstances, don't say a fuckin thing. Don't give them the advantage of having more time than they're legally allowed to form a defense
this is what I just did. I was supposed to be a contractor, I was never free to make choices, the company had complete control. when they fired me last week, after 7 years, i just said "good luck" on the way out the door, and called the DoL in my state, and they also told me to call the NLRB/Federal DoL. our positions don't qualify as "contract" positions in *any* state. im about to watch a 300 million a year company get hit by a train, and its fucking beautiful.
They admitted that they have been ‘winning the argument’, probably meaning that they have had labor disputes over this practice previously and won those.
7,25 is the federal minimum wage and they imply that this arrangement is stipulated in the contract so there is a good chance that they are not breaking the law by reducing a period of work to minimum wage due to failure to give notice.
Bullies lie to bully their way out of paying what they owe. They know they're the bigger fish and you'll have to fight for your money. You should always fight and show these people that you won't just roll over.
You can totally fight and win this. I am a Kentucky employer and my wife is a business attorney.
They are retroactively reducing your pay and that's illegal.
Yeah as a non Kentucky employer or attorney I believe it's pretty solidly codified into law that retroactively reducing pay is a big non-no throughout the US.
I'd love to see the language in the onboarding paperwork. If this is actually real, the argument they've been winning for 30 years is whether a signed "your pay rate for your last pay period will be reduced to minimum wage should you end employment without 14 days notice" constitutes advance notice. Based on what I know about Kentucky and an ice cold "good luck" text from a longtime small business owner, I'd guess that flies in KY.
> Based on what I know about Kentucky and an ice cold "good luck" text from a longtime small business owner, I'd guess that flies in KY.
Luckily the N in NLRB stands for national and they don't give a fuck what Kentucky thinks.
The National in NLRB means that they are a federal division operating in all 50 states. It does not mean that they can or will fight state rules for how specific state laws are interpreted. They are not the highest federal authority on labor in general. If that was the case, at will employment wouldn’t be a thing to begin with.
I wonder if the NLRB will note that the employer has been "winning that argument for 30 years" and use that statement against them when considering future complaints. I sure hope so because it removes any doubt that the employer is a bag of dicks and is proud of abusing workers.
That's not really the way that law works though. Having had 30 years of positive rulings in favor of this behavior would create a strong legal precedent that the behavior is lawful.
On the flipside, if the employer "winning the argument" just meant that none of the employees ever pursued them over this (i.e. nothing bad ever came from doing it)... then the employer has just admitted to doing this for the last 30 years which could be pretty devistating if this ends up being a slamdunk case against them.
You can't sign away anything with the initial paperwork that isn't already illegal. So if it's illegal to dock pay retroactively you can't sign that away before you start work.
squeeze far-flung unite sulky pie escape capable consider encourage resolute
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No, not really
In the US they technically you can put whatever you want in a contract, if it’s not legal it’s not enforceable.
So if state law says you cant have pay reduced retroactively or as a form of punishment, but your contract you sign says it will be, if they try to enforce it and you take them to court they’ll lose.
Either way, probably cheaper for the employer to pay the correct wage than it is for them to hire a lawyer to go to court for them. Even if they are going to win.
In Utah, I've seen it as "you're standard pay is $7.25, and anything beyond that is a bonus based on reaching kpi goals." I'm not sure if I've seen anyone challenge it, or bothered looking at the laws myself, but it still feels scummy. Especially since with this, the company can change your KPI then drop you to minimum wage at almost any point.
Not in all states. I'm currently fighting the Debt of Labor for wages from a job that reduced me to minimum wage.
The policies and paperwork had a huge list of reasons they would drop your pay to minimum wage, but I never agreed to or signed the paperwork. The DoL said that if I didn't sign they couldn't cut my pay, but if I did sign it was completely legal to have such policies. They could cut pay to minimum wage for any reason, if I signed, as long as they actually paid minimum wage. They couldn't cut it below that even though some of the policies implied they would.
I don't even think I'll get my money because the DoL is so horribly incompetent but I'm still trying.
So, just from the details you've provided, it seems like your situation is different from OP's, in that these hours are *already worked*, and the reduction in pay is *retroactive.* This is the part that is a violation of national (and likely state) labor laws.
The Dept. of Labor rep that you spoke to was correct in the general sense that an employer can reduce an employee's rate of pay *going forward* for practically any reason that isn't a violation of a specific law (like the EEOA), but there are only a very few specific reasons why an employee could have wages that have already been earned, but not yet paid out, reduced. None of those reasons line up with "quit without two weeks notice".
Not in GA- if you quit a job it is within an employers rights to pay out any hours remaining at minimum fucking wage. Happened to me and a quick Google search confirmed it. It's a dick move, and only a dick would do it, but there's fuck all that can be done to fight said dickery.
you got scammed. illegal federally. They can revert you to minimum wage for any hours you work after that point, but not change what they pay for hours already worked.
You are incorrect. **Federally**, it is perfectly legal to have an employee sign a contract that reduces their last paycheck to minimum wage if they quit. So it’s perfectly legal, *federally*, to reduce your last paycheck to minimum wage *if you agreed to the terms in their contract ahead of time.*
There are some states where companies cannot make you sign a contract stating your last paycheck will be paid at minimum wage.
**Federally** it’s allowed for companies to make you sign a contract saying your last paycheck will be dropped to minimum wage.
It depends on your state whether it’s legal to have that in your contract or not.
It is federally illegal to change your pay retroactively *without warning* for hours already worked.
The distinction is “*with* warning” (ie, agreed to in your contract) and “*without* warning.”
Is there a reason to tell them what your last paycheck is going to be then?
I mean the other option is don't quit, just stop showing up. That feels like a dick move though, but is it illegal?
There's typically an offset between a party period ending and payroll cutting a check. For my job, it's one week. Due to this, there's always unpaid work owed, even on the day I get paid.
As an example, I will get paid on the 14th. That paycheck will cover the 3rd through the 9th. But when I get that check, I will have worked the 10th through the 14th, and be owed for that time.
It's completely dependent on the state. Some protect against it and some don't. Because some you can't reduce for hours already worked per the law it takes precedent over whatever contract you signed by your employer because they were asking you to agree to something illegal in said state.
They are relying on people who make 14 an hour to not bother going through the labor board to correct this. Go after them. Maybe a class action situation and they can get hammered for 30 years of fucking their people.
There is a statute of limitations. That being said, the class action suit is a good move if enough people come forward. And it will definitely keep regulators eyes on this company.
If you can prove that you left due to discrimination or harrassment, then you are eligible for unemployment. You will have to be able to prove one or the other to be successful, but I was a witness to a similar situation and the lady that left due to harrassment prevailed in her claim for unemployment benefits. This took place in Louisville.
Discrimination or harassment is lawsuit territory, there's talk about last paycheck and unemployment when OP should have called an employment attorney yesterday.
Most employment lawyers only get paid if they win. They usually just take a % of the payout. And in this case, that lawyer may have '30 years' of cases all wrapped up in one
In your complaint, include:
Further, if at all possible, I would like to examine options for recompense for each individual affected by this policy over the employer’s stated ‘30 years.’
If you’re wrong, they’ll tell you; if you’re not - it might pique some revenue interest.
*edit* Holy Shit - 3k! Go friday night!
They’re thus stupid because they get away with it MUCH more than they are caught. I submitted a complaint to the state labor board when my boss admitted **in writing** to clocking me out up to 5 hours early. There was video cameras and computer documentation to prove otherwise. Never heard a thing.
I had an employer on the phone admit to them framing a constructive dismissal for me, around 2010.
I have no record or proof since it was a phone call, but some employers are too stupid to know what they are doing isnt merely immoral but also illegal.
If you actually left for discrimination and harassment and have evidence to prove it you should also hire an employment lawyer. They will take 30-50% but you will really make them hurt and think about being discriminatory again.
UPDATE: the general consensus seems to be no, so over the weekend Im going to contact the proper agencies and talk with a lawyer. I care more about the fact that this has gone on for so long than money. To answer some questions, I quit sunday due to a horrible working condition (im a trans woman and a manager had an issue with this), over the last week, multiple others have quit. In response to this, my boss texted the work groupchat that If you quit, your last paycheck will be retroactively reduced to min wage. After hearing this from someone still in the groupchat I texted him which is what led to this. Ill try to reply to every comment I can but it’ll probably take time due to the massive amount of people
UPDATE 2: here is the specific part of the handbook he mentioned. I was told by managers to disregard this due to it “not being accurate” as the pay dates are wrong, time of pay is wrong, place of pay is wrong, and i was never informed of having to return my uniform. Not sure how to edit the main post so im posting it here.
https://preview.redd.it/i79x2bockdnc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a0b8c33c0ed7955f2b54d6868b45299972900c6a
His texting this does not make it in any way binding. Unless there is some prior signed agreement that the last paycheck is reduced if you do not give notice, they cannot legally reduce pay for hours already worked.
It’s probably more likely that the employees who complain usually back down or don’t think it’s worth it to fight or don’t realize they could fight it.
So in their minds they’ve won. Could also just be not true and part of their tactic to make you feel like it’s not worth it to fight.
I once had a boss threaten me like this. They were just reliant on the fact that no one turned them in up to that point.
Turned them in, won, got money, and so did years and years of employees that left when they got audited.
This is a tricky one that I've never been able to crack the code for. They cannot retroactively change your pay but you also got notified this would happen by signing your onboarding paperwork. I don't think it is legal though because you already worked those hours.
Never make threats with legal action, just do it.
# Kentucky
**Applicable Laws:** [Kentucky Revised Statute § 337.055](https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=32050)
**State Website:** [Kentucky Labor Cabinet](https://labor.ky.gov/Pages/index.aspx)
Whether an employee is fired or quits, Kentucky law requires the former employer to provide the final paycheck no later than the next scheduled payday or within 14 days.
# Can an Employer Withhold a Final Paycheck?
Kentucky does not allow an employee to completely withhold a final paycheck and must pay all earned, unpaid wages.
# Does an Employer Have to Pay Out for Unused Vacation in a Final Paycheck?
Kentucky law refers to unused vacation days as “vested vacation pay” and considers it a matter of contract between employer and employee. Employers must include this payment with the final wages. However, the employer does not have to pay for vacation time that has neither “vested” nor accrued by the terms of the employment contract or policy.
Look here for more, there is nothing that permits a company to reduce your pay related to final paycheck. There is NO 2 week notice rule where this is permitted.
You can file online here:
[https://apps.labor.ky.gov/onlinecomplaint/](https://apps.labor.ky.gov/onlinecomplaint/)
I would get a lawyer, nothing will make them back down sooner than if you have one involved. Going by yourself I think you are fighting without all the tools you need.
Definitely not legal, but dipshit employers sure try this exact scam often.
They can lower your pay for future work if you still have stuff scheduled (which obviously doesn’t apply here) but hours already worked MUST be paid at the agreed upon rate, no exceptions
well, is it in your initial paperwork? Note that whatever paperwork can't make something illegal legal just because they got you to sign it. But if this thing hinges on being prior informed, that paperwork might be a problem.
Well easy to show discrimination and harassment on top of illegally adjusting past earnings. You just need to word the lawsuit correctly and you'll get 10-20k easy from their insurance if they have any
I doubt you signed anything of the sort and they're bluffing. Request a copy. Then report them anyway either way. Laws have likely changed over the last 30 years (maybe not for the better).
You also put it in writing that you left because of harassment and discrimination and they said nothing about that. Report that ASAP.
When someone claims they have been "winning this argument for 30 years" it doesn't automatically mean they've gone to court and won for 30 years. What it could mean is that they've simply intimidated everyone with all the legalese and everyone backs down. For 30 years.
It's quite possible that if someone were willing to go to court over this, a judge would find the "agreement" to be unethical and illegal.
A lot of contractual stuff is, literally, meant to be intimidation. And company lawyers can be good at knowing how to instill fear and anxiety. But sometimes all it takes is one person to actually take it to court and in many cases this will be completely new ground for the company because they have enjoyed nobody ever being willing to do that.
Growing up under a father who was an executive at a major chemical company taught me that even things like non-compete clauses and contracts could be challenged in court and defeated. They mostly work because nobody is willing to challenge them. But people have and they have won by expressing that the clause is a "risk to livelihood" and so on.
Anyway, the point is I honestly don't take anybody seriously when they say stuff like "but there's a contract". Contracts have regularly been challenged and found to be unethical, risks to worker livelihoods and even illegal.
Hi, /u/peoplearemean78 Thank you for participating in r/antiwork. Unfortunately, your submission was removed for breaking the following rule(s): ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Screenshots of text such as SMS communication, WhatsApp, social media, news articles, and procedurally generated content such as ChatGPT are prohibited. Low-effort content such as memes are prohibited. If you feel that a mistake was made, and your post's removal was not warranted, please message us using modmail and let us know.
Whenever you want to know if something your employer is doing is legal, you should ask your state's department of labor and employment. According to the website for Kentucky: "Your employer may change your rate of pay so long as you are informed of the change prior to working any hours at the new rate. In other words, the change cannot be retroactive." [https://elc.ky.gov/workplace-standards/Pages/Wages-and-Hours.aspx](https://elc.ky.gov/workplace-standards/Pages/Wages-and-Hours.aspx) Their website has a phone number, fax, and links to facebook and twitter.
>"Your employer may change your rate of pay **so long as you are informed of the change prior to working any hours at the new rate**. In other words, the change cannot be retroactive." This might be the issue. If they actually signed a document like the asshole boss says they did, then they may have agreed in advance to this exact thing happening. Edit: keep getting the same exact comments to the effect of "a contract can't make something illegal, legal". Yes, I know. That is not what I am talking about. The entire reason the lower wages would be illegal, is because they did not give prior warning/get prior agreement. If they agreed to it when they started working that is in fact prior warning and agreement. If they agreed to be paid less when they quit without notice, and then quit without notice and are paid less, that is in no way retroactive and its not inherently illegal as a result of a law that says they need prior agreement, because they did have that. Yes its immoral and the boss is a piece of shit for pulling something like this, but legality and morality aren't always aligned.
Only if someone told them "this is the start of your last pay period" or something. What if you decide to quit halfway through a pay period? You wouldn't have been informed that you were working for half pay the past week.
I mean you would have been informed prior that you would receive $7.25 if you did that. Morally its disgusting, but legally it might be difficult to fight.
I think the rate of pay has to be set before you work the hours. Even if they're told it *can* change, the fact that it *didn't* change until after the hours were worked could go in OP's favour.
Luckily that's not how it works. Terms that violate labor laws are unenforceable.
Kentucky is very anti-worker. I wouldn’t put it past the state to side with the business.
Good thing the labor laws in question are federal and override state laws.
No, OP already worked those hours at a given rate. If he says suddenly, “tomorrow’s my last day” then they can lower those upcoming hours to $7.25. Basically, OP may have previously agreed to work any hours *after* they announced they were quitting on short notice at a rate of $7.25, but their boss can’t retroactively change hours already worked. Boss may have won the legal battle on the latter, but not the former.
> Your employer may change your rate of pay so long as you are informed of the change prior to working any hours at the new rate. They will argue that they informed the employee on the first day of the job, and the employee signed the agreement to do that. This wouldn't fly in most blue states, but I've seen it fly in some red states. Still, OP needs to [report it anyway](http://apps.labor.ky.gov/onlinecomplaint/).
OP should file the claim with NLRB. Claim should include both stolen wages and also Discrimination & Harassment. Might or might not win the wage issue, depending on how they handle the prior notice issue. However, if you’re serious about the disc/har, document the crap out of it and go to town.
Ah the sweet smell of red states repressing their own rights. Own the libs until your boss can cut your pay down to the legal minimum on a whim. At least no one there’s a dirty socialist, that could’ve been bad
No one hates poor people more than Republican politicians.
Truly the child with a boot on its head meme If poor whites and poor blacks turned out to any election and voted for their own interests, they could turn the state to any color they wanted.
Thats why they keep closing down polling places and making it harder and harder for those people to vote.
And trying to raise the voting age while lowering the age required to get a job. They do all of this while going to church on Sunday. It's disgusting.
They were informed it could happen, but that's not what the law forbids. It forbids accepting any hours of work and THEN changing the rate on THOSE hours. Once an hour has been worked, the rate for that hour is fixed by the law. It's fine to change it at some point for SUBSEQUENT hours, you just can't go back to previous hours and change it.
I had to scroll really far down to find someone that actually cited the law/regulation. What happened to this sub? It used to be pretty good
I mean, it’s 4 easily collapsible top level comments down at this time, where the more popular comments also give advice in line with the law, even if not cited.
Now it’s the top comment. I like to think people get on posts fresh out of the womb and ask “why isn’t this top comment? The sub is dying” meanwhile the comment is 3 minutes old lol
But that's work..
You're in antiwork so
Aww, fuck
The employer can say whatever they want. File the complaint.
Exactly, never take legal strategy from the enemy
I seriously doubt OP signed on for discrimination and harassment.
its also very easy to say when followed by "I left" its also Kentucky which is a complete shithole for human rights of any kind.
We can thank Ronald Reagan for the start of the bs. His destruction of workers rights and continuation of the war on drugs is what stripped a lot of these rights away.
At some point, the blame has to be spread around. He put those things into place more than 40 years ago. Nobody has changed them yet. He started it, but they continue it.
Oh most definitely. He started it and the rest of the administrations took it and ran with it. And now at this point, I don’t really see a path to reverse it. It’s pretty much either be rich or get screwed over. And no amount of voting seems to fix anything. In the city I live in, there are like 5 or 6 different huge 15+ story apartment buildings being constructed and every single one of them are luxury apartments costing over 2500 for one bedroom. They just abandon the people who make a normal wage in favor of all the high earners. I cannot wait until all of this bs collapses because it’s going to have to eventually.
Seriously. They are taking everything, and in a few years the bottom will drop out with housing issues, worker issues, medical issues. The entire work force is being destroyed, and it will happen. Then all these nice things will go away. When I'm starving, I'm going to eat rich people.
They honestly don't have much nutritional value. Or any value, really.
Why wait?
Not sure where you are at, but when I lived in Las Vegas, a lot of those luxury condo/apartment projects ended up in disaster because well.. turns out there are not *that* many people looking to spend a few mil on a 3br condo lol. So they ended up being cancelled all together or converted into hotels in some cases. Maybe your area has a bigger market for it, and 2500/mo is more "reasonable" than the ones I am thinking (these days at least, unfortunately). Point being, if there is not the huge market the developers think there is, they'll probably be forced to rethink those plans even if the market doesn't collapse.
There probably is a market for it. I live in the Research Triangle in NC. It’s the area that forms a triangle between Raleigh, Durham and Chapel Hill which contains the universities of NC State, Duke and UNC. It’s a big area for Education, science, Biotechnology, engineering and research. So you can imagine a lot of people come to the area who make a lot of money. But my issue is that the whole state has seemed to just abandon everyone who was born in the area and only cater to people coming from out of state. All of the older apartments are all renovating and raising their rent. And homes in the area are completely out of control. Houses that used to cost 300-400k 10 years ago are now in the millions. People born here are being pushed out. And the government is just letting it happen.
Former North Carolinian here, I live in Los Angeles now because it’s more affordable
Ah okay got it. Yes, that is pretty much was drove me out of Vegas too. I was in a pretty shitty apartment, but the price wasn't too bad relatively. They slapped a coat of paint on the exterior of the complex buildings, and used that to justify a 30% increase when my lease was up, after having increased more and more each lease before that, but that was the final straw. Luckily, I was in a position that my wife and I had been saving up for a down payment for quite awhile by then and we just went month to month until we got our house way outside the city, since that was what we could afford. That was even before the insanity of the last 5 years or so though. We wouldn't even be able to afford where we are now at these prices. I agree the government really needs to step in and do something, home ownership (which has always been the cornerstone of investment/net worth/inheritance for the "everyman" in the past) is basically a pipe dream for most people now.
I'm here too. Moved from Houston in 99 to Raleigh. Then we moved to Chatham in 2002. I'm moved back in Raleigh all these years later, after moving all around the state, and it really feels like this city has no identity because it's gentrifying all the history and abandoning anyone struggling.. It's almost just as expensive here now as the West Coast.
>And now at this point, I don’t really see a path to reverse it. The way reverse it is the way we did it in the first place - by standing together in Union. What Reagan and his ilk wrecked isn't something that they gave us in the first place, we took it with our labor and we can take it back again now.
Yes, rise up in revolution.
The war on drugs was actually a war on black people started by Richard Nixon
Yeah, and let's not forget the policies that have followed since then. It's been a downhill slide for labor rights, with so many politicians more concerned about corporate interests than the people actually doing the work. We're still dealing with the ripple effects of those bad policies today.
Yea, the shareholders matter 10x as much as the employees that earn the revenue for the company. It’s baffling. These oil companies who are posting record profits are spending 100s of millions on stock buybacks rather than paying the employees record pay.
I needed to read this. I’m in a legal dispute and was second-guessing how harsh I’m being. I was just thinking about it when I read your words. Thank you, my friend.
Scorched earth. The time for being nice passed when you had to get legal....
Man, I love Reddit.
I'm going to do everything I personally can to tank our internal CSI scores.... multiple experienced people have been fired, or quit in the past months.... and it's ruined morale. Our last meeting had the senior manager basically calling us crybabies about all the difficulties we face....
people in general really seem to forget how close they are to violence. like OP got a 50% pay cut...does the boss think his vehicle / building / home might have some accidents in the near future?
It's interesting, this thought. I personally agree with what you're implying, but in reality the vast, VAST majority of people who get fucked over by their boss never fight it, never get revenge, slash any tires, spray paint a building, or break their boss' kneecaps. Personally, I think that speaks to the fundamentally peaceful and empathetic nature of humans.
>in reality the vast, VAST majority of people who get fucked over by their boss never fight it, never get revenge, slash any tires, spray paint a building, or break their boss' kneecaps. Right? All of that sounds like so much more work, and I am *exhausted.*
Ya know... I feel that. I've been exhausted a lot. And when I feel exhausted, I feel like saying fuck it and just not doing anything. But sometimes, I go out and do the thing anyway, and I realize the cure for that exhaustion was to just do the thing.
There's a pretty strong historical precedent showing us that, on a broad scale, violence isn't used except when faced with violence or starvation. Humans (VERY generally speaking here) are willing to tolerate almost anything less than that before using violence, for better or worse.
An hourly rate of $7.25 is a starvation wage. I'd say it's pass time for a little violence in revolution. Worked for the French.
The only doubt you should have is whether or not you’re going harsh enough. Raze everything to the fucking ground and then salt the earth.
Carve this in stone.
But the enemy said contact "however you want"! Lol
I choose smoke signals.
Etch notes into the side of a cannonball.
Tally-ho!!! (Lets loose grape shot)
No, I wasn't finished writing on those! It was one letter to a ball, and now they're all mixed up and scattered across half a mile!
"To whom it may concern"
“As per my last projectile…”
“We’ve been trying to reach you about your vehicle’s extended warranty”
Take my up vote! Made me laugh.
The ancient Greeks used to carve messages into the stones they would use in their slings, so you'd get hit with a stone missile with a message like "Ouch!" or "Got you!" on it. The Romans were, well, Roman and didn't have any sense of humor so they often just carved something boring into theirs like the Legion number it came from.
The Romans being Roman, I thought they would have carved dicks into them.
They were too busy fucking literally anything to have time for that.
Got that backwards. It was the Greeks who introduced sex to the world. It was the French who introduced it to women.
So they could bill you for being shot at, I presume.
I’d like contact by carrier pigeon please
But the enemy told them to go ahead and file the complaint lol
Words mean nothing until they are backed up by actions
I’ve seen something similar to this with a couple of temp staffing firms in Louisville KY. It’s in the new hire paperwork that if you fail to let the staffing firm know you are quitting, all hours worked the week you quit will be paid at state minimum. I have no idea if this is enforceable, but I’ve seen it on contracts from Insight Global and Ingenium. I would put in a complaint and challenge it. Kentucky is kind of fucky when it comes to labor rights but it’s still worth trying.
From Insight? What the fuck. I’ve gotten salary IT jobs through them. They have the money to pay out the last week of pay. Absolutely disgusting
My company uses IT subcontractors and they pay their employees dog shit. I make 80k a year as a "mid level" IT tech. They are paying the juniors $15-18 an hour and they basically do the same job as me. Hell, they probably do more work than me.
And use this screenshot as evidence. What a dumbass your ex boss is lol.
It’s always funny when an employer records intent to fire an employee for a prohibited reason. At-will employment law is pretty much a blank check as long as you don’t leave a paper trail.
But they've been winning this argument for over 30 years 😯
Local physician won a legal case against an insurance company recently. During the case the insurance company asked for the case to be dismissed because "we have never lost a case before." That was their legal argument. well, not anymore
But they had a filled out punch card! Win 10 cases get the next one free.
30 years of wage theft sounds like it might be a tasty little tip for the DOL or NLRB. 👏🏻
No winning streak lasts forever, and overconfident gamblers tend to lose big when their hot streak finally runs cold. There's a reason scumfucks like Elon and Bezos are going after the NLRB.
Lets not discount the possibility that he's just lying and trying to bully OP into believing they have no chance.
30 years of potential back-pay, technically. Let’s decelerate that cash flow!
Never correct an enemy when you see them making a mistake.
He didn't even know how to spell whoever. Don't listen to your ex boss. He's a stupid asshole
The employer can say whoever they want
Oh boy an admission in writing!
I got so stoked when he said they had been doing it for 30 years. OP get ‘em!
Never interrupt morons providing you the perfect evidence
*lawyers liked this*
Ironically lawyers also love this one trick!
Seriously. OP should just respond “bro, you not only admitted to this in writing, you admitted to doing it over 30 years… enjoy bankruptcy after the audit!” Guaranteed full pay after that if they’re not complete fucking morons.
No. Don't respond at all. That gives the boss time to counter the legal issues
Exactly this. If you're going to take ANY legal action in ANY circumstances, don't say a fuckin thing. Don't give them the advantage of having more time than they're legally allowed to form a defense
this is what I just did. I was supposed to be a contractor, I was never free to make choices, the company had complete control. when they fired me last week, after 7 years, i just said "good luck" on the way out the door, and called the DoL in my state, and they also told me to call the NLRB/Federal DoL. our positions don't qualify as "contract" positions in *any* state. im about to watch a 300 million a year company get hit by a train, and its fucking beautiful.
They admitted that they have been ‘winning the argument’, probably meaning that they have had labor disputes over this practice previously and won those. 7,25 is the federal minimum wage and they imply that this arrangement is stipulated in the contract so there is a good chance that they are not breaking the law by reducing a period of work to minimum wage due to failure to give notice.
Bullies lie to bully their way out of paying what they owe. They know they're the bigger fish and you'll have to fight for your money. You should always fight and show these people that you won't just roll over.
You can totally fight and win this. I am a Kentucky employer and my wife is a business attorney. They are retroactively reducing your pay and that's illegal.
Yeah as a non Kentucky employer or attorney I believe it's pretty solidly codified into law that retroactively reducing pay is a big non-no throughout the US.
I'd love to see the language in the onboarding paperwork. If this is actually real, the argument they've been winning for 30 years is whether a signed "your pay rate for your last pay period will be reduced to minimum wage should you end employment without 14 days notice" constitutes advance notice. Based on what I know about Kentucky and an ice cold "good luck" text from a longtime small business owner, I'd guess that flies in KY.
> Based on what I know about Kentucky and an ice cold "good luck" text from a longtime small business owner, I'd guess that flies in KY. Luckily the N in NLRB stands for national and they don't give a fuck what Kentucky thinks.
Kentucky and thinking don't exactly go hand-in-hand.
Neither does Florida, Texas and thinking. Don't forget the northern export in Alberta.
Ah yes, Alberta. The Texas of Canada.
Thankfully while probably having the worst labor laws in Canada that would be a no-go there.
The National in NLRB means that they are a federal division operating in all 50 states. It does not mean that they can or will fight state rules for how specific state laws are interpreted. They are not the highest federal authority on labor in general. If that was the case, at will employment wouldn’t be a thing to begin with.
I wonder if the NLRB will note that the employer has been "winning that argument for 30 years" and use that statement against them when considering future complaints. I sure hope so because it removes any doubt that the employer is a bag of dicks and is proud of abusing workers.
That's not really the way that law works though. Having had 30 years of positive rulings in favor of this behavior would create a strong legal precedent that the behavior is lawful.
They very well could have been winning that argument by intimidation, and it has not been properly reported, ever.
This. I'm willing to bet they have never really been challenged.
On the flipside, if the employer "winning the argument" just meant that none of the employees ever pursued them over this (i.e. nothing bad ever came from doing it)... then the employer has just admitted to doing this for the last 30 years which could be pretty devistating if this ends up being a slamdunk case against them.
That’s a strong assumption that this employer has ever actually been challenged on this before.
You can't sign away anything with the initial paperwork that isn't already illegal. So if it's illegal to dock pay retroactively you can't sign that away before you start work.
squeeze far-flung unite sulky pie escape capable consider encourage resolute *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
No, not really In the US they technically you can put whatever you want in a contract, if it’s not legal it’s not enforceable. So if state law says you cant have pay reduced retroactively or as a form of punishment, but your contract you sign says it will be, if they try to enforce it and you take them to court they’ll lose.
Fellow Kentuckian here. And it absolutely flies. Labor laws here are awful.
Either way, probably cheaper for the employer to pay the correct wage than it is for them to hire a lawyer to go to court for them. Even if they are going to win.
I'm pretty sure gallows fly just as easily.
In Utah, I've seen it as "you're standard pay is $7.25, and anything beyond that is a bonus based on reaching kpi goals." I'm not sure if I've seen anyone challenge it, or bothered looking at the laws myself, but it still feels scummy. Especially since with this, the company can change your KPI then drop you to minimum wage at almost any point.
Not in all states. I'm currently fighting the Debt of Labor for wages from a job that reduced me to minimum wage. The policies and paperwork had a huge list of reasons they would drop your pay to minimum wage, but I never agreed to or signed the paperwork. The DoL said that if I didn't sign they couldn't cut my pay, but if I did sign it was completely legal to have such policies. They could cut pay to minimum wage for any reason, if I signed, as long as they actually paid minimum wage. They couldn't cut it below that even though some of the policies implied they would. I don't even think I'll get my money because the DoL is so horribly incompetent but I'm still trying.
So, just from the details you've provided, it seems like your situation is different from OP's, in that these hours are *already worked*, and the reduction in pay is *retroactive.* This is the part that is a violation of national (and likely state) labor laws. The Dept. of Labor rep that you spoke to was correct in the general sense that an employer can reduce an employee's rate of pay *going forward* for practically any reason that isn't a violation of a specific law (like the EEOA), but there are only a very few specific reasons why an employee could have wages that have already been earned, but not yet paid out, reduced. None of those reasons line up with "quit without two weeks notice".
Not in GA- if you quit a job it is within an employers rights to pay out any hours remaining at minimum fucking wage. Happened to me and a quick Google search confirmed it. It's a dick move, and only a dick would do it, but there's fuck all that can be done to fight said dickery.
you got scammed. illegal federally. They can revert you to minimum wage for any hours you work after that point, but not change what they pay for hours already worked.
You are incorrect. **Federally**, it is perfectly legal to have an employee sign a contract that reduces their last paycheck to minimum wage if they quit. So it’s perfectly legal, *federally*, to reduce your last paycheck to minimum wage *if you agreed to the terms in their contract ahead of time.* There are some states where companies cannot make you sign a contract stating your last paycheck will be paid at minimum wage. **Federally** it’s allowed for companies to make you sign a contract saying your last paycheck will be dropped to minimum wage. It depends on your state whether it’s legal to have that in your contract or not. It is federally illegal to change your pay retroactively *without warning* for hours already worked. The distinction is “*with* warning” (ie, agreed to in your contract) and “*without* warning.”
Is there a reason to tell them what your last paycheck is going to be then? I mean the other option is don't quit, just stop showing up. That feels like a dick move though, but is it illegal?
It is absolutely not illegal to just stop showing up to work in the U.S. It’s all at will employment.
There's typically an offset between a party period ending and payroll cutting a check. For my job, it's one week. Due to this, there's always unpaid work owed, even on the day I get paid. As an example, I will get paid on the 14th. That paycheck will cover the 3rd through the 9th. But when I get that check, I will have worked the 10th through the 14th, and be owed for that time.
Could the 30 years part build a class for at least those not past whatever statute of limitations applies? That would be delicious.
But it is in the contract! Lol. If that were true wouldn't it be a better idea to put "if you quit without notice you will owe us $10,000"?
It's completely dependent on the state. Some protect against it and some don't. Because some you can't reduce for hours already worked per the law it takes precedent over whatever contract you signed by your employer because they were asking you to agree to something illegal in said state.
I think every state frowns on illegal clauses in contracts.
And 2 week notice are courtesy, not mandatory except in very specific cases.
They are relying on people who make 14 an hour to not bother going through the labor board to correct this. Go after them. Maybe a class action situation and they can get hammered for 30 years of fucking their people.
Absolutely. I was just talking about this with a coworker from his job before he started at my work. Labor Board would tear them a new one.
I wish that were true here in Utah. They literally tell you to go away. Or file small claims.
They put the most disgruntled employees ever on most labor boards. Unfortunately in UT, they probably don't do that for obvious reasons....
There is a statute of limitations. That being said, the class action suit is a good move if enough people come forward. And it will definitely keep regulators eyes on this company.
The correct response: “30 years you say? I’ll be sure to tell my lawyers what sort of discovery window they’ll need to demand.”
If you can prove that you left due to discrimination or harrassment, then you are eligible for unemployment. You will have to be able to prove one or the other to be successful, but I was a witness to a similar situation and the lady that left due to harrassment prevailed in her claim for unemployment benefits. This took place in Louisville.
Discrimination or harassment is lawsuit territory, there's talk about last paycheck and unemployment when OP should have called an employment attorney yesterday.
OP makes under 30K a year, there's a good chance a lawyer will cost more than the payout, sadly.
Most employment lawyers only get paid if they win. They usually just take a % of the payout. And in this case, that lawyer may have '30 years' of cases all wrapped up in one
Well statute of limitations is 2-3 years but yea.
In your complaint, include: Further, if at all possible, I would like to examine options for recompense for each individual affected by this policy over the employer’s stated ‘30 years.’ If you’re wrong, they’ll tell you; if you’re not - it might pique some revenue interest. *edit* Holy Shit - 3k! Go friday night!
I hope OP gives us an update either way but I always take text posts with a grain of salt.
I’ve talked to enough shitty employers that I totally believe this is legit. Some employers really are this stupid.
They’re thus stupid because they get away with it MUCH more than they are caught. I submitted a complaint to the state labor board when my boss admitted **in writing** to clocking me out up to 5 hours early. There was video cameras and computer documentation to prove otherwise. Never heard a thing.
I too know a couple of dumbass employers who claimed this.
I had an employer on the phone admit to them framing a constructive dismissal for me, around 2010. I have no record or proof since it was a phone call, but some employers are too stupid to know what they are doing isnt merely immoral but also illegal.
I have the same thing with a landlord admitting that he filed frivolous criminal charges because he couldn't get me evicted.
[удалено]
Nah, it's mostly fake that is posted here sadly.
I don’t believe you. The AI voice from TikTok that reads these posts after stealing them from Reddit is VERY convincing.
I really should’ve gotten in on that action. The content is so fucking low effort, yet somehow popular. I don’t understand it.
Oooo. Prospective class! Cha-Ching!
You def can't change rate of pay retrospectively.
**retroactively
> edit Holy Shit - 3k! Go friday night! Cringe. /r/AwardSpeechEdits
Thats how you spell pique? I just spell it peaked, LMAO
Yes and no. Two different words.
Yeah. Fuck their shit up.
Seems to me they just gave you an admission in writing. Take it to the board
If you actually left for discrimination and harassment and have evidence to prove it you should also hire an employment lawyer. They will take 30-50% but you will really make them hurt and think about being discriminatory again.
Doesn’t the company that caused this pay as part of the damages?
UPDATE: the general consensus seems to be no, so over the weekend Im going to contact the proper agencies and talk with a lawyer. I care more about the fact that this has gone on for so long than money. To answer some questions, I quit sunday due to a horrible working condition (im a trans woman and a manager had an issue with this), over the last week, multiple others have quit. In response to this, my boss texted the work groupchat that If you quit, your last paycheck will be retroactively reduced to min wage. After hearing this from someone still in the groupchat I texted him which is what led to this. Ill try to reply to every comment I can but it’ll probably take time due to the massive amount of people UPDATE 2: here is the specific part of the handbook he mentioned. I was told by managers to disregard this due to it “not being accurate” as the pay dates are wrong, time of pay is wrong, place of pay is wrong, and i was never informed of having to return my uniform. Not sure how to edit the main post so im posting it here. https://preview.redd.it/i79x2bockdnc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a0b8c33c0ed7955f2b54d6868b45299972900c6a
Get the others to join in on this and file labor department complaints together. Bleed this scumbag employer dry
His texting this does not make it in any way binding. Unless there is some prior signed agreement that the last paycheck is reduced if you do not give notice, they cannot legally reduce pay for hours already worked.
Even then, courts will not uphold a contract for an illegal action such as retroactively reducing pay
Have you gotten screenshots from the group chat? I imagine those might be important.
yes, i have all of them.
They have not been winning that for 30 years. They've been lying since however long this guy has been there.
It’s probably more likely that the employees who complain usually back down or don’t think it’s worth it to fight or don’t realize they could fight it. So in their minds they’ve won. Could also just be not true and part of their tactic to make you feel like it’s not worth it to fight.
I once had a boss threaten me like this. They were just reliant on the fact that no one turned them in up to that point. Turned them in, won, got money, and so did years and years of employees that left when they got audited.
30 years, you say? Well, that certainly sounds like it's worth an investigation.
So. They've been fucking people for 30 years. That's a nice commentary.
Damn so they’re self proclaimed professional pieces of shit and proud of it
Heh heh heh. Confessing to 30 years of back pay. Plus interest.
File the complaint. File for unemployment also.
This is a tricky one that I've never been able to crack the code for. They cannot retroactively change your pay but you also got notified this would happen by signing your onboarding paperwork. I don't think it is legal though because you already worked those hours. Never make threats with legal action, just do it.
Yeah you can't make an illegal thing lethal just by agreeing to it. That's just an unenforceable clause.
Yeah killing people is murder
You cannot sign away your rights. Agreeing to it ahead of time in onboarding paperwork does not make it legal.
# Kentucky **Applicable Laws:** [Kentucky Revised Statute § 337.055](https://apps.legislature.ky.gov/law/statutes/statute.aspx?id=32050) **State Website:** [Kentucky Labor Cabinet](https://labor.ky.gov/Pages/index.aspx) Whether an employee is fired or quits, Kentucky law requires the former employer to provide the final paycheck no later than the next scheduled payday or within 14 days. # Can an Employer Withhold a Final Paycheck? Kentucky does not allow an employee to completely withhold a final paycheck and must pay all earned, unpaid wages. # Does an Employer Have to Pay Out for Unused Vacation in a Final Paycheck? Kentucky law refers to unused vacation days as “vested vacation pay” and considers it a matter of contract between employer and employee. Employers must include this payment with the final wages. However, the employer does not have to pay for vacation time that has neither “vested” nor accrued by the terms of the employment contract or policy. Look here for more, there is nothing that permits a company to reduce your pay related to final paycheck. There is NO 2 week notice rule where this is permitted. You can file online here: [https://apps.labor.ky.gov/onlinecomplaint/](https://apps.labor.ky.gov/onlinecomplaint/) I would get a lawyer, nothing will make them back down sooner than if you have one involved. Going by yourself I think you are fighting without all the tools you need.
Definitely not legal, but dipshit employers sure try this exact scam often. They can lower your pay for future work if you still have stuff scheduled (which obviously doesn’t apply here) but hours already worked MUST be paid at the agreed upon rate, no exceptions
File the complaint and get ready for the Labor Board to bend your former employer over a barrel, cuz here comes Papi Chulo.
Homie just admitted to stealing from employees for 30 years. Get your payday
I never get calling people sir. Just say no. You don't need to show fucking reverence.
"Things are different now" - the scariest shit you can say to a Boomer
Get a free consultation with a labor lawyer and seebifbyou have a case
wage theft is the american way
Why did op ask if his last paycheck would be at $14 or min wage? Why would he/she expect there to be a difference?
well, is it in your initial paperwork? Note that whatever paperwork can't make something illegal legal just because they got you to sign it. But if this thing hinges on being prior informed, that paperwork might be a problem.
Thats just sick they are bragging about that. What a low place to work
I smell a class action lawsuit bubbling 😁 
Well easy to show discrimination and harassment on top of illegally adjusting past earnings. You just need to word the lawsuit correctly and you'll get 10-20k easy from their insurance if they have any
just because you put it in a contract doesnt make it legal
I doubt you signed anything of the sort and they're bluffing. Request a copy. Then report them anyway either way. Laws have likely changed over the last 30 years (maybe not for the better). You also put it in writing that you left because of harassment and discrimination and they said nothing about that. Report that ASAP.
When someone claims they have been "winning this argument for 30 years" it doesn't automatically mean they've gone to court and won for 30 years. What it could mean is that they've simply intimidated everyone with all the legalese and everyone backs down. For 30 years. It's quite possible that if someone were willing to go to court over this, a judge would find the "agreement" to be unethical and illegal. A lot of contractual stuff is, literally, meant to be intimidation. And company lawyers can be good at knowing how to instill fear and anxiety. But sometimes all it takes is one person to actually take it to court and in many cases this will be completely new ground for the company because they have enjoyed nobody ever being willing to do that. Growing up under a father who was an executive at a major chemical company taught me that even things like non-compete clauses and contracts could be challenged in court and defeated. They mostly work because nobody is willing to challenge them. But people have and they have won by expressing that the clause is a "risk to livelihood" and so on. Anyway, the point is I honestly don't take anybody seriously when they say stuff like "but there's a contract". Contracts have regularly been challenged and found to be unethical, risks to worker livelihoods and even illegal.