Commentary for Bava Metzia 153:14

אמר רב הלכה כר' דוסא ומי אמר רב הכי והאמר רב פועל יכול לחזור בו אפילו בחצי היום וכי תימא שאני ליה לרבי דוסא בין שכירות לקבלנות ומי שאני ליה והתניא השוכר את הפועל ולחצי היום שמע שמת לו מת או שאחזתו חמה אם שכיר הוא

'If it is worth a <i>sela'</i>, he must pay them a <i>sela'</i>.' Is this not obvious? — This is necessary only if labour was cheap originally [when he hired them], whilst he engaged them for a <i>zuz</i> above [the usual cost], but subsequently<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., by the time they had done half the work. ');">¹²</span> labour appreciated and stood at more than a <i>zuz</i>; I might think that they can plead. 'You promised us a <i>zuz</i> above [the usual price]; give us a <i>zuz</i> more [than was stipulated, since that is now the usual wage].' We are therefore told that he [the employer] may answer them,' When did I promise you an extra <i>zuz</i>, only when you did not agree;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To work for less than a sela'. ');">¹³</span> but now you have agreed.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To receive it. I cannot pay more, as that is my maximum. ');">¹⁴</span> 'R. Dosa said: That which still remains to be done is assessed [thus]: if it be worth six <i>denarii</i>, he pays them a <i>shekel</i>.' In his opinion, the labourer is at a disadvantage.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' v. p. 437. n. 8. ');">¹⁵</span> 'Or they can complete their work and receive two <i>sela's</i>.' Is this not obvious? — This is necessary only when labour costs diminished, and the employer retracted; whereupon the labourers went and persuaded him. I might think, he can say to them, '[I re-engaged you] on the understanding that you allow a rebate on your wages': therefore we are taught that they can answer him, 'It was on the understanding that we perform our work particularly well.' 'If a <i>sela'</i>, he must pay them a <i>sela'</i>.' Is this not obvious? — R. Huna. the son of R. Nathan, said: It is necessary only in a case where they [the labourers] contracted for a <i>zuz</i> below [the usual wage] in the first place, and subsequently labour costs fell. I might think that [the employer can plead.] 'You agreed with me for a <i>zuz</i> less [than usual], hence I will give you a <i>zuz</i> less;'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Than the present price, hence, a zuz below the agreed figure. ');">¹⁶</span> so we are taught that they can reply. 'We agreed upon a <i>zuz</i> less only when you would not agree [to pay the full price]; but now you have agreed.' Rab said: The <i>halachah</i> is as R. Dosa. But did Rab really rule thus? Did not Rab say: A worker can retract even in the middle of the day? And should you answer, R. Dosa draws a distinction between time work and piece work,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a labourer engages himself by the day or week, he can retract and lose nothing; but if he contracts to do a particular piece, he is thereby at a disadvantage; for the reason of the first (stated supra 10a, q.v.) does not apply to a contractor, since not being tied he is his own master. ');">¹⁷</span> [I can rejoin,] Did he really admit a distinction? Has it not been taught: If one engages a labourer, and in the middle of the day he [the labourer] learns that he has suffered a bereavement,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'one had died unto him', viz., one of the relatives for whom a week of mourning must be observed, during which all labour is forbidden. ');">¹⁸</span> or is smitten with fever: then if he is a time worker,

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 153:14. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.