- Sections
- P'ninat Mishpat
192
Ruling:There are two halachic questions to look into in this case: 1. Were the basic elements that make a deal binding reached? 2. Are there grounds to void the sale based on ona’ah (mispricing)?
There is agreement that pl started working (Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 333:1). The beginning of work is a kinyan (finalization of an agreement) in regards to the laws of a po’el (a hired worker). There is a machloket among the poskim whether beginning of work is a kinyan regarding a kablan (one who is paid by the job) (see Machaneh Ephrayim, Sechirut Poalim 5). In our case, although pl was paid by the job, he has elements of a po’el because he accepted upon himself a specific work schedule and also changed his other work responsibilities in order to enable him to do the job as requested. Also, payment by check is considered giving money and this is a form of kinyan for workers (Netivot Hamishpat 333:1). So there is certainly the basis for obligation to pay pl’s salary.
Def’s claim of mispricing is not valid for a few reasons. First, it has not been substantiated that there is a significant enough divergence from the standard price. While def showed that they received a lower estimate from someone else, that does not prove ona’ah, as differences in quality in work can account for differences in price. Furthermore, the difference between the estimates (21,000 to 19,000) is beneath the sixth needed to make a claim of ona’ah. Also, the laws of ona’ah do not apply to a po’el. While they apply to a kablan, that is not so when the work was done to land or that which is attached to land (see Shulchan Aruch, CM 227:33).
When an employer backs out of an agreement and the worker is not able to find replacement work, it is considered a loss for the worker, and he gets paid partially (we subtract from the amount agreed upon to take into account the worker’s vacation time). This is so even for a kablan in a case like this, where pl changed around his schedule to enable him to do the work. In this case, pl is entitled to the expected earnings from the job minus the amount of any other job he was able to find in its place. 2,100 shekels is a reasonable estimation.

P'ninat Mishpat (762)
Various Rabbis
245 - The Return of Equipment that Was Given or Lent
246 - Closing the Door on the Window Maker
247 - An Apartment that Was Barely Livable
Load More

P'ninat Mishpat: Unpaid Fees of a No-Show to Beit Din
based on ruling 84052 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Shevat 5784

Returning Pre-Payment for a Rental
Various Rabbis | Shvat 5768

P'ninat Mishpat: What is Included in Costs of the Elevator?
based on ruling 82159 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Tishrei 5785

P'ninat Mishpat: Questions of Changing Work Orders
based on ruling 79044 of the Eretz Hemdah-Gazit Rabbinical Courts
Beit Din Eretz Hemda - Gazit | Shevat 5784
Parasht Yitro
Towards Nationhood
Rabbi Zalman Baruch Melamed

Redeeming a Firstborn Donkey!
Rabbi Yirmiyohu Kaganoff | 5770

Parashat “Shema” and Parashat “Vehaya Im Shamoa”
Parashat Ekev
Rabbi S. Yossef Weitzen | Av 5761
Days on Which Tachanun Is Not Recited
Chapter Twenty One-Part Three
Rabbi Eliezer Melamed | 5775

How the Sacrifices Made the Torah More Approachable
Rabbi Mordechai Hochman | 16 Shvat 5785

Ask the Rabbi: Amen on a Non-Beracha
Rabbi Daniel Mann | Shevat 5785
