Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) WORKERS THAT WERE DECEIVED

(a) (Mishnah): Reuven hired workers; they tricked each other - they are only entitled to complaints;
(b) Reuven hired a donkey-driver or wagon-driver to bring wood (for a canopy) or flutes for a wedding or funeral, or workers to take his flax from the water it was soaking in, or anything which entails a loss (if not done immediately), and they retracted:

1. If there are no other workers there (to do the job for the proper wage), he hires others for more (and those who retracted must pay the excess), or tricks the retractors into working.

(c) Reuven hired workers and they retracted - they have the lower hand; if Reuven retracts, he has the lower hand.
(d) Anyone who deviates or retracts, he has the lower hand.
(e) (Gemara) Opinion #1: The first clause does not say that they retracted, rather, they (the workers) tricked each other.
(f) Question: What is the case?
(g) Reuven told Shimon (an agent) to hire workers, and he tricked them.
(h) Question: What is the case?

1. If Reuven offered four (Zuz per day), and Shimon told them three - why do they have complaints, they accepted to work for three!

(i) Answer #1: Reuven offered three, and Shimon told them four.

1. Question: What is the case?

i. If Shimon promised to pay them himself - he must give them (the extra Zuz)!
ii. (Beraisa): Levi hired David to work for himself, and set him to work on what is really Yehudah's property - Levi pays David, and can demand that Yehudah pay him the benefit he received.

2. Answer: The case is, Shimon said that Reuven will pay them.
3. Question: We should see what workers normally receive! (If they receive four, Reuven must pay four, as the Beraisa teaches.)
4. Answer #1: Some workers receive three, others receive four; they may have complaints, for they could have looked to find someone that pays four.
5. Answer #2: (Regular workers receive three) - these workers do not usually work for others, they only agreed because they were told they would be paid four.
6. Answer #3: These were regular workers, they normally receive three - because they were told they would be paid four, they worked extra hard.
7. Question: We should see if they worked extra hard!
8. Answer: The case is, they dug a trench around a field.
9. Question: We can see how they dug it!
10. Answer: It is filled with water.

(j) Answer #2: Really Reuven offered four, and Shimon told them three;

1. They have complaints, for Shimon prevented them from receiving four.

(a) The following is obvious: If Reuven offered three, and Shimon told them four, and the workers said 'we will work for what Reuven said' - they (did not mean to accept less than four, they) intended for the possibility that Reuven offered more than four.
(b) Question: If Reuven offered four, and Shimon told them three, and the workers said 'we will work for what Reuven said' - what is the law?

1. Did they believe Shimon, and accept to work for three?
2. Or - did they suspect that Reuven may have offered more, and want to get what he offered?

(c) Answer: We learn from the following.

1. (Rav Nachman): Leah made Levi an agent to bring her Get (she is only divorced when she receives it), he told her husband (Yehudah) 'I am an agent to receive her Get (she is divorced through my getting it)'; Yehudah said 'Take it as she said' - even when she gets it, she is not divorced.
2. This shows that Yehudah relies on what Levi said - if he meant what Leah really said, Levi would be an agent to bring it, she would be divorced when she gets it!

(d) Rejection (Rav Ashi): We could have made a valid inference if Rav Nachman had taught the following case:

1. Leah made Levi an agent to receive her Get, he told Yehudah 'I am an agent to bring her Get'; Yehudah said 'Take it as she said':

i. If Rav Nachman would say that she is divorced when he gets it, this would prove that Yehudah relies on what she said;
ii. If Rav Nachman would say that she is divorced when she gets it, this would prove that Yehudah relies on what Levi said;

2. But from the case Rav Nachman actually taught, we cannot learn - she is not divorced because Levi only agrees to be an agent to receive, not to bring!

(a) Opinion #2: In the Mishnah, the employer or workers retracted; the Tana calls this 'tricked'.
(b) (Beraisa): Reuven hired workers; they tricked him or he tricked them - the hurt party only has a right to complaints;

1. This is when the workers did not go to the worksite - but if donkey-drivers or workers went and there was nothing to carry or the ground was wet and unworkable, the employer pays their full wage;
2. However, there is a difference between carrying a burden and coming without a burden - they are paid what a worker would want on condition that he will be idle.

(c) The hurt party only has a right to complaints - this is if they did not yet begin working; but if they began, we estimate the value of what they did:

1. If Shimon was hired to harvest the crop or weave a garment for eight Dinarim, and he quit after doing half - if what he did is worth six Dinarim, he only gets four; he may finish the job to get eight.

i. If his work is worth four (Gra's text - two) Dinarim, he gets two.

2. R. Dosa says, we evaluate the work remaining: if it will cost six Dinarim to finish, he only gets two; he may finish the job to get eight.

i. If it will cost four (Gra's text - two) Dinarim to finish, he gets four.

(d) This is the law when there is no loss (if the work is not finished immediately);

1. If there is a loss, he hires others for more (and Shimon must pay the excess), or he tricks Shimon.

i. Tricking him: he may say, originally I promised one Sela - now I offer you two (but he will only pay one).

2. One may pay other workers an extra 40 or 50 at Shimon's expense.
3. This is if there are no other workers there (to do the job for the proper wage); if there are other workers there, he hires them; he only has a right to complaints against Shimon.

(a) A Chacham was reciting the above Beraisa: He pays him his full wage...
(b) Rav: I would only pay him as an idle worker is paid!
(c) Question: The Beraisa explicitly says, there is a difference between carrying a burden...!
(d) Version #1 - Answer: The Tana did not finish before Rav argued.
(e) Version #2 - Answer: The Tana did finish; Rav said that he would not even pay him anything.
(f) Question: But the Beraisa says that he is paid as an idle worker!
(g) Answer: That is when they had not seen the worksite the night before (the employer should have told them not to come); Rav says that he would not pay them if they saw it, for they should have realized that it might be wet and unworkable.
(h) (Rava): Reuven hired workers to dig trenches and it rained (so this cannot be done) - if they saw the worksite the night before, it is their loss; if not, Reuven must pay them as idle workers.