[deleted]
I can clearly read the name you attempted to black out.
[deleted]
Submitted 19 hours ago by Lilkub@lemmy.world to nostupidquestions@lemmy.world
Comments
protist@mander.xyz 19 hours ago
The Oregon Employment Department is likely to take a different stance than he portrays. My guess is he didn’t claim you as an employee and never paid any of the taxes he owed on your employment. Did you file your taxes at all while you were employed there? Did you ever get a W2?
Rivalarrival@lemmy.today 17 hours ago
I’m guessing he owes about $1232 in employment taxes…
Shirasho@lemmings.world 19 hours ago
They are not allowed to charge you for this, and it was not made clear in any way that your former boss would charge you. Any lawyer worth their salt would laugh this out of court.
In many areas they are also legally obligated to give you the information you requested free of charge.
henchmannumber3@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
You should definitely remove this when you get a chance because you don’t want him to allege that you’re releasing his information since the screenshot does contain identifying information.
But that said, I would confirm that he’s previously provided everything listed under ORS 652.610 because that’s what he’s legally required to provide for each paystub. If he hasn’t, then he’s been in violation of the law and you may be able to pursue the private right of action listed in the statute. But you’ll want to consult with the Oregon Bureau of Labor & Industries and possibly a lawyer.
One thing that is especially odd, beyond the dubious claim of having spoken to a lawyer, is that he claims to have already compiled the documentation. Why would he spend 8.8 hours doing the work of compiling documentation if he isn’t already certain you’re going to pay him the $1232? That’s not logical. He likely hasn’t done the work and if it actually did take that long, it would be due to his choice of poor document management. If he had digital records, it definitely wouldn’t take that long and it’s his choice on how he managements his documents.
deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz 16 hours ago
You are being scammed.
RestlessNotions@sh.itjust.works 17 hours ago
The IRS might be very interested in what your ex employer has to say. If he hasn’t been properly withholding taxes, you’ll ultimately be responsible. And obv don’t pay a dime. You might actually be looking at some windfall for whatever fines BOLI ends up charging him.
In my experience, most employers, and landlords, count on you not knowing your rights and their status as authority to get away with shit like this.
litchralee@sh.itjust.works 18 hours ago
The practice of handwritten paystubs is deeply suspicious, in an era where even the most basic of business payroll software can easily generate and print out a paystub directly. But I want to focus on the request for $1232 for 8.8 hours of apparent effort.
That divides out into an hourly rate of $140 per hour! Such a high rate is the near-exclusive domain of a lawyer’s billable hours, as suggested from this 2002 survey by the Oregon State Bar. It is patently absurd to request the services of a lawyer for 8 hours when all it would have taken is an hour for a skilled accountant, or two hours if performed by even the most confused of small-business entrepreneurs.
Unless your employment records extended for decades across multiple corporate entities that went through mergers and acquisitions, that is an unreasonable charge. Your former employer may be confusing the “reasonable fee” provisions for preparing documents persuant to a subpoena.
Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de 16 hours ago
🤭it is less than what a standard working hour costs here in Switzerland
BCsven@lemmy.ca 16 hours ago
They are a vet, so probably their hourly rate
Evotech@lemmy.world 16 hours ago
Dudes been talking to chatgpt
argueswithidiots@lemmy.world 18 hours ago
This guy’s a fucking veterinarian?? Ha!
chuso@fedia.io 12 hours ago
I cannot provide advice about this specific case. But as a general advice to everyone, unionize before it's too late. By the time you realize that your boss has been fooling you for one year in a way that will make it harder for you to claim a resolution, it may be too late. Don't wait for problems to appear, unionize sooner to get advice and prevent things like this from happening in the first place.
IHeartBadCode@fedia.io 17 hours ago
Sadly your employer is likely in the right here. Oregon just recently passed a law requiring what you have indicated. Senate Bill 906. It goes into effect January 1, 2026. However, before that point in time, employers are not legally required to spell out anything about your employment to you at any given point so long as they fulfill the requirements to give you a timely W-2 when tax time rolls around.
As for the $1232, that is quite the amount and I would not see that as reasonable. However, it really depends on if you want to call their bluff on attorney advisement. The letter looks like something they blew out their own printer, but doctors are petty as fuck and will drag your ass into court over six pennies, or at least in the time I've ever known them.
However, take none of this as legal advice. More like a suggestion and you should absolutely look at whatever your local laws are. Oregon JUST got on the bus about requiring employers to provide exactly the documentation you are requesting. I know, but some States still don't have a legal requirement to provide paystubs. And Federal law absolutely doesn't require that, they only require the whole "things you need to fill out your taxes". In many of the States that don't require it, if your employer does hand it off to you, it puts a ton of responsibility on it being correct on the employer. So some will literally go to a CPA for this one off, which is a much higher rate than a regular book keeper.
But yeah, your Government just recently addressed this, but it doesn't go into effect until next year. So sadly that new law does not help you here. However, you should absolutely speak with your department of labor to see if there are avenues you can take.
henchmannumber3@lemmy.world 15 hours ago
I’m not reading that link the same way you are. It seems like from the summary of the bill, that is just calling for more transparency in paystub information. But the employer is already required to provide a significant number of fields on a paystub under ORS 652.610. So from my reading of the OP’s account, their boss hadn’t provided all of what is listed under ORS 652.610 and there is a private right of action on that statute.
mienshao@lemmy.world 19 hours ago
You should repost and actually remove the names, I can see both…
Also, ignore the letter. That person is unhinged—you don’t owe them shit. Wait for the state DOL to get back to you for next steps, and keep calling them if you don’t hear back.
Onomatopoeia@lemmy.cafe 18 hours ago
Hell, forward that to DOL - they’ll surely take a dim view of what that jackass is doing.