Bava Metzia 77a — the Talmud in English

The loss

of losing the day of their labor, the loss

of the workers

is his. And they cannot claim against him, since it was on this condition that they hired themselves to him.

But if

he did not inspect the field from the previous evening, the loss is the employer’s

—and he

gives them

wages

as an idle worker,

as explained above.

And Rava said: This one,

one who owns a field,

who hires workers

who hired workers

to draw water,

to draw water in order to irrigate his fields,

and

rain came,

and rain fell, and he no longer requires their labor,

the loss of the workers

is his, for it was on this condition that they were hired, since it is common that rain will come and there will be no need for them.

But this is not so

if a river came,

a river came and flooded the channels of his field, and he no longer needs to draw water for irrigation, since this is not so common, and they were not hired on this understanding, and it was incumbent upon the employer to inform them of this; therefore, if he did not inform them, it is

the loss of the employer, and he gives them

wages

as an idle worker.

And Rava said: This one who hires workers to draw water, and the river stopped,

the river from which they drew the water—its waters stopped

in the middle of the day,

in the middle of the day, and they cannot complete their work,

if it is not customary for it to stop,

if it is not the way of the river for its waters to stop,

the loss of the workers

is his, since even the employer did not know and could not have informed them, and their fortune caused it.

But if it is customary for it to stop

its waters,

if

the workers are

residents of the town,

residents of the city, who know that it is the practice of the river to stop at times,

the loss of the workers

is his, because it was on this condition that they were hired by him.

But if the workers

are not residents of the town, the loss is the employer’s, because

he should have informed them of this.

And Rava said: This one who hires workers for work,

one who hires workers for one day for a particular task,

and they finish the work in the middle of the day,

and they completed this work in the middle of the day, then:

if he has

if the employer has something for them to do during the rest of the day,

work that is easier than it,

work that is easier than it,

he gives it to them,

it is his right to compel them to continue and work at it.

Alternatively,

and likewise if the employer has work

of its kind,

neither more difficult nor easier,

he assigns it to them,

he has the right to compel them to do it.

But

if he has only work

more difficult than it, he does not assign it to them.

He cannot compel them to work, since they were not hired for work this difficult.

And he gives them their full wage,

as though they had worked the entire day.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

But why

does he pay them full payment

and not give them as an idle worker!

As was explained.

And we answer:

When Rava said

that “he gives them their full wage,”

it is with regard to the laborers

porters

of Mehoza, for if they do not work, they become weak,

they become weakened.

And for this reason he does not deduct from their wages, since they prefer to work the entire day rather than sit idle.

The Master said,

we learned above in the beraita that, for contractors who retract after beginning the work,

the value of what they have done is assessed for them. How so? If it was worth six dinars, he gives them a sela.

And although the employer will not find workers to complete his work for less than six dinars, and it follows that he loses two dinars, nevertheless he gives them a sela.

And the reason is:

the Sages hold that the hand of a worker is uppermost.

And he is always permitted to retract. As it is written: “For they are My servants,” and not servants to servants [Kiddushin 22b].

We further learned in the beraita:

Or they shall complete their work and take two sela’im.

And we ask: If they complete their work,

it is obvious

that they receive two sela’im, since they performed their work, and therefore he will certainly give them according to what they stipulated at the outset?

And we answer:

It is necessary, for the work became more expensive, and the workers said,

they retracted.

And the employer went

and appeased them,

he appeased them until they agreed to return to their work.

You might say,

since the hand of a worker is uppermost,

they can say to him

the workers can now say to the employer:

When we were appeased, it was with the understanding that you would add to our wage

on the understanding that you would add to our wage and pay us for the second half of the work at the rate of the wage of a worker at the time when we agreed to return to your work.

It teaches us

that perhaps you were appeased

with the understanding that we would trouble ourselves for you with food and drink.

с расчетом, что мы потрудимся для вас, угощая вас едой и питьем.

It was further explained in the beraita:

If [the work] is worth a sela

that the employer will spend in order to complete his work,

he gives them a sela.

And we ask:

It is obvious!

For they caused him no loss at all. And we answer:

It is necessary, for the work was cheap at the outset,

at the time he initially hired them, and these workers did not agree to hire themselves to him at the wage fixed in the market,

and

for this reason

he hired them for an additional dinar,

he hired them for one dinar more than the ordinary wage.

And in the end, it became more expensive,

the market price of workers

and it stood at an additional dinar,

the ordinary wage of workers rose by a dinar, and the ordinary wage became equal to the wage that he had initially agreed upon with these workers.

You might say, they could say to him

the workers could now say:

You said to us, “An additional dinar,”

at the time when you initially hired us.

And if so, even now you must add more to us than the wage of other workers,

it teaches us that he said to them: When I said to you

“I will pay you”

an additional dinar,

since

you were not established for yourselves.

That is, it was not fitting for you to perform work for a small wage, and therefore I agreed to pay more.

But

now, you are established for yourselves.

You have already agreed to this amount. What difference does it make that the other workers too are hired for this amount?

We further learned there:

Rabbi Dosa says: The value of what is yet to be done is assessed for them. If it was worth six dinars, he gives them a shekel.

And the reason is:

he holds that the hand of a worker is lowermost.

And for this reason he must bear the employer’s loss, as was explained.

We further learned there:

Or they shall complete their work and take two sela’im.

And the Gemara asks:

It is obvious!?

As above.

And we answer:

It is necessary, for the work became cheap,

the wage of workers.

And the employer retracted,

the employer retracted from hiring them,

and the workers went and appeased him.

You might say,

since Rabbi Dosa’s position is that the hand of a worker is lowermost,

he can say to them

the employer can say to them: I agreed

on the understanding that you would deduct from your wages for me,

that you would reduce the wage for your work.

It teaches us

that although the hand of a worker is lowermost, he pays them two sela’im as their wage, since

they said to him:

You agreed

on the understanding that we would perform fine work for you.

We further learned in the beraita:

A sela: he gives them a sela.

And we ask:

It is obvious!?

For they caused him no loss.

And we answer:

Rav Huna son of Rav Natan said: It is necessary, for they reduced

the workers

for him

the employer

by a dinar at the outset,

at the time he initially hired them, they reduced one dinar from their wage for him.

And in the end the work became cheap,

the wage of a worker in the market was reduced and became fixed at the wage that they had agreed upon with him.

You might say,

the employer should now claim:

You said to me, “One dinar less,”

and therefore, even now,

I will give you one dinar less.

It teaches us that they said to him

the workers:

When we said to you

at the outset

“One dinar less,”

it was because

you were not established for yourself;

you did not agree to give a sela. But

now, you are established for yourself.

And this does not depend upon the amount of the wage of a worker in the market.

Rav said: The halakha is according to Rabbi Dosa,

that the hand of anyone who retracts is lowermost.

And the Gemara raises an objection:

But did Rav say this?

But Rav said: A worker may retract even in the middle of the day.

And if so, why is his hand lowermost? After all, he acted according to the law.

And if you would say

to distinguish and say:

Rabbi Dosa distinguishes for him between hiring,

a day-worker,

and contracting,

one who accepts a particular task upon himself; and a day-worker is permitted to retract [because “They are My servants,” and not servants to servants] even according to Rabbi Dosa. Only a contractor is not permitted to retract, and if he retracts, his hand is lowermost [because this is not so much the manner of servitude

It is impossible to distinguish in this manner!

For

does he distinguish for him

for Rabbi Dosa between hiring and contracting!?

But it was taught in a beraita: One who hires a worker, and at midday the worker heard

the worker

that a relative of his had died,

a relative for whose death he is obligated to mourn,

or a fever seized him,

the worker became ill,