It would appear that if they overpay on the final paycheck, tough shit.
Please check my reading--the link seems to indicate that future wages can be reduced to recoup an error, but that the money can't be collected back directly. So, it suggests that the final paycheck is overpaid, Codemasters would have to reduce future wages temporarily to make up for the imbalance, but there are no future wages (lol), so Codemasters cannot seek recourse.
Am I reasonable in this interpretation?
~
As an aside, it irks me that an employer is given any rights in this regard--if you can't do basic HR arithmetic (especially since they sure as hell aren't doing anything as exacting as code or what have you) I deserve the balance of your ignorance.
If a company overpays for a part and then finds out that the part went on sale right after purchase, they eat the cost.
If a company brings a product to market and underprices it and loses money, they eat the cost.
If a company hires someone for contract work and overpays them--pays them more than is reasonable for the work done, but pays them what was promised--then they eat the cost.
If a company decides to take out a chunk from its petty cash fund and burn it to make smores over, they eat the cost.
So, why the hell isn't an overpayment in HR considered something similar? Why isn't it a free-market "you can't do math accurately" tax?
This kind of thing applies generally to all overpayment of contracts. The advice I've been given by employment lawyers in the past about this kind of thing is that once you leave, it becomes a normal debt and they are free to chase you about it however they choose. Usually this results in you offering to pay them a small some every month with no interest until it's all paid back. They don't want to go to court either after all.
Please check my reading--the link seems to indicate that future wages can be reduced to recoup an error, but that the money can't be collected back directly. So, it suggests that the final paycheck is overpaid, Codemasters would have to reduce future wages temporarily to make up for the imbalance, but there are no future wages (lol), so Codemasters cannot seek recourse.
Am I reasonable in this interpretation?
~
As an aside, it irks me that an employer is given any rights in this regard--if you can't do basic HR arithmetic (especially since they sure as hell aren't doing anything as exacting as code or what have you) I deserve the balance of your ignorance.
If a company overpays for a part and then finds out that the part went on sale right after purchase, they eat the cost.
If a company brings a product to market and underprices it and loses money, they eat the cost.
If a company hires someone for contract work and overpays them--pays them more than is reasonable for the work done, but pays them what was promised--then they eat the cost.
If a company decides to take out a chunk from its petty cash fund and burn it to make smores over, they eat the cost.
So, why the hell isn't an overpayment in HR considered something similar? Why isn't it a free-market "you can't do math accurately" tax?
(genuinely curious)