[Avodah] Paying your workers on time using electronic payments

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, Jun 24, 2019 at 10:00:44PM -0400, Akiva Miller wrote:
: I would suggest that there is one small difference between bytes of data
: and fiat currency: Granted that fiat currency doesn't have any inherent
: value, but it at least a tangible object. Being a tangible object, even if
: it is a worthless one, it is still possible to pick it up physically and
: perform some sort of kinyan on.

: I'm not at all familiar with the halachos of performing kinyanim on
: worthless objects, but I'd presume that it's at least a mashehu better than
: the kinyanim one might perform on intangible bytes.

Well there is a well-discussed precedent -- shetaros. The paper and
ink of the shetar itself could well be worth less than shaveh perutah.
And yet for mamunus, the present value of a shetar chov is worth the
value to be paid times the probability of collecting. And for qiddushin,
the qiddushin are only chal if the paper and ink are shaveh perutah
(AhS CM 66:18).

Also, AhS se'if 9 says that paper currency has all the laws of kesef.
And if the note isn't publicly tradable, then a qinyan chalifin wouldn't
work because the ink and paper of the note aren't shaveh perutah. Seems
that the rationale is about tradability, not whether the note is backed
or fiat. Or maybe you need the hitztarfus -- only money that is a shetar
chov backed with something of value AND is publically tradable is kesef.


: Next topic...

: I would like to distinguish between two different kinds of credit card
: transactions. One is the ordinary purchase of an object in a store. I
: choose my object, somebody presses buttons and/or swipes a card, and the
: sale is complete, with a debit from my account and a credit on theirs. My
: ability to challenge the transaction later, and "claw my money back" is
: totally irrelevant, because even if I am successful, it would be a separate
: transaction....

Would it? My bank and the counterparty's bank undo the transaction at
my say-so, even if without their involvement. How could the retrieval
of money qualify as a second qinyan if they weren't maqneh?

Either you would have to argue that disputing a charge is assur, or
that it's a tenai or otherwise incorporated into the first qinyan.
No?



On Tue, Jun 25, 2019 at 08:07:31AM +0300, Marty Bluke via Avodah wrote:
: After thinking about it and seeing R' Shternbuch (3:470 Teshuvos VHanagos)
: I think they are saying something else...
: However, I don't think anyone is saying that you can be mekayem the mitzva
: of byomo on a different day even if the worker agreed.

Thank you for the correction.

I'm still left confused, though, why the SA spends so much space telling
me how to avoid the issur in ways that still don't fulfill the chiyuv.
Bitul asei isn't as bad as breaking a lav, still... how could it not
even point out that the employer wouldn't be fulfilling their chiyuv?!

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger                 In the days of our sages, man didn't sin unless
http://www.aishdas.org/asp   he was overcome with a spirit of foolishness.
Author: Widen Your Tent      Today, we don't do a mitzvah unless we receive
- https://amzn.to/2JRxnDF    a spirit of purity.      - Rav Yisrael Salanter