Bava Metzia - Daf 76
- השוכר את האומנין "והטעו זה את זה"
The sixth Perek begins: השוכר את האומנין – If one hires craftsmen, והטעו זה את זה – and they deceive each other, אין להם זה על זה אלא תרעומת – they have nothing but complaints against one another, but no monetary claim. Since the Mishnah does not say "חזרו" – they reneged, expressing the retraction of one party, but “they deceived one another,” it implies one worker deceiving another, i.e., the employer instructed someone to hire workers for him, and that person misled them about their pay rate. Two cases are suggested: (1) The employer offered to pay three zuz, but the worker told them the employer would pay them four (and that the employer is responsible for their pay). Three explanations are given why they are not entitled to the higher amount, yet have a legitimate complaint against the hiring worker. (2) The employer offered four, but the hiring worker told them three, and although they agreed to the rate, their complaint against him is for transgressing אל תמנע טוב מבעליו – Do not withhold good from its owner. Later, the Gemara demonstrates that the Mishnah can mean that one of the two parties retracted, despite the Mishnah’s language.
- כמה שאמר בעל הבית
If an employer told the hiring worker to offer three zuz, and he told the workers they would receive four, and they responded: כמו שאמר בעל הבית – “We agree to the offer as the employer said,” their intent certainly was to agree to the higher rate of four. The Gemara asks, if the employer told the hiring worker to offer four, and he offered them three, and they responded, "כמו שאמר בעל הבית", how is this interpreted? Are they saying: מהימנת לן דהכי אמר בעל הבית – we trust you that the employer said this, in which case they are only entitled to the three they agreed to, or do we say אדיבורא דבעל הבית קא סמכי – they are relying on the word of the employer, and they are saying that they do not trust the hiring worker’s offer, and insist on the employer’s actual offer, so they would receive the four he offered?
The Gemara attempts a resolution from Rav’s ruling, where a woman appoints someone to bring her get as a shaliach להולכה – for delivery to her, and the shaliach tells the husband he was sent to be a shaliach לקבלה – for acceptance, and the husband responded, “This get is for you as she said,” the get is not effective even after she receives it, because he is not even a שליח להולכה. This indicates that the husband does rely on the shaliach’s word. The Gemara rejects the proof.
- הלכו, התחילו במלאכה
A Baraisa teaches that although workers have only complaints against an employer who reneges, this is only if he reneged before the workers traveled to their job. אבל הלכו חמרים ולא מצאו תבואה – But if hired donkey drivers (hired for the day) went to the arranged location and did not find grain to deliver for him, פועלין ומצאו שדה כשהיא לחה – or workers hired to hoe his field went and found the field damp, and work could not be done, he must pay them for the entire day, adjusted to the rate of פועל בטל.
The Baraisa teaches that although workers hired by the job have no monetary claim if they did not begin work, אבל התחילו במלאכה – but if they began their work, and they reneged, שמין להן מה שעשו – we assess for them what they already did, and he must pay for it. The Tanna Kamma says they are paid according to how much work was completed, even if the completion will cost the employer more. Rebbe Dosa says: שמין להן מה שעתיד להעשות – we assess for them according to [the work] that remains to be performed, and that amount is deducted from their wages. Rashi notes that our Mishnah follows this opinion.
