Bava Metzia, Chapter 6, Mishnah 2. In this Mishnah, we discuss a case where a worker quits his job in the middle and leaves his employer with an inconvenience. We are not dealing here with a 'davar ha'aved', meaning an immediate monetary loss, but only with an inconvenience: the worker is not carrying out what was agreed upon with him from the outset.
The worker's right to back out:
It is a rule that a worker, even if he committed to working a full day, may stop whenever he wants, and the employer has no financial claim against him for the inconvenience caused to him (provided it is not a 'davar ha'aved'). The reason for this: Jews are not slaves. The verse says "For the Children of Israel are servants to Me" - they are servants to the Holy One, Blessed is He, and a Jew is not a slave to flesh and blood. Therefore, a person cannot be forced to work, and he has the right to say "I am not working", even in the middle of a project.
However, the question remains how his wages are calculated. On this, the Mishnah says: "Hasocher et ha'umanin vechazru bahen, yadan al hatachtonah" - One who hires artisans and they back out, they are at a disadvantage. This refers to a situation of contracting: a person hires a carpenter to make him six chairs for his dining room, at a price of one hundred dollars per chair - six hundred dollars in total. In the middle of the work, after making three chairs, the carpenter says: "I am tired of this, I am stopping". He backed out of the agreement, and therefore he is at a disadvantage - he is the weaker and losing side.
Let us assume that the homeowner is forced to hire a new carpenter to complete the remaining three chairs, and he demands four hundred dollars. There are two ways to calculate what is due to the first carpenter:
According to his portion of the work: He completed half of the work, three chairs out of six, and therefore he should receive half of the agreed-upon amount - three hundred dollars.
According to the remainder: The agreement was for six hundred dollars; the homeowner paid four hundred to the second carpenter due to the first one's departure, and only two hundred dollars remain.
The meaning of the rule "they are at a disadvantage" is that the one who backs out receives the lower amount of the two. In this scenario, the first carpenter will receive only two hundred dollars, and not three hundred.
When the homeowner is the one who backs out:
The law also works in the opposite direction. If in the middle of the work the homeowner finds a cheaper carpenter, and says to the original carpenter after three chairs: "Stop here, I am bringing someone else" - the homeowner is at a disadvantage. Let us assume the second carpenter makes the last three chairs for two hundred dollars. Here too, it can be calculated in two ways: according to the remainder - four hundred dollars to the first carpenter; or according to his portion of the work - three hundred. Since it is the homeowner who backed out of the agreement, he cannot cut it off in the middle, deprive the first carpenter, and save money. He committed to six hundred, and since he paid two hundred to the second carpenter, he must pay four hundred to the first.
This concludes the first rule in the Mishnah. From here on, in connection with the concept of "he is at a disadvantage", the Mishnah lists additional cases where a person is in an inferior position - and these do not relate to employment contracts.
"Kol hameshaneh, yado al hatachtonah" - Anyone who deviates is at a disadvantage:
A worker who was hired for a job and deviated from the instructions given to him. The classic case is cited in the Mishnah in Tractate Bava Kamma, Chapter 9, Mishnah 4: A person hires a dyer to take his raw wool and dye it red. The raw wool is worth fifty, and after the completion of the work it will be worth two hundred. However, the dyer "deviates" - he departs from the instructions and dyes the wool black. Black wool is not as sought after as red wool, and we have here a mistake that caused a loss to both parties.
There are two ways to determine what the dyer is entitled to:
His expenses: Even though he is not entitled to wages for his work, it is proper to reimburse him at least for the cost of the materials he spent - let's say twenty-five.
The enhancement: Even though the wool did not become red and is not worth two hundred, nevertheless it is black now and worth more than raw wool, and he should be paid for the value he added.
This assumes the dyer did not cause damage. If he had caused the wool to be worth less than its original value - such as burning it in fire - he would be a damager and liable for damage payments. But if he enhanced it, he is entitled to the lower of the two: his direct expenses or the enhancement he provided to the homeowner. This is the meaning of "yado al hatachtonah" - he is at a disadvantage.
Two examples for illustration:
When the expenses are lower than the enhancement: The black wool sells for one hundred. The raw wool was worth fifty, which means the enhancement is fifty; the dyer's expenses were twenty-five. He receives the lower amount - twenty-five, to cover the black dye, electricity, and the like.
When the expenses are higher than the enhancement: The dyer spent one hundred on the black dye, and the final value of the wool stands at only one hundred. He asks for a reimbursement of one hundred, but the homeowner replies: "I gave you something worth fifty, and I can sell it for one hundred; you only added fifty for me". Therefore he will receive only fifty, and will lose from his own money - because he did not listen to instructions, and his actions have consequences.
"Kol hachozer bo, yado al hatachtonah" - whoever retracts is at a disadvantage:
The last part of the Mishnah deals with a real estate transaction. In regular commercial transactions of buying and selling, giving money by itself does not accomplish anything - as we saw regarding "mi shepara" - and until the buyer makes an act of acquisition and takes possession, the transaction is not binding. But in a real estate transaction, the money itself acquires.
The case: A person has a ten-thousand-acre farm in Texas, and he wants to sell it for ten million dollars. The buyer replies that he does not have the full amount, and offers: one million dollars in cash now, and the remaining nine million within thirty days.
What is the halachah if one of the parties wants to back out afterward? If the seller backs out, claiming he found a buyer who will pay more for the rest of the land, the choice is given to the wronged buyer:
To demand the fulfillment of the partial transaction: "Give me the thousand acres that I bought with my million dollars, and sell the rest to whomever you please".
To cancel the transaction: "I am not interested in being the new buyer's neighbor - return my money to me, and do as you wish with your land".
And on the other hand, if the buyer is the one backing out, and informs that he was unable to raise the remaining nine million, the choice is given to the seller:
To uphold the partial transaction: "Your million stays with me, and here are your thousand acres".
To cancel it: "The plot is not worthwhile to me when it is divided - take your money back, and I will sell it to someone else".
It emerges that even though the transfer of money effects an acquisition of land, the Sages ruled that a person may back out, and they established that the one who backs out of the transaction is placed in an inferior position. He is at a disadvantage, and he must accept the decision of the other party - the injured party - whether to complete the transaction or to cancel it.
In summary: In this Mishnah we learned of three cases where a person is at a disadvantage: an artisan or a homeowner who backed out in the middle of a contracting job, who receives the lower amount between two methods of calculation; a worker who deviated from his instructions, who receives the lesser amount between his expenses and the value of the improvement he added; and one who backs out of a real estate transaction, where the choice to complete the transaction or cancel it is given specifically to the other party.