Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 74 posts

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#21

Post by chrisseaton »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #19
thaumaturgy wrote: post #8

That clever bastard dropped an Oxford comma right from the very first sentence of the article. (I understand the Times style guide advises against it. I'm still pretty sure he did it on purpose.)

> Ending a case that electrified punctuation pedants, grammar goons and comma connoisseurs, Oakhurst Dairy settled an overtime dispute with its drivers that hinged entirely on the lack of an Oxford comma in state law. I see no Oxford comma there. Am I missing something?

He dropped the comma from the sentence, so it isn't there. That's the point.

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#22

Post by ghayes »

ASalazarMX wrote: post #19
thaumaturgy wrote: post #8

That clever bastard dropped an Oxford comma right from the very first sentence of the article. (I understand the Times style guide advises against it. I'm still pretty sure he did it on purpose.)

> Ending a case that electrified punctuation pedants, grammar goons and comma connoisseurs, Oakhurst Dairy settled an overtime dispute with its drivers that hinged entirely on the lack of an Oxford comma in state law. I see no Oxford comma there. Am I missing something?

I think OP meant dropped as in "did not include," as opposed to made a reference to. The author set up a sentence that could have, but did not, contain an oxford comma.

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#23

Post by waqf »

ivoras wrote: post #15

Uhmh, can anyone elaborate on exactly why someone driving perishable food should be exempt from overtime pay ? Isn't it a bit ass-backwards: exactly those who need to work overtime so the food doesn't spoil are the ones who cannot get overtime? Am I reading that correctly?

You're reading it correctly and it's working as intended. The people who should have reasonably expected that their job involves overtime are the ones who shouldn't be able to demand punitive extra pay when it turns out that their job involves overtime.

Maybe it sounds more palatable said the other way round: the people whose job can't reasonably be expected to involve overtime are the ones who most need statutory protection when they're suddenly asked to work overtime (because they didn't plan for it when negotiating their contract, for example).

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#24

Post by logfromblammo »

kevinmhickey wrote: post #3

Feels like they could have made this even simpler by reordering the exemptions. For example: The distribution, canning, processing, preserving, freezing, drying, marketing, storing or packing for shipment of: I'm a fan of the Oxford comma and think it would still add clarity here. The semicolon solution is ham-fisted and unnecessary.

It would have been even clearer as

  Any activity necessary to prevent the spoilage
  of comestible goods prior to their arrival at a
  market where they may be offered for sale to
  consumers, including, but not limited to, the
  activities specified in subsection (1) and the
  goods specified in subsection (2).
  (1) Activities:
    (a) Canning,
    (b) Processing,
    (c) Preserving,
    (d) Freezing,
    (e) Drying,
    (f) Marketing,
    (g) Storing,
    (h) Packing for shipment, or
    (i) Distribution.
  (2) Goods:
    (a) Agricultural produce,
    (b) Meat products,
    (c) Fish products, or
    (d) Perishable foods.
A lawyer would then be able to specifically address the relevant portion of the law, by labeling the plaintiffs as satisfying both (1)(i) and (2)(d), along with satisfying the overall criterion of getting a perishable comestible to market prior to its spoilage.

Writing the intent of the law into the actual law is a great way to keep lawyers from arguing over commas.

What we want is for them to argue about whether pasteurized dairy goods would have spoiled if the drivers had worked a normal shift. Presumably, they would have been kept in refrigerators overnight?

But it would have been even clearer to not have the law at all. The businesses that benefited from it would just have to pay more for the labor capacity that they clearly anticipated, since they got a legislator to pass this law for them. Need more driver labor to get your milk to market? Hire another driver or pay your existing drivers overtime!

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#25

Post by SeanLuke »

cperciva wrote: post #2

I'm as big a fan of the Oxford comma as anyone, but the court ruling here was ridiculous. External evidence, including the state legislature's style guide, made it perfectly clear what the law meant.

I agree. I think the Oxford comma is a necessity; but so far as I can tell there is only one grammatically valid parsing of the sentence.

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#26

Post by logfromblammo »

bencoder wrote: post #10

Can someone explain why these exemptions exist in the first place?

The industry lobbied for them, and there was no workers' union to tell the other side of the story.

It seems to me like the intent is to avoid economic waste due to spoilage of perishable goods that might otherwise be sold, but for a dearth of timely labor.

It also seems like the burden should be on the employer to hire more laborers if they have need of more labor, or to demonstrate some reasonable level of urgency that would have prevented hiring.

Since this suit covered years of unpaid overtime, it is clear to me that someone bought themselves a "F U" law that only benefits their own selfish interests, at the expense of someone else. It is likely responsible for the failure of the business to hire an additional permanent driver employee, or to ever employ a contractor to pick up the slack during rushes and crunches.

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#27

Post by namelost »

waqf wrote: post #23
ivoras wrote: post #15

Uhmh, can anyone elaborate on exactly why someone driving perishable food should be exempt from overtime pay ? Isn't it a bit ass-backwards: exactly those who need to work overtime so the food doesn't spoil are the ones who cannot get overtime? Am I reading that correctly?

You're reading it correctly and it's working as intended. The people who should have reasonably expected that their job involves overtime are the ones who shouldn't be able to demand punitive extra pay when it turns out that their job involves overtime. Maybe it sounds more palatable said the other way round: the people whose job can't reasonably be expected to involve overtime are the ones who most need statutory pr…

The point of overtime pay is to incentivise employers to employ extra workers instead of overworking the ones they already have into the grave. It doesn't matter whether it is expected or not, unless the job intrinsically requires overtime and cannot be done by hiring extra workers. So exceptions for trucking, perhaps, but exceptions for "packing for shipment" are definitely total bullshit!

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#28

Post by garmaine »

wvenable wrote: post #18
ivoras wrote: post #15

Uhmh, can anyone elaborate on exactly why someone driving perishable food should be exempt from overtime pay ? Isn't it a bit ass-backwards: exactly those who need to work overtime so the food doesn't spoil are the ones who cannot get overtime? Am I reading that correctly?

If you are an IT worker you're probably exempt from overtime pay as well. Does nobody bat an eye at this? How is this even justified?

Because IT workers make a lot more money than the average voter so they are more likely to be the victim of animosity than the subject of pity.

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#29

Post by paulcole »

behindmyscreen wrote: post #11
paulcole wrote: post #7

To paraphrase one of my favorite quotes (from the guy who developed Comic Sans): If you really love the Oxford Comma you don't know much about writing and need a new hobby. If you really hate the Oxford Comma you don't know much about writing and need a new hobby.

You might have been implying this with your parenthetical but, just to say it, the irony is that the same guy created Comic Sans.

I wasn't implying that, just giving him credit for a great quote.

> In an interview for the Huffington Post, Vincent Connare, designer of Comic Sans, said, “if you love Comic Sans, you don’t know anything about typography. But if you hate Comic Sans, then you don’t know anything about typography either…and you should get another hobby”.

Re: Oxford Comma Dispute Is Settled as Maine Drivers Get $5M

#30

Post by ggm »

paulcole wrote: post #7

To paraphrase one of my favorite quotes (from the guy who developed Comic Sans): If you really love the Oxford Comma you don't know much about writing and need a new hobby. If you really hate the Oxford Comma you don't know much about writing and need a new hobby.

this, I think we can all agree. no wait.. this I think, we can all agree. No, hang on, this I think we, can all agree ...
Post reply on HN