76b says the employer can trick his employees into returning to work and not be bound by the additional promised compensation.
77a2 My Englsh notes says that the Ritva says that if the employer offered to pay them a higher wage, he is legally bound to increase their salary.
How do we reconcile these 2 oppposite opinions and which is halachah?
Barry Epstein, Dallas, USA
The Ritva you are quoting is not talking about a case of Davar ha'Avud, unlike the first case where the employer will suffer a loss due the lack of their work. The Gemara (77a) discusses an employer who encourages his disgruntled workers to stay on the job by saying something vague like "you won't regret it" (my example), despite the fact that they could now receive more for this type of job. The Gemara says that the employer does not have to pay more at the end of the day, and could say that he made it up by giving them better food. The Ritva states that this is only because he did not explicitly give them a wage increase. If he did, he would have to pay them that increase.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose