Israeli Court Rules Jehovah's Witness Volunteer Was Employee

An Israeli court has ruled that a man who worked full-time for the Jehovah's Witnesses community for 16 years without pay was legally an employee, not a volunteer. The ruling means he is entitled to back wages for the past seven years, within the statute of limitations, and social benefits for his entire period of service.

The decision could have implications for thousands of activists in various religious communities in Israel, including Christian monks and members of ultra-Orthodox groups. Jehovah's Witnesses organizations are expected to appeal the ruling to the Supreme Court, likely arguing that the decision was made by a majority of lay members on the court, rather than professional judges, who reportedly opposed the finding of an employment relationship.

Nissim Nahum joined the community at age 18 in 2001 and was baptized as a teenager. In late 2005, he joined the "Beit-El" center in Tel Aviv, the spiritual and administrative headquarters for Jehovah's Witnesses in Israel, pledging to dedicate himself fully to any tasks assigned. He agreed to turn over all earnings exceeding his basic needs to the organization, accepting modest provisions in return.

From then until 2021, Nahum worked eight hours a day, five days a week, translating texts, managing publishing, and handling video and audio production. He received housing, food, medical care, and a small allowance. In 2021, he left the community and sued the Tel Aviv Labor Court, seeking recognition as an employee and approximately 764,200 shekels for wages, overtime, social benefits over seven years, and severance pay for his entire service.

The lawsuit named the "Mitzpeh le-Israel" association, which oversees Jehovah's Witnesses in Israel, and the international Watchtower Bible and Tract Society as defendants. The court's majority, comprising a representative for workers and a representative for employers, distinguished Nahum's spiritual activities from his daily eight-hour professional work, which had a fixed schedule, supervision, attendance tracking, and clear economic value. The court concluded that documents Nahum signed waiving his rights did not strip him of protections under labor law.