Israeli Court Bars Supermarket Chain From Deducting Cash Shortages From Employee Wages
Translated & summarized from Mignews by baba
An Israeli labor court has prohibited the Rami Levy supermarket chain from deducting cash register shortages from its cashiers' salaries, approving a class-action lawsuit. The court ruled that such shortages do not constitute a debt under the law and that employee consent was often coerced. The ruling also noted that the chain had previously covered shortages through other means. The plaintiffs sought to recover deducted funds and receive social benefits.
The story in 5 lines · by baba
- The Jerusalem Labor Court banned the Rami Levy supermarket chain from deducting cash shortages from cashier wages.
- The court approved a class-action lawsuit against the chain for violating salary protection laws.
- Plaintiffs Meir Edri and Baruch Shaltiel stated shortages were deducted from their pay.
- The court ruled cash shortages are not legal debts and consent was often coerced.
- The ruling requires the chain to stop the practice and return collected funds.
The Jerusalem Labor Court has ruled against the Rami Levy supermarket chain, prohibiting the company from deducting cash register shortages from its cashiers' salaries. The ruling came as the court approved a class-action lawsuit filed by former cashiers Meir Edri and Baruch Shaltiel.
According to the Globes publication, the chain was accused of violating the Salary Protection Law by withholding funds from employees to cover discrepancies found at the end of their shifts. The plaintiffs sought to end this practice, recover the deducted funds, and receive proper social benefits.
Rami Levy's representatives argued that the law permits such deductions with employee consent. However, the court determined that a cash shortage does not constitute a debt under the law. The court also noted that employee consent forms were often signed as a mandatory condition of employment and that there was evidence of pressure on workers.
The court specified that deductions for debt must be for fixed, proven, and undisputed amounts, and that investigating each shortage individually contradicts automatic deductions. The ruling also highlighted that the chain had previously covered shortages using surplus funds or by finding customers, rather than from its own budget.
