Lawyer Who Declared Herself Fired in Email Loses Severance Case

A Tel Aviv Labor Court has ruled that a lawyer who sent an email stating she considered her employer's silence to be a dismissal effectively resigned. The court determined that Nurit Haravest, who worked for lawyer Chai Bar-El, could not claim constructive dismissal after sending an email on November 6, 2023, stating, "Since I have not received any response from you... I see your blatant disregard as a dismissal in every respect." Bar-El, who specializes in labor law and heads an anti-corruption organization, was facing a criminal case at the time for a fatal traffic accident.

Haravest had been the sole lawyer in Bar-El's office, managing it alone while he was dealing with his legal issues. The dispute began when a pension agent discovered missing pension fund deposits for Haravest in May 2023. Bar-El admitted in court that he initially dismissed the issue as a false alarm. Following her email, Bar-El responded politely the next day, wishing her well and asking for proper notice and handover upon her recovery, stating he wouldn't argue whether she was fired or resigning.

Despite the email, Haravest continued working, and her salary was still paid. Meetings in December and January involved discussions about her future employment, with Bar-El offering alternative arrangements like hourly work, freelance, or partnership. Haravest refused, citing her need for a stable salary as a mother of three. Bar-El claimed they agreed her employment would end on February 11, 2024, but he later informed her via email on February 25 that their professional relationship had concluded two weeks prior. The following morning, Haravest found her access to the office computers blocked, prompting her to accuse him of firing her without notice or a hearing.

Haravest subsequently filed a lawsuit for approximately NIS 210,000. However, the court, presided over by Senior Judge Ravit Tzadok, along with public representatives Avraham Kaminsky and Dalia Kotai, did not accept her claim. The court ruled that while an employee might resign in anger, they must explicitly retract it within a reasonable time, which Haravest failed to do. The court noted that Haravest, being a labor law expert, should have been aware of legal requirements. The judges stated that an employee cannot dictate terms of dismissal to an employer. The court considered the period after her email until February 25 as an extended notice period, prolonged by her illness, negotiations, and case completion, thus denying claims for severance pay, notice pay, and compensation for dismissal without a hearing.

Despite ruling against Haravest on severance, the court also rejected some of Bar-El's claims. His assertion that Haravest worked less than 5% of the time was dismissed due to insufficient evidence. The court determined she worked at a 60% capacity, as Bar-El himself had calculated. The court also ruled that Bar-El could not retroactively claim the employment ended on February 11, as she continued working until February 25. Consequently, Haravest is entitled to salary for those two weeks. Additionally, the court found that Bar-El unlawfully deducted three vacation days and that he failed to prove he provided her with payslips since September 2022. She also received compensation for receiving her employment terms notification nearly two years late. In total, Bar-El was ordered to pay Haravest approximately NIS 33,170, plus interest, covering vacation pay, wage differences, payslip compensation, and travel expenses, along with NIS 3,000 in legal costs.