When a Flat Salary Still Requires Overtime Pay

A Hebrew-language guide published June 18, 2026 explains that paying workers a fixed “global salary” does not automatically protect employers from overtime claims. The article, written with attorney Einav Zusim, says employees may still be entitled to extra pay if the arrangement is not properly written into the contract, does not reflect actual hours, or is not broken down clearly on the payslip.

The guide says a global salary is legal only if it is expressly agreed in the employment contract and if the overtime component matches the real work performed. If those conditions are missing, the arrangement can be treated as fictitious, exposing the employer to significant legal claims. It also warns against paying one lump sum without separating base pay from the overtime supplement on the pay slip, because the law on wage protection forbids an unitemized all-inclusive salary. In that case, the lump sum may be treated as base salary only, and overtime can be recalculated on top of it.

If an employee works beyond the number of overtime hours covered in the contract, the employee is entitled to additional payment. The article cites the standard rates, 25 percent extra for the first two overtime hours in a day and 50 percent from the third hour onward. Employers who do not track actual hours and update the agreement accordingly risk retroactive claims for wage differences.

As an example, the article cites an Israeli labor court case in which the employer failed to prove the worker’s hours. The worker was awarded overtime pay for 60 hours a month, totaling 50,175 shekels in case number סע"ש 12352-06-22. The article adds that employers must keep attendance records for all workers, including those on global salaries, and says that if no records exist, the burden of proof shifts to the employer. The piece concludes that clear contracts, itemized payslips, periodic updates, and attendance tracking are the best protection for both sides.