Labor Dispute (Nazareth) 27940-03-20 Dvir Cohen – Amud Farm Ltd. - part 20

In general, Noam is entitled to a sum of NIS 12,100 for an annual grant.

From here we will turn to discuss the components that were claimed by Dvir only: the addition of a family, a study fund and the salary of the "G".

Family Supplement

301. In his statement of claim, in his affidavit and summaries, Dvir filed his claim for a family supplement in the amount of NIS 1,145.5 in respect of an unemployed spouse, in accordance with section 39 of the Administrative Extension Order (section 33 of the claim, paragraph 53 of the affidavit, paragraph 79 of its summaries).
302. In the statement of defense and in the defendant 's  affidavit, the defendants denied Dvir's entitlement to a family supplement, on the grounds that he had received a salary that was higher than the tariff wage that included the family supplement (paragraph 82 of the statement of defense, paragraph  88 of the affidavit).  In their summaries,  the defendants argued that if the court determines that the expansion orders in the agricultural sector apply, the defendants reiterate what was stated in their statements of defense (section 20).
303. As to our decision – taking into account our determination above, according to which Dvir is entitled to rights by virtue of the Administrative Extension Order in addition to the salary paid to him, and in circumstances in which the defendants do not have a claim on the merits of entitlement to a family supplement, we have decided to accept Dvir's claim for family addition.
304. Section 33 of the Administrative Extension Order states: "Every permanent and seasonal permanent employee who is married will receive a family supplement as stated in the salary tables and accompanying conditions." Appendix A to the Administrative Extension Order establishes eligibility "for a spouse who is not an employee – NIS 29".
305. We are aware that Dvir did not produce any reference attesting to his wife's status as a non-employee during the period relevant to his claim, evidence that could have easily been brought. Notwithstanding the aforesaid, since Dvir's claim that his wife did not work during the relevant period was not contradicted, we decided to accept the claim.
306. Considering the period of Dvir's employment, which did not become statute of limitations, 79 months (from 03/2013-09/2019) and the addition of the family in accordance with the administrative extension order (NIS 29 per month), Dvir is entitled to the sum of NIS 2,291 for the addition of a family, but since the sum of NIS 1,145 is claimed, his claim is accepted in full and we award him the sum of NIS 1,145 in respect of it.
307. In general, Dvir's claim for a family supplement is accepted, so that he is entitled to a sum of NIS 1,145.

13th salary

308. In his statement of claim, Dvir filed his claim in respect of a salary of NIS 84,000, in accordance with section 47 of the Administrative Extension Order (section 51).  In his affidavit and summaries,  Dvir placed his claim at NIS 74,029, or alternatively in the amount of  NIS 57,741 (paragraph 58 of his affidavit, paragraph 80 of his summaries).  To his affidavit, Dvir attached a calculation (Appendix 12).
309. In their statement of defense, the defendants denied Dvir's entitlement to the 13th salary (paragraph 86 of the statement of defense), and in the defendant's affidavit it was claimed that Dvir was not entitled to the 13th salary, since he received annual grants. According to the defendants, in 2017 the defendant paid NIS 10,000 to Dvir for the vehicle he purchased, and on November 14, 2019, she paid a total of NIS 7,000.  The defendants referred to the correspondence that was attached as Appendix 15 to the defendant's affidavit.
310. As for our decision, after examining the parties' arguments and evidence, we decided to accept the claim and charge the defendant the sum of NIS 69,154 for the 13th salary, as detailed below.
311. We have not been persuaded that the defendants paid money on account or for Y3's salary, both on the grounds that this claim was first raised in the defendant's affidavit and since it is an expansion of a prohibited front, this is sufficient to dismiss it. However, the law of this claim is also rejected on its merits, since the payment of NIS 10,000 to Dvir for a vehicle was not proven at all.  Indeed, an examination of the correspondence that was attached as Appendix 15 to the defendant's affidavit  shows that the sum of NIS 13,000 was transferred to Noam and Dvir (see correspondence with Noam at p. 123, correspondence with Dvir at p. 122), but it is not possible to conclude from these correspondences that this is an additional payment that is not related to the basic salary, as emerges from correspondence between Dvir and the defendant (p. 122).
312. Section 47 of the Administrative Extension Order states: "Employees will receive a thirteenth salary, which will be paid to them in 12 monthly installments or twice a year; in places where a grant has been paid, the payment of thirteenth salary will be substituted for a grant, provided that the employees receive an amount not less than the amount of the thirteenth salary." It follows from the aforesaid that Dvir is not entitled to double payment for an annual grant and a 13th salary, and since an annual grant is not claimed, Dvir's entitlement to 13th salary was not impaired at all.
313. Dvir's calculations, which were attached as Appendix 12 to his affidavit, are not acceptable to us, since from 2016 until the end of his employment, Dvir demanded an annual salary of NIS 12,000, in contrast to the determining salary that we set at NIS 11,500. The following is the calculation we made: