Caselaw

Labor Dispute (Tel Aviv) 44232-09-22 Woldemariam Mahari – Glossy Cleaning M.B. Clean Ltd. - part 34

February 23, 2026
Print

For the year 2021 - in which Mehri actually worked for 277 days, he is entitled to redemption of 14 vacation days.

Antitrust for the entire period of employment, the plaintiff was entitled to 19 days of paid leave.

  1. Since the plaintiff worked full-time and beyond, the plaintiff was entitled to vacation pay in the sum of ILS 232.96 per day (= 8 hours * ILS 29.12 per hour), and multiplied by the vacation days -19 days, he was entitled to vacation redemption in the sum of ILS 4,426.24.
  2. In practice, he was paid a total of ILS 3,413 for vacation, and it was not proven that the plaintiff was not on vacation at all (although the attendance reports did not specify the vacation days, it can be seen that the plaintiff missed work days during the month of April 2021 and the payment in November 2021 constitutes vacation redemption).
  3. Therefore, he is entitled to differences in the amount of ILS 1,013.24.

Holiday Allowance

  1. In the statement of claim, the plaintiff petitioned for payment for 8 holiday days at a rate of 100% (and attached a table with details of the Jewish holidays). In the summaries, the plaintiff detailed for which days he was petitioning to receive payment (as stated in paragraph G2 of the plaintiff's summaries , p.  36).
  2. The defendant, for its part, claims that the pay slips are correct and that as long as the plaintiff worked on a holiday, he was paid a total of 150% of his salary (paragraph 30 of the statement of defense).

.

  1. After reviewing the arguments of the parties, the testimonies and the evidence, we have reached the conclusion that the lawsuit in respect of this component should be accepted in part. Let us explain.
  2. In light of our determination that the pay slips are reliable, the plaintiff is entitled to payment for this component to the extent that there are differences in payment.
  3. The plaintiff began working for the defendant in September 2020 and therefore was not entitled to holiday pay before the end of the first three months of his employment, i.e., before December 1, 2020.
  4. In 2021, Israel holidays fell on the following dates:

 

  Passover Passover Independence Shavuot Rosh Hashanah Kippur Sukkot Sukkot (Simchat Torah)
Slave     15.4 (Worked 8 hours)         28.9 (Worked 4 hours)
Didn't work 28.3 3.4 (Sat)   17.5 7.9 + 8.9 16.9 21.9  

 

  1. Therefore, the plaintiff was entitled in 2021 to payment for 6 holiday days in which he did not work * ILS 29.12 per hour * 8 hours = ILS 1,397.76. In addition, the plaintiff is entitled to holiday pay for the days he worked on the holiday (100%) - 8 hours (on April 15, 2021) + 4 hours (on September 28, 2021) = 12 hours * ILS 29.12 = ILS 44.  The plaintiff was entitled to payment of holiday pay in the sum of ILS 1,747.14.
  2. The defendant admits in its summaries that there are differences in payment for holiday pay (albeit in a different amount) and it also claims that what was paid in the pay slips under the Shabbat hours component should be deducted from the amount to be paid for the holidays in which the plaintiff worked (paragraph 135 of the defendant's summaries). However, since the plaintiff was not paid holiday pay (100%) and in relation to the days on which he worked on the holiday he was underpaid (according to the defendant), then she must pay the plaintiff the difference in the holiday pay (100%) also for the days in which he worked on the holiday.
  3. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to payment in respect of this component in the sum of ILS 1,747.14.

Study Fund

  1. The plaintiff claims that the defendant did not pay him in lieu of a study fund according to the hourly wage as she should have done, and therefore she must compensate him with differences in the sum of ILS 6,962. On the other hand, the defendant claims that it paid the plaintiff the full payments due to him according to the minimum wage.
  2. As stated above, we have determined that the registration in the pay slips reflects the plaintiff's salary.
  3. As stated in section 10 of the Expansion Order in the cleaning industry, the plaintiff was entitled to deposits of 7.5% of the salary as well as the convalescence pay. Accordingly, the plaintiff was entitled to a change of study fund according to the following calculation:

14.5 months * 182 hours (full-time) * 29.12 ILS per hour * 7.5% = 5,763.5 ILS.

Previous part1...3334
35...53Next part