Caselaw

Organizational Claim (Between Employee and Workers’ Union) (Jerusalem) 3166-07 Ronen Shweig vs. Hapoel Jerusalem Football Club - part 12

August 21, 2011
Print

In the aggregate of the above, it appears that in the circumstances that arose at the time, in relation to the investigation and the results of the polygraph, the plaintiff left voluntarily.  The aforesaid is anchored in the affidavit of Mr. Sassi and the testimony of Mr. Yona, which were consistent at the stage of the affidavit of the main witness on behalf of the defendants, and were strengthened in their cross-examinations and in contrast to the plaintiff's version, which changed between the affidavit and the testimony.  In these circumstances, their version should be preferred to his version that was inconsistent.  Therefore, even if he has proof of continuous seasonal work of three seasons, which, as stated above, has not been proven, since he left voluntarily, regardless of the reason for leaving, he is not entitled to severance pay, especially since the defendants claimed that they wished to keep him.  Therefore, section 9(a) of the law also does not apply.  For this reason as well, in the aggregate, his claim for severance pay is rejected.

Amir Gola

  1. With respect to the aliyah grant, his claim was rejected for the above reasons.  With regard to the claim for severance pay, the defendants claim that in his case, section 9(a) of the law applies , which states that if the employee refuses to renew the contract, he is considered to have resigned.  We will preface by saying that this argument should be accepted in light of the facts below.
  2. In the 2000 and 2001 seasons, Mr. Gola was loaned and played for Hapoel Nazareth at the end of the season (31.5.01) Mr. Gola was offered to return to play for Hapoel Jerusalem.  However, he refused the offer and remained in Nazareth Illit of his own free will.  He found a job there at Rav Bariach outside the framework of soccer.  Mr. Gola returned to Hapoel only at the end of December 2001 and signed a five-month agreement.

"Q.  What you wrote in your affidavit is true. 

  1. There is one section in which I was wrong. Section 3, Beginning of My Work.  It was registered in 1989, after a check we did at the association I started receiving money when I was a soldier from 1987.  Two years back.  That's the only mistake.  Everything else is true. 
  2. In the 2000-2001 season you played for Hapoel Nazareth Illit.
  3. That's right.
  4. Why didn't they attach the agreement with Nazareth to the affidavit?
  5. I would be happy if my agreement would be in front of you, a nice agreement there.
  6. Receiving a salary from Hapoel Nazareth Illit.
  7. That year, yes. I played there for a year.  When the season ended and we were relegated in May, the season ended in May 2000, there was a two-month break, in August I moved to Nazareth Illit , I played until May 2001, I stayed there, I didn't get along there, I lived there for a few more months, me and my wife.  I worked at Rav Bariach, it was hard for me to return to Jerusalem even though they told me to come back, after a few months in the middle of the season in November 2001, the beginning of 2002, Vector spoke to me and told me that we are in the direction of the elite league will come back."

(Pro.  of July 6, 2010, p.  29, s.  21-32, p.  30, s.  1).  (Emphasis mine, S.S.).

Previous part1...1112
13...19Next part