In addition, the defendants raised other claims relating to the period of employment and the termination of employment, and we will also examine them in relation to each plaintiff.
Method of calculating compensation and its rate
- Regarding the calculation of severance pay, there is a specific provision in the agreements of all the plaintiffs that states that in a situation where a right to severance pay is determined, the determining salary for the purpose of calculating the severance pay will be the minimum wage according to the Minimum Wage Law.
The minimum wage is an amount determined according to a statutory provision that is officially updated in the Publications Collection. Therefore, it cannot be said that an agreement that refers to this law is unjust. The plaintiffs were interrogated and confirmed that they signed the agreements of their own free will. The plaintiffs' argument that the premiums and bonuses on points should also be included in the salary should not be accepted, firstly, since they are components that depend on the matter and are not automatic and not fictitious, in any case the plaintiffs did not prove that they are components that should be included in the compensation required by the case law. In essence, the components constitute a conditional supplement that is not included in the severance pay basis, as stated in the Severance Pay Regulations and in the case law relating to conditional supplements.
and second, these additions do not constitute a basis for severance pay since there is no positive provision in the agreement regarding their inclusion in the severance pay. We found that clause 10B of the agreement is a reasonable clause, which meets the requirement of proportionality, relates to the provisions of the law and has received the approval of its professional discretionary body, i.e., the Israel Football Association and its Budget Control Authority. The court will not intervene in the content of the contract and this clause in view of the above.
- The judgment in the matter of C.A. 3298/06 Shlomo Iluz v. Hapoel Be'er Sheva (Nevo) should be examined, in which it was determined that "the salary will be 75% of the total payments to be paid to him by the group". This is because he changed his position to assistant coach and his specific circumstances do not correspond to the facts and agreements that are the subject of this proceeding, in which football players are only involved.
It has already been noted above that the plaintiffs were asked if they voluntarily signed the contract and understood what was written in it and confirmed that this was the case. For this reason, what is stated inthe line of transfer of the Davidian hearing venue does not apply, where the court raised a real doubt as to the plaintiff's knowledge of the contract clause there.
- An examination of the plaintiffs' agreements for the last season of H.H. Schweig, Gola and Avrahami raises sums close to the minimum wage for that period in a proportionate manner. The minimum wage on 1/03 was ILS 3335. For example, Dado Dahan for 2001/2002 earned ILS 3,400 per month, Eyal Avrahami for 2001/2002 earned ILS 3,700, so that at that time the contracts were realistic and fair in relation to the minimum wage stipulation as a basis for severance pay.
In relation to Ohayon's agreement from May 2006, which was three years late, the sum of ILS 11,000 per month was discussed, at that time the minimum wage was ILS 3,456, but when in any case the calculation of the severance pay in his affidavit does not relate at all to this monthly sum and its calculation is not legally correct and otherwise (paragraph 7 of his affidavit), in any case the amount of the minimum wage is not important in his case.
- In the judgment in the matter of labor appeal 300250/08 Uri Isaac v. The Israel Water Planning Authority in a Tax Appeal (published in Nevo) (Plugata 4), the court rules that in order to determine relations between the parties, the path must be both "complete" and "two-way" for the purpose of granting rights. There is no dispute as to the status of the plaintiffs. As for the dispute regarding the rate set for the rights, there is no reason to deviate from what is stated in the written contract that was made with them according to their explicit consent.
- In the Yanai Cohen case, it was held that since the players are seasonal employees who worked under employment contracts for fixed periods, and when their employment contract was not renewed, they are entitled to severance pay. The plaintiffs worked there for 8 months during the offseason and during the recess there was no activity in the group, as a seasonal employee it was determined that since they worked for more than two years in a row, they are entitled to severance pay according to the relative portion in which each of them worked each year. In conclusion, the basis for paying severance pay is the minimum wage in accordance with the relative portion of the actual employment.
- We will now discuss from the general to the individual in relation to each plaintiff - the period of his employment and the circumstances of his engagement and its termination.
Ronen Schweig
- This plaintiff claimed severance pay for the period from January 1, 2000 to May 31, 2003, 3 seasons and 6 months in the sum of ILS 35,500.
In his cross-examination, he was asked: