The second reason is that the plaintiff has often chosen to conduct herself in complete contravention of Mr. Clare's instructions, on the assumption that she can and knows better on her own – such as deciding not to go on a preparatory trip despite an explicit request, as well as sending inappropriate messages and instructions on her own to all members of the team. This conduct created an overload on the plaintiff, sometimes discomfort and harassment to the staff members, and harmed Mr. Clark's ability to trust her.
The third reason is that on more than one occasion the plaintiff expressed to Mr. Klar a lack of confidence in the defendant's conduct.
- These arguments were discussed at length between the plaintiff and Mr. Klar in their various conversations recorded by the plaintiff. In a conversation dated April 7, 2022, Mr. Klar explained to the plaintiff the difficulty on the first day of the annual trip she organized; both agreed that there was room for a preparatory day before going on the trip; the plaintiff explained why she did not go out for a preparatory day; Mr. Klar explained that he expected her to cooperate, share difficulties and consult with the staff and especially with a certain teacher, and finally said, "Now if I say that my relationship, that I did not manage you properly, I would also expect to hear, there are things that now in retrospect we have to take upon ourselves." In doing so, Mr. Klar also expressed his responsibility for the plaintiff's guidance. It should be noted that throughout the conversation, the plaintiff agreed with Mr. Klar's words. In these circumstances, and given that the plaintiff was in her first year of work, on the first trip that she organized and conducted, the fact that she worked building the trip and invested a great deal of effort that was appreciated by Mr. Klar[42], and that despite the difficulties, the defendant's students enjoyed the trip and returned well, and the fact that the plaintiff is an excellent teacher, it seems that the issue has been exhausted. Mr. Klar himself noted that "a learning process and in order to improve, one must conduct a reflective discourse and take responsibility." [43] It is clear from his conversations with the plaintiff that they had a constructive dialogue and both understood and took responsibility. It is therefore not clear why this claim was raised as a reason for her dismissal.
- The subject of the student who left came up in Mr. Klar's email dated March 9, 2022.Mr[44]. Klar expressed disappointment that the student had left, adding, "I guess if there had been more cooperation and professional work with Karin, perhaps Uri would have stayed." However, this was stated in the framework of a letter that dealt with Mr. Klar's positive impression of the plaintiff and her conduct during the first half of the school year.
- In these circumstances, it is not clear why Mr. Klar found it necessary to raise these two grounds again, after they were discussed at length in his conversations with the plaintiff, this time in the framework of a summons to a hearing prior to dismissal. It appears that the defendant chose to reiterate these grounds, even though they were in agreement with the plaintiff, in order to strengthen the reason for which the defendant chose to fire her.
- The plaintiff responded to these arguments in full during the hearing and in the framework of her answers, reiterated all the arguments she raised with Mr. Klar during their conversation on April 7, 2022. This included a claim: that she tried to coordinate a meeting with Karin (the same staff member with whom Mr. Klar instructed the plaintiff to consult) without success since they did not find a single spare joint hour during work and after work hours; that she held weekly meetings with Tal and Karin and made sure that the meeting with Tal gave her (the plaintiff) the answer she needed; that she spoke with Karin on certain matters and that during the year she consulted with other staff members, especially Bori, who is a veteran teacher of grades 7-8, was assisted by Hagit and Anat in sex lessons, and worked closely with Anat in preparation for the annual trip. She often stayed beyond her work hours to meet with staff members. Regarding the relationship with the students in the classroom, she noted that she has a personal and committed relationship with them. Since she is a first-year teacher and it was at the beginning of the year - it is likely that she made mistakes and if she did - she is willing to take responsibility, hear criticism and learn. As for the timing of the annual trip - she claimed that the management team changed the date of the trip and did not inform her. She had a conversation about it with Karin and they left her with a better understanding. As for the preparation day - she agreed that there was room to go out for a preparation day before the trip - but there was no one available to go out with her and she was not sure to go out alone.[45]
- As for the third reason, the plaintiff replied at the hearing as follows: "We talked about the fact that I didn't contact you and you claim that I don't trust it, and I think it's very justified. When I contacted you about the salary, it took you a month and a half to get back to me, even though we said you'd come back after two weeks, and as far as I'm concerned, that's not right. You gave me an answer after I insisted, and it's possible that if I hadn't insisted, you would have let it slip away, and therefore you think that the problem with the conduct is not mine. You set up a meeting with me and you didn't give an answer. We set up a few more meetings afterwards and you didn't give an answer there, so how can I trust you?" In response to the prosecutor's remarks, Mr. Klar said: "It is important for me to say that after you contacted me, I contacted the authorities to get answers. I already know that Ankori pays according to the law and I have checked it again. I am willing to check it again." [46]
Here, in contrast to the first two reasons that were exhausted, this reason was not exhausted and Mr. Klar was willing to examine the plaintiff's claim again.
- At the end of the hearing, Mr. Klar asked the plaintiff as follows: "With all that has been said, how do you imagine that we can continue from here?" She replied: "I love teaching in the studio, I love the children, the staff and the atmosphere, but I will not give up on my salary demands."
In other words, even at the hearing, the plaintiff expressed her opinion that she wanted to continue teaching at the defendant.