Class action approved against Rami Levy: "Shortages found in the cash register are not a debt of the cashier" | First publication
The Jerusalem Regional Labor Court approved a class action against the Rami Levy Shivuk Hashikma chain, for deducting cash register shortages from the wages of cashiers. Judge Rachel Berg-Hirshberg ruled that a cash register shortage does not constitute a "debt" allowing deduction from an employee's wages, and rejected the chain's claim that signing a deduction authorization form constitutes consent. Attorney Tzvi Mandelson, representing the plaintiffs, stated that the decision sets a clear limit on an employer's power to deduct from an employee's wages.
The Jerusalem Regional Labor Court today (Tuesday) approved a class action against the Rami Levy Shivuk Hashikma chain, for deducting cash register shortages from the wages of cashiers. The decision was given by Judge Rachel Berg-Hirshberg and public representatives Benjamin Alvaz and Bruria Maman. The motion was filed by Meir Adari and Baruch Shaltiel, former cashiers at the chain, represented by Attorney Tzvi Mandelson. At the center of the proceedings was a practice whereby shortages found in cash registers at the end of a shift were collected from the cashiers, through deductions from their wages or demands to make up the shortfall from their own money. The petitioners argued that a cash register shortage cannot automatically become a "debt" of the employee to the employer. The court accepted the central argument and ruled that shortages found in a supermarket cash register cannot be considered a "debt" under Section 25(a)(6) of the Wage Protection Law, and therefore amounts cannot be deducted from employees' wages on this basis. The court emphasized the protective nature of the Wage Protection Law and the need to prevent a situation where an employer uses its direct access to the employee's wages to unilaterally collect amounts it claims the employee owes. It was further determined that testimony from the chain's witnesses indicated it applies a "regime of absolute liability," whereby even when the cause of the shortage cannot be determined, it is imposed on the cashier. The court also did not accept the chain's argument that signing a "deduction authorization form" by the employee is sufficient, as the forms were signed at the end of the shift under pressure. Attorney Mandelson stated: "The employee's wages are not the employer's insurance fund. If a shortage occurs during work, it cannot automatically become a debt of the employee and take the money directly from their wages." According to him, the decision extends beyond the two petitioners and sets a clear limit on an employer's power.