Tel Aviv Court Rules Evening Emails and Home Work Require Overtime Pay
The Tel Aviv Labor Court ordered an optics company to pay 280,000 NIS in unpaid overtime to an ex-employee who managed Latin American clients from home during evening hours.
The Tel Aviv Labor Court recently ruled that a sales representative who worked for an optics import and marketing company must be compensated with approximately 280,000 NIS after his evening work was omitted from attendance reports. The verdict established that continuous email responses outside of working hours do not merely constitute "availability," but rather professional labor that mandates compensation.
Overtime for Latin American Markets
As part of his duties, the employee—who was employed by the company for 6 years—was responsible for clients in Latin America. Due to the clear time zone differences between Israel and South America, he frequently found himself working from home during evenings and nights, conducting calls, answering emails, closing deals on WhatsApp, and initiating business ventures. When he resigned, he demanded payment for all those extra hours spent from his living room. Represented by attorneys Liat Feigel and Maor Shalom, he sought compensation exceeding 800,000 NIS for unpaid overtime exceeding 40 hours per month.
The company, for its part, refused to pay, arguing that it was a "position of trust." Represented by attorney Keren Frucht Cohen, the company claimed the employee enjoyed significant autonomy, was not required to clock in during evenings, and therefore the Hours of Work and Rest Law simply did not apply to him. Additionally, the employer argued that random responses to messages or emails outside the office do not constitute working time justifying payment, but at most a form of "availability."
Labor Court Rejects Employer Claims
Judge Kamal Abu Kaoud of the Tel Aviv Labor Court dismissed the employer's arguments. Although he agreed that the employee had professional autonomy, he clarified that this did not make him a senior executive exempt from overtime pay. "The plaintiff was a professional and experienced employee with significant responsibility and freedom of action," the judge emphasized in the verdict, "however, it was not proven that he was part of the defendant's senior management tier."
The court ruled that continuous evening work from home is not mere availability, but actual professional activity exceeding standard working hours.
Since the company's attendance logs did not present the full picture and failed to maintain proper records of home-based work hours, the judge ruled that the burden of proof shifted to the employer. Because the company failed to prove the employee did not work those hours, the court accepted the employee's calculation of 41 monthly overtime hours. The court awarded a total of 280,634 NIS (plus interest), with 273,381 NIS allocated specifically for home-based overtime.
