Harish teacher awarded 200,000 shekels after surprise dismissal
A middle school employee was summoned to a meeting without a hearing, where she was told she would not be returning the following year. While the municipality claimed it was merely an "introductory conversation," the judge ruled it constituted a formal notice of termination.
The Labor Court in Haifa recently awarded compensation and legal expenses totaling approximately 195,000 shekels to a teacher employed by the Harish municipality who was dismissed without a proper hearing. The municipality argued that the meeting in question was merely an "introductory conversation," but Judge Miri Shai ruled that it functioned as a formal notice of termination.
The plaintiff worked as an educator and teacher at the city's school. In May 2024, she and the principal had agreed that she would continue her employment for the following school year with the same workload. However, just a week later, the school's stance shifted entirely: the teacher was summoned to a meeting without prior notice, during which the middle school principal informed her that she would not be teaching the following year. Although the principal later attempted to retract the statement, telling the teacher she was not fired and could return on September 1, 2024, the teacher stated she felt humiliated and exhausted, choosing not to return. Her employment officially ended on August 31, 2024.
In her lawsuit, the teacher claimed she was fired without a hearing, in violation of her prior agreement with the principal, and alleged discrimination related to her husband's reserve service and her son's autism diagnosis. She sought approximately 375,000 shekels in damages. The municipality maintained that the teacher was not fired but had "misunderstood" the conversation, insisting that the principal’s subsequent message clarified that her position remained open.
Judge Shai ruled that the meeting was not just an "introductory conversation" but a notice of termination: "When a member of the school's management informs a teacher that they will not continue teaching the following year, a reasonable teacher interprets this as a clear expression of the employer's intent to end the employment relationship." The court found the principal’s later retraction to be "lip service," lacking any genuine intent to reverse the decision. The verdict noted that the teacher’s refusal to return did not constitute a resignation, as she felt insulted and unwanted by her superiors.
The judge concluded that the municipality failed to act as a reasonable employer, noting that the principal’s attempt to fix the situation was "too little and too late." While the judge rejected the claim of discrimination based on personal circumstances, she awarded the plaintiff approximately 165,000 shekels for emotional distress and wrongful termination, plus 30,000 shekels in attorney's fees.
• To read the full verdict – click here
• The article is in collaboration with the Israeli legal website PsakDin
• Plaintiff's counsel: Adv. Einav Zosim
• Defendant's counsel: Adv. Yaniv Nisenholtz
• Adv. Shmuel Shaluch practices labor law
• The author did not represent in the case
• The editorial team of the PsakDin website took part in the preparation of the article
• ynet is a partner of the PsakDin website
