On 6 October 2026 the Jerusalem Regional Labor Court certified a class action against the Rami Levi Shivuk Hashikma supermarket chain. The claim is that the chain deducted from cashiers' wages whatever money was missing from the till at the end of a shift. The court held that a till shortfall is not a debt an employer may deduct from wages, even when the employee signed a form agreeing to the deduction.
This is a decision at the certification stage. The claim itself has not been decided and now moves on to liability and amounts. But the reasoning is already on record, and it applies to any business where an employee runs a till.
How the chain's procedure worked
Under the procedure the chain presented, in place since 2023, a shortfall of more than ₪10 in a shift was deducted from the cashier's pay. Accumulated shortfalls of ₪50 in a month could lead to dismissal. At the end of the shift the cashier was asked to sign a form approving the deduction.
The named plaintiffs' amounts are small. One had ₪45.70 deducted, the other ₪200 and another ₪57.50. The class covers every cashier at the chain who had shortfalls deducted in the seven years before the motion was filed, and that is where the total grows.
Why the signed form did not help
Israel's Wage Protection Law lets an employer deduct from wages a debt the employee committed to in writing. The chain argued that this was exactly the case: a debt, and a signature.
The court rejected both halves. A debt that may be deducted has to be certain, proven and undisputed between employee and employer. A shortfall found in a till does not meet that bar, because nobody established who caused it or how. The court added that the law was not meant to let an employer charge an employee for damage the business suffered.
As for the signature, the court found it was not real consent. Cashiers signed at the end of a shift, under pressure, knowing that refusing could cost them the job. In those conditions the form does not make the deduction lawful.
The court ordered the chain to pay ₪25,000 in costs.
Who should review their own procedure
A corner shop, a café, a clothing store, a petrol station: any business where an employee closes out a till at the end of the day. Many small businesses run a similar rule, sometimes only verbally: if money is missing, it comes off the paycheck. This decision says that rule is exposed to a claim, and a signed form does not protect it.
The exposure runs backwards. An employee who had shortfalls deducted can sue to get the money back, and amounts that look trivial for one shift become material once multiplied across several employees and several years.
Steps to take now
If your business deducts till shortfalls automatically, stop and check your position with an employment lawyer or with the accountant who prepares your payslips. Also look at what your employment contracts and the forms employees sign actually say, because under this decision a signature alone is not enough.
You can still look into where missing money went. Under the decision, until a debt is established as certain and proven, it cannot be collected through the payslip.