"The police department's firing of an employee in such a manner and for such a reason is contrary to all laws governing employer-employee relations." So says employment legal expert Atty. Ohad Lapidot. Lapidot learned of the firing via an Arutz-7 report, and immediately offered his services, free of charge, to the fired worker.
The employee is Rivka Margolis of Beit El, who has been working as data base administrator in the Israel Police Computer Department for five years. On Wednesday, just after she was fired, she told Arutz-7's Ruti Avraham what happened: "The police department, preparing for the disengagement this summer, has made it clear that we would all have to take part in the disengagement effort, either by actually going out to the 'territory,' or by filling in for those who go out."
Margolis was concerned that she might also have to take part in this effort, and she sent an email to her colleagues, sharing her concerns with them. She wrote that there must be an opportunity to discuss the problem of people being forced to do something that is against their conscience. An upcoming police seminar that will deal with issues such as the disengagement would be an appropriate forum, she wrote.
Ms. Margolis also sent a similar letter to the Police Department Rabbinate, asking that they intervene to prevent unfair pressures against employees to act against their conscience.
At the end of the day, this past Wednesday, she was called in to her superior's office and was fired on the spot. "He didn't even allow me to return to my office and get my things," she said. A number of her colleagues expressed their shock and consternation over the hastiness of the firing.
Atty. Lapidot said that all police employees are entitled to a hearing before being fired. "This means that they must be informed why they are being fired, and must be given a chance to respond to the charges," he said. "This must be done in a sincere manner, and in a way that will allow the decision to be revoked. This is a mandatory process in the public sector."
"The police department must be reminded that it is not a private organization," Lapidot said, "and that there is a legal way of dealing with discipline problems that must be adhered to. The firing in this case, with no prior warning, is disproportionate to Ms. Margolis' behavior, and therefore borders on being illegal, unreasonable, and extreme."
The employee is Rivka Margolis of Beit El, who has been working as data base administrator in the Israel Police Computer Department for five years. On Wednesday, just after she was fired, she told Arutz-7's Ruti Avraham what happened: "The police department, preparing for the disengagement this summer, has made it clear that we would all have to take part in the disengagement effort, either by actually going out to the 'territory,' or by filling in for those who go out."
Margolis was concerned that she might also have to take part in this effort, and she sent an email to her colleagues, sharing her concerns with them. She wrote that there must be an opportunity to discuss the problem of people being forced to do something that is against their conscience. An upcoming police seminar that will deal with issues such as the disengagement would be an appropriate forum, she wrote.
Ms. Margolis also sent a similar letter to the Police Department Rabbinate, asking that they intervene to prevent unfair pressures against employees to act against their conscience.
At the end of the day, this past Wednesday, she was called in to her superior's office and was fired on the spot. "He didn't even allow me to return to my office and get my things," she said. A number of her colleagues expressed their shock and consternation over the hastiness of the firing.
Atty. Lapidot said that all police employees are entitled to a hearing before being fired. "This means that they must be informed why they are being fired, and must be given a chance to respond to the charges," he said. "This must be done in a sincere manner, and in a way that will allow the decision to be revoked. This is a mandatory process in the public sector."
"The police department must be reminded that it is not a private organization," Lapidot said, "and that there is a legal way of dealing with discipline problems that must be adhered to. The firing in this case, with no prior warning, is disproportionate to Ms. Margolis' behavior, and therefore borders on being illegal, unreasonable, and extreme."