Ethical Teachings of the Torah

The Challenge of Money: Wages and Labor; Employer and Employee [part 3]

In view of the human element involved in labor relations over and above the economic and legal aspects, Judaism has taken special steps to protect workers; steps that are relevant to present-day discussions world-wide concerning health costs, job security, severance pay and pensions. For the first three-quarters of the 20th century, most social thought centered on these issues resulting in various forms of socialism. In these, as in Jewish religious labor circles of Hapoel Hamizrachi and Poalei Agudat Yisrael, there was a tendency to overstress the rights of the worker exclusively, although Judaism balances Tzedek with Tzedaka. A Jewish attitude to social costs is not whether poor, sick, and elderly workers have to be cared for and supported, that is a given of tzedaka, but rather whether this is the responsibility of the employer or of society. Social costs undertaken voluntarily in order to smooth labor relations are merely employers’ investments, while those that society wishes to take upon itself, become in Jewish law, binding custom. Our concern is with the extent to which halakha obligates the employer beyond these.
What is the employer’s responsibility, beyond that imposed by contract or legislation, to share in the medical costs incurred by his employees?
Regarding those costs for which the employer is directly or indirectly responsible, the worker, like any other injured party, is entitled to the fivefold damages awarded by the Torah: loss of income, loss of limb, medical expenses, pain incurred, and any shame resulting from the injury. However, there are normal elements of risk inherent in any human activity including work, which the employer has no automatic obligations to shoulder; the worker considered and accepted normal work related risks when he accepted the work. Workers, like everybody else, are commanded, “You shall surely guard yourselves very much” (D’varim 4:15), so may not place themselves beyond reasonable risk even in consideration of the extra wages they are offered.
As distinct from this, custom seems to have acknowledged employer liability for social and medical costs even where an injury occurs during normal everyday activities and even though the employer is blameless. For example, responsibility for the medical care of Kohanim who suffered from intestinal diseases as a result of working conditions in the Beit Hamikdash [drinking water rather than wine considered in their day as medicinal, working barefooted dressed only in a single shift and eating the meat of the korbanot] was placed on the Temple treasury (Yerushalmi, Sh’kalim 5:1). Another example concerns the claim of a worker who was hired to accompany his employer through the villages to sell articles of glass, etc. “Even if the worker became ill the custom is to pay him the full salary agreed upon. It is also customary to pay the full medical costs involved. The reasoning is that requiring him to travel away from his home and to wander, increases the probability of him becoming ill” (Ru’ach Chayim 333:1, Rabbi Chayim Pallache, 18th century Turkey).
However, cognizance must be taken of the difficulties inherent in foisting the costs of normal occurrences onto the employer, simply because he had hired the sick person. Perhaps the following communal edict regarding a domestic servant who had become ill, can serve as a feasible and ethical compromise. “For the first two weeks the householder is required to pay all the hospitalization costs. If a further period of two weeks is required, then the costs shall be shared equally between the domestic and the householder. Any period after that shall be financed out of the charitable funds of the community” (Vaad K’hillat Crakow, 1598). This is parallel to Rabbi Hirsch’s comment that first a person should make every effort to help himself, then his family has to help and only beyond that is it right to turn to the community.
The late Chief Rabbi of Israel summed up the halakhic attitude to these employer responsibilities as follows: “The worker labors more for his own self-interest than for the benefit of his employer. The law therefore does not place any special responsibility on employers for the worker’s welfare or make him responsible for injuries suffered [excepting the responsibility placed on him by custom]. At the same time however, the Torah obligates him to make every effort to protect his workers from injury or ill-health; failure to do so would make him liable to the moral crime of “You shall not spill blood in your house (D’varim 25:6)” (Mispatei Uzziel, Choshen Mishpat 4).

• Other Ethical Teachings of the Torah
• Today is the Birthday of the World, whether as Children or as Servants [2] by Dr. Meir Tamari
• Funding Social Costs - Taxation [2]
• THE CHALLENGE OF MONEY - Funding Social Costs - Taxation [1]