Labour9/16/2026

Labor Court Denies Rafa’s Injunction Request: Employees May Continue Strike

The Jerusalem Regional Labor Court denied Rafa Laboratories Ltd.’s request to prohibit the employees’ strike. The court did not find that the protest was disproportionate and held that the claim that the company’s stock exchange offering could affect the employees’ status and working conditions warranted examination.

Key facts

•Court: Jerusalem Regional Labor Court
•Source last updated: September 16, 2026
•Judge: Daniel Goldberg
•30% of Rafa’s shares were offered to the public
•Trading in the shares began on July 16, 2026
•The case number is not specified in the source

The Reason for the Dispute

The employees’ representatives demanded negotiations over the implications of Rafa’s transformation from a private company into a public company. As part of the offering, 30% of the company’s shares were offered to the public. According to the employees, management refused to discuss the transaction’s implications: after a one-day strike on August 3, they resumed the protest on September 9, 2026.

What the Court Ruled

The court declined to issue the injunction requested by the company and ruled that, at this stage, the collective action should not be restricted. It found no basis for determining that the labor dispute was artificial or served merely as a pretext for violating industrial peace. The court also found no bad faith on the part of the employees or the Histadrut and noted the prolonged negotiations and the flexibility shown by the employees’ representatives.

Why the Offering Concerns the Employees

The court noted that the demand for negotiations had been raised after the publication of the first draft prospectus and that it had a substantive basis warranting examination in the principal proceeding. Under prevailing case law, when a plant is sold, the employer must negotiate over working conditions, a possible new collective agreement, or the terms of the employees’ retirement. For collective bargaining, control of the company need not pass to another person: the nature of the change and the possibility that it could affect the employees’ status or working conditions are significant.

Timeline of the Offering

The employees demanded negotiations on May 24, when they learned of the intention to conduct a share offering. Approval in principle was received on May 31, the offering took place on July 13, 2026, stock exchange approval for the offer for sale was received on July 14, and official trading began on July 16, 2026. The source does not provide a ruling on the merits of the principal dispute.

What this means for you

An employer’s stock exchange offering may itself provide grounds for demanding collective bargaining if the change is capable of affecting the employees’ status or working conditions; a change of control is not required. However, the decision merely preserved the option of continuing the strike at this stage and did not finally resolve the principal dispute.

Find a lawyer for this topic

Case analysis based on court rulings