by Chaim Weber

The Gemara in Bava Metzia (88b) discusses two sets of mitzvos when it comes to feeding workers.

The first is the negative prohibition not to muzzle an animal while it’s working – lo sachsom shor b’disho.

The second is the positive commandment to allow human workers to eat from the produce they are working on, as long as the produce is harvest-ready.

As these mitzvos both relate to feeding a worker, the Gemara compares these mitzvos and derives halachos from one to the other. However, R’ Chaim Soloveitchik (Me’ila 8:1) explains that these two mitzvos are still different at their core.

The prohibition against muzzling an animal is a commandment to be benevolent and not prevent a hard-working animal from eating.

However, when it comes to the positive commandment allowing a worker to eat from produce he is working on, this isn’t just a mitzvah on the boss to be benevolent. Rather, it’s a monetary obligation that a worker is entitled and owed this produce. The produce belongs to the worker. Not to his boss.

Can a Worker Eat Hekdesh Produce?

R’ Chaim uses this to explain a difficult Gemara in Bava Metzia.

The Gemara (87b) learns from a dedicated verse that although a worker is allowed to take produce, he cannot take produce if he is working with consecrated property (hekdesh).

Tosfos and the Tosfos Harosh explain that the same way a worker is allowed to take produce from the owner despite the potential prohibition against stealing, we would have thought that he can similarly take produce from hekdesh. This is why we need a dedicated verse prohibiting it.

The obvious question is: Why?

Why would we have thought that a worker can take hekdesh produce?

When it comes to hekdesh, there is a prohibition of me’ila – that one is forbidden to derive benefit from hekdesh property. Unlike ordinary theft, this carries a penalty of misah bidei shamayim – death carried out through Heaven – if performed willingly according to some Tana’im and at the very least, requires a special korban when done accidentally. Why would I think that the same way a worker can circumvent the prohibition against stealing, he can also circumvent the prohibition against me’ila?

R’ Chaim explains that although the penalty of me’ila is severe, it’s essentially a theft-related prohibition. It’s a prohibition against benefiting (and thereby stealing) from hekdesh.

What Tosfos means to say is the following:

The same way a worker is entitled to take food from his boss and it’s not considered stealing – because the produce belongs to the worker – similarly, when working with hekdesh property, it’s not considered me’ila to take hekdesh produce because the produce no longer belongs to hekdesh. It belongs to the worker. This is why I would have thought to permit it without a dedicated verse telling us otherwise.

R’ Yehonason of Lunil seems to disagree.

He learns that the Gemara never had any thought to permit produce that was actually hekdesh. The Gemara only thought that the Torah might obligate the Temple treasurer to release produce from its hekdesh state in order to feed the worker. Similarly, the Ritva learns that the Gemara was dealing with a case where the hekdesh was made conditionally. Otherwise, there would be me’ila and the worker would not be allowed to take produce.

The Halacha – Can the Worker Demand Payment?

The Shulchan Aruch (Choshen Mishpat 337) quotes the halacha that a boss is not allowed to prevent a worker from eating on the job. The Rema adds that if a boss does prevent the worker, he has to pay. (Although the Gemara in Bava Metzia 88b says that a boss who “muzzles his worker” and prevents him from eating is exempt, this is only an exemption from lashes, not from an obligation to pay.)

This works well with R’ Chaim’s explanation that the obligation to allow workers to eat is in fact a monetary entitlement. Therefore, if the owner prevents the worker from eating, he will have to pay.

The Bottom Line – It Goes Both Ways

These mitzvos demonstrate the Torah’s will that employers treat workers with care and not take advantage of them. This is also seen in many other mitzvos, such as the mitzvah to pay a worker timely and to not delay his wages.

That said, there are also obligations that a worker has to his boss.

The Rambam (Sechirus 11:3) rules that there’s a Torah prohibition for a worker to take produce if he isn’t actually working and that there’s also a prohibition to take extra produce “to-go.”

Additionally, the Shulchan Aruch concludes the siman dealing with this topic by noting (337:20) that a worker needs to be careful to not be lax in his work and to learn from Yaakov Avinu, who served Lavan with dedication and with all of his abilities.

Sadly, in our current times, many wrong-headed people and son’ei yisrael have latched onto the idea that the world is divided into “oppressors” and “oppressed”. That all people in positions of power are wrong and that the “oppressed” are never to blame for their actions.

Responsibilities go both ways. Both an employer and an employee have to act with yashrus. Both the wealthy and the needy have to follow halacha.

The Gemara in Shabbos calls Seder Nezikin (the Seder dealing with damages and monetary laws) the seder of yeshuos. Hopefully our keeping of these halachos will indeed bring yeshuos, bekarov.