Series of Answers by the Eminent Scholar Ata bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah, Ameer of Hizb ut-Tahrir, to the Questions of the Visitors of his Facebook Page "Fiqhi"
Answer to a Question
To Ribhi Abu Mu'adh
Question:
The law obliges the employer to follow the regulations concerning workers and their rights, but the employer evades commitment to the law. Amidst the labor crisis and the greed of employers, the worker's rights are lost, and he cannot claim his rights except through the law that compels the employer to pay the worker's rights as stipulated. If the worker feels wronged and resorts to the law, is there any prohibition in this?
Answer:
Walaikum Assalam wa Rahmatullahi wa Barakatuh,
You are asking about the ruling on a worker claiming to obtain his right as stipulated by the law...
The answer to that is that it is permissible in the case of obtaining a right or repelling an injustice according to Sharia. That is, the right must be established by Sharia and the injustice must be established by Sharia. It is not correct to demand a right that is not considered a right according to Sharia. If the worker is claiming a right according to the law, but it is not a right according to Sharia, then it is not permissible for him to demand it. However, if the worker is claiming a right according to the law and it is also a right according to Sharia, then it is permissible for him to demand it.
For example, one who is wronged and subjected to imprisonment because he speaks a word of truth... Islam defends him and brings him out of prison. Therefore, it is permissible for him to resort to whoever can defend him to remove the injustice from him and save him from prison.
For example, one who is subjected to theft; Islam returns his stolen money to him. Thus, it is permissible for him to resort to whoever can defend him to obtain his stolen money.
For example, one who sells his house to someone for an amount paid in advance with the rest in installments, and the buyer pays part of the amount but refuses to pay the rest or denies it, even though he bought the house and lived in it... Islam returns the seller's right from the buyer. Therefore, it is permissible for him to resort to whoever can defend him to obtain the price of his house which the buyer denied.
Similarly, an employee who works for a specific salary according to the employment contract between him and the employer, and then the employer withholds part of his salary; Islam obliges the employer to give him his full salary. Therefore, it is permissible for him to resort to whoever can defend him to obtain his full salary.
That is to say, if the right is established for him by Sharia and he is prevented from it, then it is permissible for him to resort to whoever can defend him before the judiciary to obtain the right established for him by Sharia. However, if the right is established for him by man-made law but contradicts Sharia, it is not permissible for him to resort to whoever can defend him before the judiciary to obtain it:
For example, one who is a shareholder in a joint-stock company (sharikah musahamah) that has an invalid (baatil) contract. When profits are distributed to shareholders, if he sees that the profit given to him according to his shares is less than what he deserves, it is not permissible for him to resort to the judiciary to obtain this right as long as this right is only established by man-made law and contradicts Sharia. This is because this company is invalid and the profits resulting from it are not recognized by Sharia; the duty of the Muslim is to withdraw from such a company.
For example, one who places his money in a bank for usury (riba), with a certain interest rate. When the bank gives him his share, it calculates the interest at a lower rate than what was agreed upon with the bank. It is not permissible for him to resort to the judiciary to obtain this usury as long as this right is established by man-made law and contradicts Sharia. This right is established for him according to man-made law which recognizes usurious banks, but it is not established for him according to Sharia. The duty of the Muslim is to cancel this usurious transaction with the bank.
In summary: if the rights claimed by the worker according to the law are also rights according to Sharia—such as if Sharia pointed to them or if they were conditions that do not contradict Sharia in employment contracts, etc.—then it is permissible for the worker to demand them. However, if the rights the worker is claiming are rights according to man-made law but are not Sharia rights, then it is not correct for the worker to demand them before the judiciary.
I hope this answer is sufficient. Allah is the All-Knowing, All-Wise.
Your brother, Ata bin Khalil Abu al-Rashtah
10 Sha'ban 1441 AH Corresponding to 03/04/2020 CE
Link to the answer from the Ameer's (may Allah protect him) page on Facebook Link to the answer from the Ameer's (may Allah protect him) page on the Web