Salary Deduction For Late Coming

Money Matters

Mufti Abu Muhammad Ali Asghar Attari Madani

How is it to deduct an employee’s wage by half a day’s worth for arriving one hour late?

Question: What do the honourable scholars say regarding the following: how is it to deduct an employee’s wage by half a day’s worth for arriving one hour late?

اَلْجَوَابُ بِعَوْنِ الْمَلِکِ الْوَھَّابِ اَللّٰھُمَّ ھِدَایَۃَ الْحَقِّ وَالصَّوَابِ

Answer: An individual should be penalised based on his level of fault. If an employee arrives one hour late, then only an hour’s worth can be deducted from his wage; one cannot deduct the wage by half a day’s worth. In some places, arriving late for three days results in an entire day’s wage being deducted; this is not permissible; in fact, to do so would be unjust.

The correct thing to do would be to deduct the employee’s wage based on the amount paid for the duration that he was late. A’la Hazrat, the Imam of Ahl Al-Sunnah, Maulana Shah Ahmad Raza Khan رَحْمَةُ الـلّٰـهِ عَـلَيْه states: ‘Only the amount equal to the number of hours missed for that day shall be deducted. If it amounts to one fourth, then one fourth shall be deducted. If it is more or less, then only that amount shall be deducted. For example, if the duration of work was six hours but someone missed an hour, one-sixth of the wage will now be deducted. Deducting more than this is unjust.’ ^[1]

وَاللہُ اَعْلَمُ  عَزَّوَجَلَّ  وَ رَسُوْلُہٗ اَعْلَم  صلَّی اللہ علیہ واٰلہٖ وسلَّم

How is it to include images in a clothing catalogue?

Question: What do the honourable scholars say regarding the following: I work in a ladies’ boutique where clothes are sold accompanied by images. Is it permissible to sell clothes accompanied by images? How is it to blur the face from the image? Also, our household members purchase clothing from brands that have images accompanying them; how is it to buy such clothing?

اَلْجَوَابُ بِعَوْنِ الْمَلِکِ الْوَھَّابِ اَللّٰھُمَّ ھِدَایَۃَ الْحَقِّ وَالصَّوَابِ

Answer: Placing the image of an uncovered woman alongside clothes is impermissible and contrary to modesty. To do so is a sin. To invite a woman for a photoshoot whose pictures are then included alongside clothing cannot be permissible in any way.

A permissible alternative would be to display the clothes using a mannequin (without a face or with an obscured face) and then take a picture of them. Mufti Amjad Ali A’zami رَحْمَةُ الـلّٰـهِ عَـلَيْه writes: ‘There is not an issue with an image where the head is cropped out or the face is removed. For example, if the image is on a paper, clothing or wall, ink could be cast over it, or the face or head could be scraped off or washed off.’^[2] Displaying clothes on a mannequin is also cheap, as pictures can be taken of a mannequin dressed in different types of clothing. This is also conducive to modesty.

As for the issue of buying clothes accompanied by images, it is permissible to buy and sell them. The pictures accompanying such clothing are not the items that are being purchased, rather they are something additional. Nevertheless, to include images alongside the clothes is impermissible. ^[3]

وَاللہُ اَعْلَمُ  عَزَّوَجَلَّ  وَ رَسُوْلُہٗ اَعْلَم  صلَّی اللہ علیہ واٰلہٖ وسلَّم

Purchasing a partner’s share in a plot of land with joint ownership

Question: What do the honourable scholars say regarding the following: I have a fifty-fifty partnership in a plot of land which me and my friend purchased worth one million. The land is now worth 1.5 million. My partner wishes to sell the land, but I do not want to do so. Can I purchase his half from him?

اَلْجَوَابُ بِعَوْنِ الْمَلِکِ الْوَھَّابِ اَللّٰھُمَّ ھِدَایَۃَ الْحَقِّ وَالصَّوَابِ

Answer: Yes, you may. In the given scenario, you can purchase your partners share from him. However, it must be purchased according to the current value. You cannot simply give the amount your partner contributed towards purchasing the land. Rather, you must purchase his share based on its current value or for an amount you both agree upon.

The seller may stipulate that he will sell his portion according to its current value. If the current value of the plot is 1.5 million, his share can be bought by giving him 750,000.

وَاللہُ اَعْلَمُ  عَزَّوَجَلَّ  وَ رَسُوْلُہٗ اَعْلَم  صلَّی اللہ علیہ واٰلہٖ وسلَّم

Who is entitled to the life insurance payout of someone who passed away?

Question: What do the honourable scholars say regarding the following: an individual passed away, who took out one life insurance before his marriage and one after his marriage. On the life insurance taken out before marriage, the deceased included his mother’s name on the insurance form as a nominee. On the life insurance taken out after marriage, the deceased chose his wife as a nominee. The wording on the insurance form is as follows:

“This form can be filled by a person who is an applicant for a death claim under the concerned insurance policy, i.e. a nominee, guardian, trustee, an assigned party or inheritors.”

Please clarify who is entitled to receive the payout from this insurance; is it only the deceased’s mother and wife, or are all the [deceased’s] inheritors entitled?

اَلْجَوَابُ بِعَوْنِ الْمَلِکِ الْوَھَّابِ اَللّٰھُمَّ ھِدَایَۃَ الْحَقِّ وَالصَّوَابِ

Answer: First, note that the wealth given to the insurance company comes under the ruling of a loan, and the conditional benefit gained from a loan is interest.

A Hadith states: کُلُّ قَرْضٍ جَرَّ مَنْفَعَةً فَھُوَ رِبًا, meaning, the benefit gained by means of a loan is interest.^[4] It is essential for every Muslim to stay away from interest. Hence, in the given scenario, the actual amount of money the deceased paid in towards the insurance policy will be distributed between all his inheritors. However, shariah’s ruling regarding the additional amount of money that is interest is that the inheritors should give it as charity to someone considered poor according to shariah (shari faqeer) without the intention of gaining reward for giving this charity.

A’la Hazrat, the Imam of Ahl Al-Sunnah, Imam Ahmad Raza Khan رَحْمَةُ الـلّٰـهِ عَـلَيْه writes: ‘It is an obligation to return the wealth attained from bribery, singing or theft to whoever it was taken from. If they no longer remain, it should be returned to their inheritors. If their whereabouts cannot be ascertained, then the wealth should be given as charity to the poor (fuqara). To spend this wealth in any matter of buying or selling is definitively haram. Aside from the aforementioned way, there is no alternative to getting rid of this burden. The same ruling applies to interest and void contracts (uqood fasidah). However, the only difference here is that it is not obligatory to give back to those from whom it was taken, rather one has the choice of returning it or giving in charity in the first instance.’^[5]

As for who is entitled to the money paid in towards the insurance, note that all the inheritors have a right to this; it is to be distributed amongst them as stipulated by shari’ah. This is because without transfer of ownership, simply nominating someone has no effect, as the nominees do not become owners.

It is stated in Fatawa Shaami: ان ملك الانسان لا ينقل إلى الغير بدون تمليكه, meaning, anything owned by a person does not transfer to the ownership of another without the latter taking possession of it.^[6] The actual reason behind choosing nominees is to grant them the right to make a claim, receive the payout when the policy holder passes away and give the wealth to its rightful recipients. It is not the case that the nominee is deemed the owner of that wealth with the actual policy holder no longer having any relevance.

وَاللہُ اَعْلَمُ  عَزَّوَجَلَّ  وَ رَسُوْلُہٗ اَعْلَم  صلَّی اللہ علیہ واٰلہٖ وسلَّم