فائزه مقتدایی

Government intervention in employment contracts is a complex and significant issue. On one hand, freedom of contract and mutual agreement between parties are fundamental principles that support individuals' economic and social independence. On the other hand, a lack of government intervention in these contracts can lead to exploitation of workers, inadequate wages, and social inequality. In determining the optional terms of an employment contract, the principle of freedom of will prevails, allowing parties to agree on specific terms. However, for mandatory terms that are considered imperative rules, the will and agreement of the parties are not valid. Labor laws are the primary factor limiting freedom of contract in employment. Another basis for government intervention in employment contracts is the principle of justice and fairness. This principle ensures that the terms of the contract do not infringe on workers' rights and that they receive fair wages. Additionally, parties to an employment contract must adhere to good morals and religious principles, and any agreement contrary to these is void. To promote social justice, alleviate poverty, and create a balance between workers and employers in determining working conditions, the government, based on the principle of "no harm or causing harm," has enacted laws to protect workers. These laws are mandatory, and any agreement contrary to them is unenforceable. Therefore, the government, as the governing authority, plays a pivotal role in determining certain terms of employment contracts. The necessity of government intervention in setting working conditions is justifiable from both legal and religious perspectives.