Ignacio Samonte's work visa was that of a carpenter. Since his company was engaged more in steel fabrication work, he was forced to do the job of a fabricator, although he was a carpenter. “At first, I protested because fabrication work required skills, like welding, which I barely had the experience. But then my employer encouraged me to learn the rudiments of fabrication work. Now, I learned the trade. I have no complaint now,” he said. He said abolishing sponsorship system might not be appropriate in many work categories. “Without a sponsor, how will a foreign worker improve his competitiveness in the labor market, like acquiring skills? My employer, who was my sponsor, provided me the skills that I now possessed,” Samonte said. While Samonte was concerned on skill-building, other expatriate workers are worried how they will come to work in the Kingdom without a sponsor. “If my understanding is right that my sponsor is my employer, who will pay for my recruitment fees, the fees for residence and work permit, my visas, my housing, etc.?” asked Domingo, a barber. “The problem is how to get started. If sponsorship is abolished, and I go on cutting hair without a sponsor, do I have the money to start a barber shop on my own or can I afford to pay all the fees my sponsor is paying now to the government?” the barber inquired. A. M. Mohan, an outdoor advertising salesman, asks as to how he will deal with the municipal government offices if he were to work without a sponsor. “My job is to sell advertising billboards and neon signs, a trade that requires contacts with government agencies. Without my sponsor, who is my employer? Will the municipal engineering office or the health department deal with me and give me the permit to put a billboard on a building or highways? Employers and sponsors in this kind of business do all these things,” Mohan explained. A human resource manager of a large company engaged in diversified commercial, industrial and services activities said that in the absence of a clear-cut policy on how the non-sponsorship system will work, speculations on the sides of employers and expatriate workers will be varied and many. He said he personally believes that the present system of worker-employer relationship is ideal. “It is the implementation of the law that is defective,” he said. “The labor sector, particularly employers, is yet to learn and know the guidelines. The Ministry of Labor is yet to issue the guidelines. Only after that can I comment whether or not abolition of sponsorship system is indeed workable or not,” he told Saudi Gazette Dr. Bandar Al-Hajjar, chairman of the National Society for Human Rights (NSHR), which strongly voiced for the abolition of the sponsorship system, said it is the Ministry of Labor that will issue the guidelines that will “rectify the relationship between the employer and the expatriate employee.” Ghazi Al-Gosaibi, the Minister of Labor, has been quoted as saying that “his ministry was planning to establish certain companies that would organize workers and conclude contracts between employers and expatriate employees.” During a forum organized by the Technical and Vocational Training Corporation that discussed the rights of employees, including foreign workers, it was emphasized that expatriate workers have the same rights with those of Saudi employees with regards to compensation, allowances, end-of-service awards, educational allowances and other pay packages. “It is precisely these rights (of foreign workers) that would be at stake and at risk if the sponsorship system is abolished, amended, or rectified,” the human resource manager pointed out. Under the revised Saudi Labor Law, part three of the laws under the heading employment of non-Saudis specifies that (under section 3, article 33) “the workman must be contracted by the employer and under his responsibility. The term “work” as used in this Article shall mean any industrial, commercial, agricultural, financial, or other endeavor, any service including domestic service.” This Section 3, Article 33 of the Saudi Labor Law establishes the sponsorship relation between the employer and the employee. There are provisions of the Saudi Labor Law pertaining to the employment of foreign workers that need to be looked into if sponsorship is to be abolished. Article 37 says: “Employment contracts for non-Saudi nationals shall be in writing and of specific term.” A random survey points out two specific provisions of the Saudi Labor Law that are often abused by employers. Article 38 says: “The employer shall not employ the workman in a profession other than the one specified in his work permit.” Many employers force their workers to do jobs they don't have the skills, which is a violation of the job contract. Article 39 says: “The employer shall neither let his workman work for another party nor shall he employ a workman of another party and by the same token shall the workman work for another employer prior to satisfaction of the designated statutory procedures and rules.” “These two Articles need to be rectified. I hope the non-sponsorship employment will free foreign workers from the abuses of employers,” said Filipino architect R.C. Lim, who has been worked independently for various government agencies after he had misunderstanding with his sponsor. Lim surmised that the abolition of the sponsorship system was planned to encourage foreign workers to come and work in the Kingdom. He said many foreign engineers and technicians are now by-passing Saudi Arabia in favor of our Gulf countries that pay attractive wages and offer better amenities. “There is now a shortage of foreign workers in Saudi Arabia, particularly in construction and engineering projects, which is why, I think, the Ministry of Labor is trying to dangle the non-sponsorship plan,” Lim said. According to Dr. Richard B. Joseph, regional manager of one of the leading international engineering companies operating in the Kingdom, the abolition of the sponsorship program must be studied incisively and judiciously. “I am seeing advantages and disadvantages on both sides. Workers may feel the so-called freedom that they are envisioning, but losing other factors, such as employers' protection in terms of job security, health insurance, and other compensation packages,” he said. He said the non-sponsorship scenario could be abused by workers. __
