Bakheet Al-Ghabash Makkah An Arab friend of mine told me about the sad experience he had when dealing with officials at a labor office in the Kingdom. He had had a dispute with his sponsor, which he could not resolve amicably. My friend tried very hard to claim his financial rights from the sponsor, but to no avail. Not having any other option, he went to the labor office in the city where he works and filed a complaint against his sponsor. However, there was a big surprise waiting for him. The official in charge of employee-employer disputes refused to entertain my friend's complaint because he had never signed an employment contract with his sponsor, a contract which could be used to prove that he was working for his current sponsor and not for another employer. No matter how hard my friend tried to convince the official that the complaint could be accepted without an employment contract, the official refused, even though my friend pointed out that there are several methods, other than an employment contract, which could be used to prove that he was working for his sponsor. Undoubtedly, my friend made a big mistake when he trusted his sponsor and did not insist on signing an employment contract. However, that does not mean that the Saudi Labor law does not protect such employees. For those who may not know, Article (51) of the law states: “The employment contract shall be deemed to exist if it was not written. In this case, the workman alone may establish the contract and his entitlements arising therefrom using all burdens of proof.” Article (37) stipulates: “The work contract for non-Saudis shall be written and of a specified period. If the contract does not specify the duration, the duration of the work permit shall be deemed as the duration of the contract.” These two articles protect the employee-employer relationship. Any conditions that do not agree with the articles are considered null and void as Article (8) of the same law states: “Any condition that contradicts the provisions of this law shall be deemed null and void. The same applies to any release or settlement of the worker's rights arising from this law during the validity of the work contract, unless the same is more beneficial to the worker.” Had the labor office official ever heard of the above articles? I am sure he had not because if he had, he would have accepted my friend's complaint without an employment contract. But I have another question: Who appointed this official to this position? I think the person who did so should be the one to blame because he failed to double check the credentials and qualifications of the official and whether or not he would be suitable for such a position. Unfortunately, some government agencies do not choose the right people for the job. Why? Because when they advertise for a vacancy, they state that they require general conditions which most applicants can meet. Unfortunately, they do not focus on competency and the necessary skills for the vacant position.
