The Board of Grievances upholds the termination of the employee's service despite the formal signature
The Board of Grievances in Saudi Arabia issued a decisive administrative ruling upholding the termination of an employee's service if their absence from work is proven, even if they maintain daily attendance records. This ruling rejected a compensation claim filed by the dismissed employee, affirming the legality of the administrative procedures and reinforcing a judicial and administrative principle that prioritizes actual performance over procedural formalities.
Details of the case and the grounds for the employee termination ruling
The Administrative Court of Appeal revealed details of the case in which the plaintiff sought to compel his former employer to pay him financial compensation following his dismissal. The employee based his claim on proof of his daily attendance through his official signature in the attendance register, arguing that this signature negated any claim of absence from work and that his actions did not fall under the legal circumstances that would justify terminating an employee's service.
However, the court found, through official documents, that the employee's attendance was merely a formality; he would sign the registers and then leave immediately without performing any duties for a full month. The plaintiff admitted this behavior but maintained that it did not constitute actual absence.
Job systems in the Kingdom and addressing job loss
Historically, the civil service system in Saudi Arabia has been keen to regulate the relationship between employees and their employers to ensure the smooth and consistent operation of public services. Human resources regulations have evolved to close any loopholes that could be exploited to evade job responsibilities. In this context, the judiciary clarified that the regulations explicitly permit the dismissal of an employee who is absent from work without a legitimate excuse for 15 consecutive days or 30 non-consecutive days within a single year. This historical progression in the drafting of laws aims to protect public funds and guarantee the efficient delivery of services to citizens.
Actual performance as a basis for job commitment
The Board of Grievances, in its ruling, affirmed that official attendance is not achieved merely by signing paper or electronically in the registers. Rather, it is fundamentally based on the performance of the job duties assigned to the employee according to their job description. The ruling emphasized that simply signing in and then leaving constitutes actual absence from work and violates the essence of professional commitment, even with paper or electronic proof of attendance.
Accordingly, the Administrative Court of Appeal concluded by confirming the validity of the procedure taken by the administrative body, with the absence of the element of error that warrants compensation, and dismissed the case due to the absence of any legal justification supporting the plaintiff’s claims.
The expected impact of the ruling on the administrative work environment
This judicial ruling carries significant weight at both the local and administrative levels, sending a clear and firm message to all employees in the public and private sectors that administrative oversight extends beyond electronic fingerprinting or paper signatures to encompass actual productivity and performance. This principle is expected to contribute to strengthening the values of integrity and transparency, and raising the level of professional discipline within institutions. It also provides human resources departments with strong legal support to take corrective measures against administrative negligence, which will positively impact the quality of services provided and enhance the efficiency of government agencies, in line with the objectives of Saudi Vision 2030 to develop and increase the productivity of the public sector.
