|
Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Students and Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
In the heat of the moment
Joined: 22 May 2015
Posts: 393
Location: Italy
|
 Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2015 4:49 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| buravirgil wrote: |
This popped up on one of my feeds today:
http://www.lawprose.org/lawprose-blog/
Because qualifying a post as not written by a lawyer, but aping the language of its discipline is fun! |
Always fun to read your posts, buravirgil! |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
nomad soul
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 11454
Location: The real world
|
| Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2015 10:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| gregory999 wrote: |
| nomad soul wrote: |
FYI: Not a good example. That McGill teacher was on the right type of visa since McGill University is a Canadian and not a Saudi entity. |
May be he was on the right type of visa (business visa), but he was on the wrong side of the Saudi labour laws. He was working illegally in the Magic Kingdom, and this is what he wrote:
The McGill teachers were working on a visa annotated “NOT PERMITTED TO WORK’ which all the McGill teachers were provided on arriving in Bahrain before being transported to Saudi Arabia.
According to Saudi Labor Law:
Article (33):
A non- Saudi may not engage in or be allowed to engage in any work except after obtaining a work permit from the Ministry, according to the form prepared by it for this purpose.
The Ministry of Labor did not issue McGill teachers with a work permit known as an Iqama. |
Why would the Saudi Ministry of Labor provide that McGill teacher with a residency card; he wasn't recruited/employed by a Saudi entity, which is why the labor law doesn't apply to his situation. In other words, who is his Saudi employer? There's no such thing as "Al Magheel University."
You should have quoted more of that provision of the labor law, which states (bolding mine):
| Quote: |
PART III: EMPLOYMENT OF NON-SAUDIS
Article (33):
A non- Saudi may not engage in or be allowed to engage in any work except after obtaining a work permit from the Ministry, according to the form prepared by it for this purpose.
The conditions for granting the permit are as follows:
(1) The worker has lawfully entered the country and is authorized to work.
(2) He possesses the professional and academic qualifications which the country needs and which are not possessed by citizens or the available number of such citizens is insufficient to meet the needs, or that he belongs to the class of ordinary workers that the country needs.
(3) He has a contract with the employer and is under his responsibility.
Source: http://forums.eslcafe.com/job/viewtopic.php?t=83790 |
That doesn't fit his work relationship. Per Saudi labor law, the concept of "employment/work" constitutes an employment agreement between a Saudi entity and a worker in which the employer pays the worker directly for work provided. This is not the same as "providing services" (usually to a client), which is what those on business visit/work visit/government visit visas may be contracted for --- that's the purpose of those visa types. Their work agreement is with their employer or the entity in their home country that hired them (e.g., McGill, Pepsi, X US contractor, Halliburton, etc.), which in turn, has a contract with the Saudi government or private Saudi company for payment of services. (It's analogous to working in our home country as a subcontractor or temp for Manpower or Kelly Services.) By the way, if that McGill teacher had worked for a Saudi on the side and pocketed riyals for that work, then he would have violated immigration law rather than the labor law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jackblack55
Joined: 27 Mar 2015
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2015 4:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| he wasn't recruited/employed by a Saudi entity, which is why the labor law doesn't apply |
The fact that the employer was a non-saudi company makes no difference. Saudi labor law is still applicable.
Common sense would suggest that a company conducting business overseas needs to respect the law of the country they are operating.
| Quote: |
| Per Saudi labor law, the concept of "employment/work" constitutes an employment agreement between a Saudi entity |
Saudi Labor Law does not define an employer as having to be a Saudi entity.
Saudi Labor Law defines an employer as follows;
Employer; Any natural or corporate person employing one or more workers for a wage.
| Quote: |
This is not the same as "providing services" (usually to a client), which is what those on business visit/work visit/government visit visas may be contracted for --- that's the purpose of those visa types. |
A full time teaching position would not fulfill the purpose of a business visa or government visit visa. Clearly the 'contract for services'
in this instance falls under Article (5) Saudi Labor Law which states:
The provisions of this Law shall apply to;
(1) Any contract whereby a person commits himself to work for an employer and under his management or supervision for a wage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nomad soul
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 11454
Location: The real world
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2015 8:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jackblack55 wrote: |
The fact that the employer was a non-saudi company makes no difference. Saudi labor law is still applicable.
Common sense would suggest that a company conducting business overseas needs to respect the law of the country they are operating.
....
Saudi Labor Law does not define an employer as having to be a Saudi entity.
Saudi Labor Law defines an employer as follows;
Employer; Any natural or corporate person employing one or more workers for a wage.
....
A full time teaching position would not fulfill the purpose of a business visa or government visit visa. Clearly the 'contract for services'
in this instance falls under Article (5) Saudi Labor Law which states:
The provisions of this Law shall apply to;
(1) Any contract whereby a person commits himself to work for an employer and under his management or supervision for a wage. |
"Common sense," signing a binding agreement with McGill to provide services for nine months as an independent contractor at their Saudi project, getting paid in dollars directly into one's Canadian bank account, and having "visit" indicated on one's visa don't fall within the purview of the Saudi labor law. But we'll have to agree to disagree. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MixtecaMike
Joined: 19 Nov 2003
Posts: 643
Location: Guatebad
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 2:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In the McGill-RCJ disaster aftermath, let's forget the legal niceties, and just go for blood, beheadings, and public shame! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
buravirgil
Joined: 23 Jan 2014
Posts: 967
Location: Jiangxi Province, China
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2015 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Now ^THIS^ is the sort of Stockholm syndrome I can rally behind! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jackblack55
Joined: 27 Mar 2015
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 12:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| "Common sense," signing a binding agreement with McGill to provide services for nine months as an independent contractor at their Saudi project, getting paid in dollars directly into one's Canadian bank account, and having "visit" indicated on one's visa don't fall within the purview of the Saudi labor law. But we'll have to agree to disagree. |
The aforementioned facts have no legal significance and are therefore irrelevant in terms of applying Saudi Labor Law.
In this context the issuance of a 'visit visa' meant the teacher was working illegally. It does not mean that Saudi Labor Law does not apply.
This is not a subjective issue. It is a question of fact based on Saudi Labor Law. The web site www.mcgilllawsuits.com shows an email
from the Ministry of Labor which confirms that a visit visa does not permit the holder to work as an English teacher.[/quote] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nomad soul
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 11454
Location: The real world
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2015 6:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jackblack55 wrote: |
| Quote: |
| "Common sense," signing a binding agreement with McGill to provide services for nine months as an independent contractor at their Saudi project, getting paid in dollars directly into one's Canadian bank account, and having "visit" indicated on one's visa don't fall within the purview of the Saudi labor law. But we'll have to agree to disagree. |
The aforementioned facts have no legal significance and are therefore irrelevant in terms of applying Saudi Labor Law.
In this context the issuance of a 'visit visa' meant the teacher was working illegally. It does not mean that Saudi Labor Law does not apply.
This is not a subjective issue. It is a question of fact based on Saudi Labor Law. The web site www.mcgilllawsuits.com shows an email
from the Ministry of Labor which confirms that a visit visa does not permit the holder to work as an English teacher. |
The emails he provided wouldn't be admissible for consideration in any court due to lack of specificity. He was deliberately vague in his inquiries when describing his situation, and therefore, received generic responses. Moreover, why does he not have "evidence" from the Saudi Embassy's consulate in Canada or Bahrain? They're the Saudi entity that reviewed his visa application along with his McGill contract and other documentation, and subsequently, approved him for a government visit visa. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nomad soul
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 11454
Location: The real world
|
| Posted: Fri May 11, 2018 5:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I came across the following CBC news article, Former McGill teacher alleges he was sent to Saudi Arabia with wrong visa, June 22, 2016:
Not surprising, it states:
| Quote: |
Tamella Severcan testified via phone conference from Vancouver, where she is the director of Visa Universe.
Severcan said she saw a copy of Fleming's 2012 contract with McGill, and found it described work that would require a different type of visa, an "Employment visit visa."
Fleming lost a first civil suit against McGill last year before Quebec Court.
In the original lawsuit, he had argued he'd not been informed ahead of time about his obligations to renew his visa by exiting and re-entering Saudi Arabia multiple times over the course of his nine-and-a-half month contract. His passport ran out of space, and McGill dismissed him after he was not allowed back in the country.
In 2015, Dortelus found McGill did provide Fleming both proper paperwork and ample warning. |
There doesn't seem to be further news about the Quebec Court's ruling on this case.
For additional background, also see:
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sheikhitnow
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 32
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2018 12:44 am Post subject: McGill |
|
|
| US universities with any sense, such as MIT, are avoiding the Middle East, for all the reasons we know. NYU set up a campus in Abu Dhabi designed to appeal to students from around the world as an alternate to the home US campus, but students are not particularly happy. Chinese students complain they can't even dress as they wish, wishing they'd gone to the "real" NYU. Then you have the other questions of censorship and meddling: refusing visas to professors whose opinions the local authorities don't like; a lack of the same academic freedom found at the home campus, etc. The ones in Qatar are special cases--mostly professional and graduate schools that seem to be doing all right. You can be sure no US university will establish any Saudi campus in the foreseeable future, even if MBS transforms the KSA into another UAE. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nomad soul
Joined: 31 Jan 2010
Posts: 11454
Location: The real world
|
| Posted: Sun May 13, 2018 11:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| US universities with any sense, such as MIT, are avoiding the Middle East, for all the reasons we know. |
Valid points. However, this thread reflects the issue of one expat's misunderstanding of visa types and failure to thoroughly read his contract with a Canadian university. The context is legal rather than cultural. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sheikhitnow
Joined: 29 Dec 2017
Posts: 32
|
| Posted: Tue May 15, 2018 7:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| The two contexts very often overlap. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
This page is maintained by the one and only Dave Sperling.
Contact Dave's ESL Cafe
Copyright © 2018 Dave Sperling. All Rights Reserved.
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
