Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai General Chat

http://business.maktoob.com/20090000003 ... m_content=

i've nothing to say.....

Improving on the good points? Are there any?

Part of it may have to do with the fact that there would be many government agencies that would no longer be needed, hence a rise in unemployment amongst the local population.

Bahrain equated the sponsorship to slavery. And what would the UAE be without slaves??

Here is a helpful tip. If you write

<url=www.mysite.com>This is the link</url>

replacing the <> with the proper [] you can make your posts look much nicer and more people will read them.

Like this...

--

Hey guys, look at this site UAE pours cold water on labour law reform

I am really worried about this decision.I was suppose to move to another job and was only waiting for this law to be introduced but all my hopes went in vain.

Thanks anyway for the tip Captain.

Bora Bora wrote:Improving on the good points? Are there any?

Part of it may have to do with the fact that there would be many government agencies that would no longer be needed, hence a rise in unemployment amongst the local population.

Bahrain equated the sponsorship to slavery. And what would the UAE be without slaves??

The only thing that sucks in this visa sponsoring is that you have to get the sponsors to approve you being transferred to another job. Any other thoughts guys? I'm not in your shoes here so could someone explains to me why is it described as slavery. What is harming you other than what I just wrote?

uaekid I would look at it the other way round and say 'what is good about it' (why does it need to exist?).

The law certainly is used by some employers to prevent workers from leaving their employment and moving freely to other employers. It's illegal for an employer to refuse to issue a no objection letter for a worker to change companies, if there are no good reasons, but it happens, especially to workers who don't have much power. Same as the employers who take employees passports away 'for their own security, in case they lose them, blah blah'.

That's my understanding.

Speedhump wrote:uaekid I would look at it the other way round and say 'what is good about it' (why does it need to exist?).

The law certainly is used by some employers to prevent workers from leaving their employment and moving freely to other employers. It's illegal for an employer to refuse to issue a no objection letter for a worker to change companies, if there are no good reasons, but it happens, especially to workers who don't have much power. Same as the employers who take employees passports away 'for their own security, in case they lose them, blah blah'.

That's my understanding.

Yes but I thought it's not legal now to hold anyone’s passport! But it has a good turn to it now! Isn’t it a good thing to hold the sponsor responsible for his obligations toward you?

How does it work in EU? Is everyone on his own? Doesn’t every worker have someone responsible for him? I mean "a sponsor" is just another word for "employer" "work place" isn't it ?

Kid, the only reference I have is that in the US its referred to as "at-will employment". Either party can break the working relationship with no liability.

You don't have to ask permission to go from one job to the other. Nor do you have to ask an employer to provide a no objection letter to take up employment elsewhere. Nor do you have to worry that just out of spite someone will put a ban on you. It is a "May I" working mentality in the UAE.

If I recall, you claimed to have worked in the US. Since you were not a US citizen or holding a green card, surely you were required to obtain some documentation to allow you to work. Having worked there surely you know the difference between there and here. In spite of your status in the US, I am sure that if you wanted to seek employment elsewhere you would have been free to do so without penalty.

What Bahrain is doing is good the for country as well as the people. It will encourage companies to put in place incentives to retain staff as well as making it a competitive salary market.

Yes kid it's not legal to withhold passports and it's not legal to withhold 'no objection' letters (to allow transfer of a work visa) but it still happens, the system is abused. The system has only ever benefited the employer and never the employee.

In the UK, provided that the person is legally resident in the country both sides sign a contract and that's it. Either side can end the contract by giving whatever period of notice is mentioned in the contract, usually a month for lower jobs. Then, provided that all financial obligations of both sides have been settled, the worker is free as a bird, no need to ask permission of the government or the employer to work anywhere else.

You guys are useless at reading between the lines

“There is absolutely no need to abolish the sponsorship system because so many government departments and external organisations are tied to it,” Khazraji was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

Means what about all the sleeping partners who own 51% stake in everything and charge huge amounts of money just to sign a paper once in year which yto get ou have to chase after them for months on end because he won't pick up the phone or is in bangkok for some "bussiness" and dunno when hes comming back etc etc.

How many of you actually have to deal with your forced emarati bussiness "partner" ?

desertdudeshj wrote:You guys are useless at reading between the lines

“There is absolutely no need to abolish the sponsorship system because so many government departments and external organisations are tied to it,” Khazraji was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

Means what about all the sleeping partners who own 51% stake in everything and charge huge amounts of money just to sign a paper once in year which yto get ou have to chase after them for months on end because he won't pick up the phone or is in bangkok for some "bussiness" and dunno when hes comming back etc etc.

How many of you actually have to deal with your forced emarati bussiness "partner" ?

what ever leads to shuting down that lazy labor department. I'm with it.

beside if you collect all the taxes you have to pay else where ,it will be the same is you paying the sponsor the 51% LOL nothing is free you know.

ps: you can always work in free zone.

“There is no plan or talk of applying that here at the moment as there are enough initiatives to work through,” the unnamed official was quoted as saying

What he is really saying is "Lets see if it works with Bahrain first, then we'll learn from it and do something".

Nothing is written in stone.

desertdudeshj wrote:You guys are useless at reading between the lines

“There is absolutely no need to abolish the sponsorship system because so many government departments and external organisations are tied to it,” Khazraji was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

Means what about all the sleeping partners who own 51% stake in everything and charge huge amounts of money just to sign a paper once in year which yto get ou have to chase after them for months on end because he won't pick up the phone or is in bangkok for some "bussiness" and dunno when hes comming back etc etc.

How many of you actually have to deal with your forced emarati bussiness "partner" ?

Sorry I missed something. What does the law concerning majority business shareholding have to do with employment visas? The sleeping partner doesn't take a cut of the visa fees, in fact he should have signed a legally binding agreement to say he takes no part whatseover in the running of the business, so why do you ned to deal with him apart from renewing the company trade license?

I'm in a Free Zone company so I don't have personal experience but isn't that right?

desertdudeshj wrote:You guys are useless at reading between the lines

“There is absolutely no need to abolish the sponsorship system because so many government departments and external organisations are tied to it,” Khazraji was quoted as saying by the newspaper.

Means what about all the sleeping partners who own 51% stake in everything and charge huge amounts of money just to sign a paper once in year which yto get ou have to chase after them for months on end because he won't pick up the phone or is in bangkok for some "bussiness" and dunno when hes comming back etc etc.

How many of you actually have to deal with your forced emarati bussiness "partner" ?

I know of someone who had similar troubles. Crazy!

Bora Bora wrote:If I recall, you claimed to have worked in the US. Since you were not a US citizen or holding a green card, surely you were required to obtain some documentation to allow you to work. Having worked there surely you know the difference between there and here. In spite of your status in the US, I am sure that if you wanted to seek employment elsewhere you would have been free to do so without penalty.

Probably there are different kind of contracts/visas for foreigners in the US and Canada. 20 years ago my uncle and a few my former university mates signed some contracts with some US universities. State College, PA was one of them. They worked as lecturers for next to nothing (~1500 bucks per month plus flat). They was able to change their job only inside the university.
As I remember they didn't have green cards.

Surprisingly their wives were granted normal visas with permission to work outside university. As a rule they earned even more money although their qualification was much lower than the one of university-slaves.

Red Chief wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:If I recall, you claimed to have worked in the US. Since you were not a US citizen or holding a green card, surely you were required to obtain some documentation to allow you to work. Having worked there surely you know the difference between there and here. In spite of your status in the US, I am sure that if you wanted to seek employment elsewhere you would have been free to do so without penalty.

Probably there are different kind of contracts/visa for foreigners in the US and Canada. 20 years ago my uncle and a few my former university mates signed some contracts with some US universities. State College, PA was one of them. They worked as lecturers for next to nothing (~1500 bucks per month plus flat). They was able to change their job only inside the university.
As I remember they didn't have green cards.

Surprisingly their wives were granted normal visas with permission to work outside university. As a rule they earned even more money although their qualification were much lower than the one of university-slaves.

Well as you noted, it was 20 years ago. I would assume that State College, is just that - run by the state. They were probably restricted to universities due to their status, which was probably a restricted visa, they had no social security number, and did not pay taxes.

And to say they were "university-slaves". Like the UAE, I am sure that no one held a gun to their head and there was always the choice to leave. The difference could be is that expats that come to the UAE are not chasing the passport, whereas they may have been.

Bora Bora wrote:And to say they were "university-slaves". Like the UAE, I am sure that no one held a gun to their head and there was always the choice to leave. The difference could be is that expats that come to the UAE are not chasing the passport, whereas they may have been.

There was no big difference with current situation in the UAE. I'm not sure about taxes. I think they had to pay something.

The situation has been changed for 20 years because you hardly find any lecturer with doctor degree who wants to sign a contract for 1500 bucks a month in Russia now. Probably they have been changed for Indians.

It's only economical issue - if you can find somebody who wants to be a slave why you don't use him/her.

I applaud Bahrain for its decision. But I totally agree with the UAE'S wait and see aproach. I do believe that Bahrain's example will eventually be followed by the rest of the Middle East- but it will take time. Bahrain is a very small country and can better afford to experiment with these kind of things than the UAE or Qatar can.

As far as the sponsorship system in the UAE, the system on paper is not completely without merit. It just has been heavily exploited and this needs to be remedied ASAP.

UAE needs to think about offering citizenship to people that are highly qualified or over a certain networth. This will help the country on the whole as talented people and entrepreneurs will be committed to the development of UAE. The UAE Nationals should be pushed in the government jobs to ensure that they stay competitive. This will help them in moving to private sector and working their way up.

A lot of UAE Nationals benefit for this and take undue advantage of benefits being offered.

I do believe though that companies should be allowed to seek compensation, if the employee changed jobs, but should not be restricted. This will ensure that nobody is exploited and employer's do not take advantage of the employees. This will also bring parity to the salaries.

The rule for 51% controlling stake should also be relooked at, as lot of business might not find this feasible and are currently avoiding UAE. UAE has a window for another 5-10 years, before the world moves to using alternative fuels as against oil. Carbon credits are gaining in prominence and will ensure that people reduce their dependance on fuels that impact the environment. Oil might last for 100 years, but demand whill shift.

worldguy wrote:UAE needs to think about offering citizenship to people that are highly qualified or over a certain networth. This will help the country on the whole as talented people and entrepreneurs will be committed to the development of UAE. The UAE Nationals should be pushed in the government jobs to ensure that they stay competitive. This will help them in moving to private sector and working their way up.

A lot of UAE Nationals benefit for this and take undue advantage of benefits being offered.

I do believe though that companies should be allowed to seek compensation, if the employee changed jobs, but should not be restricted. This will ensure that nobody is exploited and employer's do not take advantage of the employees. This will also bring parity to the salaries.

The rule for 51% controlling stake should also be relooked at, as lot of business might not find this feasible and are currently avoiding UAE. UAE has a window for another 5-10 years, before the world moves to using alternative fuels as against oil. Carbon credits are gaining in prominence and will ensure that people reduce their dependance on fuels that impact the environment. Oil might last for 100 years, but demand whill shift.

Can’t agree more about the citizenship. And for the 51% I really thought it's just something on papers not more than that and from what I encountered, locals are mostly the ones financing the businesses, but of course this does not apples on all cases. Moreover, it's just a law on paper! I didn't hear much dispute in courts, at least not in a big scale and I think you can always overpass these law ones you establish an internal laws inside your company somehow to be in the actual investor side other wise I can’t see how thousands of companies are doing well in the UAE and there are always the free zones in almost every city.

uaekid wrote:

worldguy wrote:UAE needs to think about offering citizenship to people that are highly qualified or over a certain networth. This will help the country on the whole as talented people and entrepreneurs will be committed to the development of UAE. The UAE Nationals should be pushed in the government jobs to ensure that they stay competitive. This will help them in moving to private sector and working their way up.

A lot of UAE Nationals benefit for this and take undue advantage of benefits being offered.

I do believe though that companies should be allowed to seek compensation, if the employee changed jobs, but should not be restricted. This will ensure that nobody is exploited and employer's do not take advantage of the employees. This will also bring parity to the salaries.

The rule for 51% controlling stake should also be relooked at, as lot of business might not find this feasible and are currently avoiding UAE. UAE has a window for another 5-10 years, before the world moves to using alternative fuels as against oil. Carbon credits are gaining in prominence and will ensure that people reduce their dependance on fuels that impact the environment. Oil might last for 100 years, but demand whill shift.

Can’t agree more about the citizenship. And for the 51% I really thought it's just something on papers not more than that and from what I encountered, locals are mostly the ones financing the businesses, but of course this does not apples on all cases. Moreover, it's just a law on paper! I didn't hear much dispute in courts, at least not in a big scale and I think you can always overpass these law ones you establish an internal laws inside your company somehow to be in the actual investor side other wise I can’t see how thousands of companies are doing well in the UAE and there are always the free zones in almost every city.

Are you sure about what you say kid?

As I said above provided that the company gets a legally binding signed agreement (it is done) from the 51 pct shareholder not to interfere in any way with the running of the company, uaekid would seem to be quite correct.

Speedhump wrote:As I said above provided that the company gets a legally binding signed agreement (it is done) from the 51 pct shareholder not to interfere in any way with the running of the company, uaekid would seem to be quite correct.

The part I was refering to was about locals financing business, this is really not the case in the majority of companies.