further to the last meeting held between wataniya airways and staff representatives, wataniya airways finally issued termination a letter to its employees - however, the letter was described as "ambiguous" and did not really answer the staff's concerns - the letter was dissected and some serious questions were raised on virtually every point.
one major concern was the absence of time frame as nothing mentioned when or how the employees dues will be settled! another concern was the selective use of the labor law - if all was as per the labor law, why is the airline breaching its articles on daily basis and why are their contracts also being breached???
here's the full letter analysis as received by a staff's representative:
The following post represents our teams point of view, we are NOT lawyers, but like most of the educated members of this group, it is safe to assume that we know how to read and interpret the law from a layman’s perspective, please use your own common sense and good judgment to assess and evaluate what’s written below. DO NOT quote us on any of the below labor law articles, please do your home work and read the labor law yourself.
Anatomy 101, how to dissect an email ;)
Take note of the following points, please read carefully, cross reference the numbers below with the numbers on the email scan in the photos section.
a- “Staff” = as per labor law, you are no longer “staff” since as par article # 48 you have the right to terminate the contract without notification if the employer does not abide by the terms of the contract OR the provisions of the law, which happened already, since as per article # 56 payments SHALL NOT be delayed for more than 7 days, not to mention that as per article # 61 that he (the employer) SHALL also pay the remuneration of workers throughout the complete or partial period of closure if the closure is due to any other reason not related to the workers, as long as the employer wishes them to keep working for his account.
b- “With reference” = in the Arabic version its written “in addition to”, which gives it a different legal meaning, addition to means this is an appendix or part of the termination letter, with reference means this is merely a clarification of a previous correspondence.
c- “Terminated” = once again, “terminated” literally means terminated, it is not a notice period, if the termination letter was a notice period, it would have clearly mentioned that the 7th or march was the start of your 3 month notice, ending in you being “terminated” on the 7th of July.
d- “Subsequent legal and procedural measures” - “implications of some further procedures” = the only “measures” and “procedures” to be carried out by the company now is to pay us our dues, as per the continuation of article # 48 that the worker SHALL be entitled to his end of service benefits, as per article # 52 the worker is entitled to the entire end of service benefits, and as per article # 44 -b, you are also eligible for the compensation of the notice period if the party wishing to terminate the contract (in our case the company) does not abide by the period of notice.
f- “notification” = in the Arabic version its written as “request”, although there is a major difference between “requesting for permission to leave” and “notifying you that I’m leaving without waiting for your approval”, either terms are wrong anyway since once again you are no longer “staff” as per the explanation above.
g- “administrative measures applicable in such cases” = it is no secret that some employees were and still are being bargained to leave a part of their total financial dues in order to be given an immediate release, needles to say it is within the company’s power by law to not give you an immediate release, that’s mentioned in the famous article # 44-d, BUT for that to happen, as per the continuation of article # 44-d, you have to be WITHIN your 3 month notice (not our case, we are already terminated), you have to still be an employee (not our case) you have to be paid your entitlements and remuneration for the period of notification (not our case too)
What you will be told to believe is that you are still an employee! And that as per article # 53, if you want to leave now you will get an indemnity of HALF a month for every year of work since YOU are the one who’s terminating the contract!!!
h- “the end of service settlements dues will be in accordance with Kuwaiti labor law” = why is it not mentioned that it will be in accordance to our contracts??? Is there a try to enforce the labor law instead of the contracts??? Article # 6 states that the labor law shall represent the MINIMUM level of workers rights, therefore, if your contract allocates more entitlements it is to your benefit!!! why is it not mentioned WHEN or HOW these dues will be settled??? if all was per the labor law, why are several articles of the labor law being breached on daily basis??? why was our contracts breached??? why are we being led to believe that we are still employees??? And why oh why is the intentional ambiguity???