Labour Dispute Resolution Process and Its Impact on the Rights of Low-Skilled Temporary Foreign Workers in the Absence of a Labour Court in Saudi Legal System: A Critique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article deals with the issues linked to the process of resolving labour disputes and their impact on the rights of low-skilled Temporary Foreign Workers. In doing so, the article intends to provide an overview of the development of the legal system in Saudi Arabia in an effort to provide a critical review of the main authorities influencing the Saudi legal structure and highlight the current reforms of the judicial system. For the purpose of this study, this paper examines the judicial and quasi-judicial bodies to understand the issue linked to the process of resolving labour disputes and its impact on the rights of TFWs. Due to the absence of a labour court from the existing judicial structure, it is essential to consider the regulations for litigation before the commissions for the settlement of labour disputes issued by the Saudi Council of Ministers. This article highlights the key labour cases that are interrelated with employment contracts and residency (Iqama) regulations in order to review the jurisdiction of the commissions. Finally, the paper provides a suggestion to resolve the problems of labour dispute resolution process with special reference to TFWs cases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".