VoxxArrive · Saudi Arabia onboarding topic

Saudi Arabia Gross Misconduct Dismissal: Article 80 Grounds and Due-Process Requirements

Under the Saudi Labor Law (Royal Decree No. M/51), Article 80 lets an employer dismiss a worker without an end-of-service award, notice, or indemnity only for nine closed grounds - including assault on the employer or a superior, proven dishonesty or breach of trust, forgery to obtain the job, disclosure of trade secrets, unlawful personal gain from the job, deliberate material loss to the employer (reported to the competent authorities within 24 hours), and unauthorized absence exceeding 30 days in a contract year or 15 consecutive days after a required prior written warning - and only if the worker is first given a chance to state objections to the dismissal. Two of the nine grounds are not misconduct in the ordinary sense - dismissal during the probationary period, and disregard of posted safety instructions or main job obligations after a written warning - so this page focuses on the seven conduct-related grounds most relevant to a "gross misconduct" dismissal; employers relying on the probation or safety-instructions grounds should treat them as separate, distinct grounds rather than misconduct findings. Employees who dispute the classification can pursue the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Development's Amicable Settlement process and then the Labor Courts; claims for wrongful termination (Article 77 compensation: 15 days' wage per year of service, minimum two months' wage) are time-barred after 12 months under Article 234. These figures were confirmed directly against the Ministry's own published text of the Labor Law and corroborated by an independent 2026 law-firm legal guide, including a second independent re-check of the full nine-ground list during final fact review.

Try it live →Add to VoxxHire

Steps

Document the ground and preserve evidence - Build a written record (incident reports, witness statements, attendance logs, warnings) tying the conduct to one of the nine specific Article 80 grounds - vague or general 'misconduct' claims that don't map to a listed ground will not survive a Labor Court challenge.
Report material-loss incidents within 24 hours - If the dismissal is based on Article 80(4) - a deliberate act or omission causing the employer material loss - the employer must report the incident to the competent authorities within 24 hours of becoming aware of it, or that specific ground fails.
Issue the required prior written warning where applicable - For safety-instruction breaches (Article 80(2)) and unauthorized absence (Article 80(7)) a written warning is a statutory precondition - for absence, the warning must be given after 20 days of cumulative absence in a year or after 10 consecutive days, before the worker crosses the 30-day/15-day dismissal threshold.
Give the worker a documented chance to object - Article 80's opening clause conditions every one of the nine grounds on the worker first being given an opportunity to state their objections to the termination; record this step (date, method, worker's response or refusal to respond) - the Labor Law text does not itself state who bears the burden of proof, but as a practical matter employers are expected to be able to show this step happened if the dismissal is challenged.
Process the termination and withhold pay only if the ground is solid - Record the dismissal through the employer's standard HR and contract-management process (commonly Qiwa, HRSD's e-contract platform used for Saudi employment contracts generally, though this session could not independently confirm a Qiwa-specific recording requirement for Article 80 dismissals) without the end-of-service award, notice pay, or indemnity - if the Article 80 ground doesn't clearly hold up, Article 77 exposes the employer to compensation of 15 days' wage per year of service (fixed-term contracts: wages for the remaining term), with a minimum of two months' wage.
Expect Amicable Settlement, then Labor Court, if the worker disputes it - A worker who disagrees with the Article 80 characterization can raise it with the Ministry's Amicable Settlement for Labour Disputes mechanism first, then the Labor Court if unresolved; under Article 234 the claim must be filed within 12 months of the termination date.

Timeline

The Article 80 dismissal itself is immediate once the ground is documented and the worker has been given the chance to respond - there is no statutory notice period or waiting period, unlike an ordinary Article 75 termination (30 days' notice from the employee, 60 days' notice from the employer). If contested, the dispute first goes through the Ministry's free Amicable Settlement process, then the Labor Court; Article 234 gives the worker up to 12 months from the termination date to file a claim and requires Labor Courts to handle labor claims "on an urgent basis," though no fixed statutory number of days for resolving a contested case is published.

Cost & fees

No government fee applies to executing an Article 80 dismissal itself - it is a unilateral employer action, not an application requiring authority approval. If the worker disputes it, the Ministry's Amicable Settlement mechanism is a free mediation step before any Labor Court filing; this session's sources did not confirm current Labor Court filing-fee amounts, so that figure is not asserted.

Some figures on this page vary by jurisdiction, zone or nationality, or could not be independently confirmed from a public source at time of writing - confirm the current figure with the regulator before relying on it.

Sources

Frequently asked

Can we dismiss an employee under Article 80 without paying end-of-service benefits?

Only if the conduct fits one of the nine specific grounds in Article 80 - e.g., proven dishonesty or breach of trust, assault on the employer or a superior, forgery to get the job, or unauthorized absence beyond the statutory threshold - and only after the worker has been given a documented opportunity to state objections. Miss either condition and courts routinely reclassify the dismissal as unlawful, triggering Article 77 compensation instead. Note that two of the nine grounds (probationary-period termination and disregard of safety instructions/main job obligations) are not misconduct grounds as such, even though they sit in the same Article 80 list.

What happens if we skip the written warning for an absence-related dismissal?

Article 80(7) makes the prior written warning a precondition for dismissing an employee for unauthorized absence: it must be issued after 20 days of cumulative absence in one contract year, or after 10 consecutive days, before the 30-day/15-day dismissal threshold is reached. Skipping it disqualifies the Article 80 ground and exposes the employer to Article 77 compensation (15 days' wage per year of service, minimum two months).

Does the employer have to prove the Article 80 ground applied, or does the employee have to disprove it?

The Labor Law text itself does not state an explicit burden-of-proof rule for Article 80 disputes. As a practical matter, though, once a worker challenges the dismissal through the Amicable Settlement process or the Labor Court, employers are expected to be able to show both that a listed ground applied and that the worker was given the chance to object beforehand - which is why documenting the warning, the incident, and the worker's response is standard employer practice, even though the law does not prescribe a specific written format or say who formally bears the burden.

How long does an employee have to challenge an Article 80 dismissal?

Under Article 234 of the Labor Law, no labor claim is admissible more than 12 months after the date the employment relationship ended, unless the claimant has an excuse the court accepts or the employer acknowledges the right; once filed, labor claims are meant to be adjudicated on an urgent basis.