Dismissal After a Workplace Injury
Hassan, a Bahraini national, worked as a steel fixer for a construction firm for six years under a written contract with a basic wage of BD 400 plus BD 100 housing allowance. In February 2025 he fell from scaffolding and fractured his wrist. The employer reported the injury late, disputed that it was work-related, and stopped paying him after four weeks. In April 2025 the employer served a termination notice citing 'absence without leave' for the days Hassan missed while hospitalised. Hassan has medical reports, two co-worker witnesses, and payslips showing he was also required to work 60 hours per week without overtime pay. He has not received end-of-service benefits.
1. Assess the lawfulness of the dismissal and Hassan's entitlements on termination, including end-of-service gratuity.
Read the worked answer
The dismissal is almost certainly unlawful. Two grounds converge. First, an employee is protected from dismissal during a period of incapacity caused by a work injury; terminating him because he was absent while hospitalised for an injury sustained at work is a dismissal for exercising a legal right and for a reason the law protects against. Second, 'absence without leave' requires proof of unjustified absence; here the absence is documented, medically certified and caused by the employer's own failure of site safety. The burden of proving a lawful reason for dismissal rests on the employer, and it cannot discharge it.
The consequence is that Hassan is entitled to compensation for unfair dismissal in addition to his contractual and statutory terminal entitlements. On end-of-service gratuity, the statutory scheme for a worker on a monthly wage accrues at a rate of one month's wage for each year of service for the first years, with the calculation based on the last wage; on six years' service and a wage of BD 500 (basic plus the regular housing allowance, which forms part of wage for this purpose), the gratuity is substantial - roughly BD 3,000 on a straightforward application, subject to the precise accrual formula and any contractual scheme more favourable to him.
He should also claim: unpaid wages for the period from the injury to termination; accrued but untaken annual leave; the statutory notice or pay in lieu; and any unpaid overtime. The employer's late reporting of the injury does not defeat a work-injury claim; it is an offence and it shifts evidentiary advantage to Hassan, who has medical records and witnesses.
2. Hassan worked 60 hours per week. Analyse his overtime claim and the evidentiary problems, and explain the procedural route he should take.
Read the worked answer
Bahraini labour law caps normal working hours and permits overtime only within limits and at a premium rate (typically time-and-a-quarter for ordinary overtime and more for night or rest-day work). Sixty hours per week exceeds the permitted ceiling, so part of the arrangement is unlawful regardless of consent, and the employer cannot rely on a contractual waiver to defeat the premium. Hassan should compute the claim by identifying, week by week, hours worked beyond the normal threshold, apply the premium rate to his hourly rate derived from the BD 500 wage, and claim the shortfall for the period within the limitation window (claims are time-barred after a relatively short period, so recent years only are safely recoverable).
The evidentiary problem is that employers often do not record overtime. Hassan's payslips showing a flat wage, co-worker testimony, site attendance records, gate logs and WhatsApp rosters are the practical proof. In Bahraini practice the labour dispute is first referred to the competent labour authority for conciliation; if that fails, the matter goes to the labour court. Hassan should file promptly to stop time running, and should join the work-injury compensation claim in the same or a parallel action.
Strategic note: the 60-hour week also supports the unfair dismissal and safety claims - it shows a system of excessive hours that contributed to the fall. Present it as a health-and-safety failure, not merely a wage arithmetic dispute.