Employees Accused of Dodging Responsibilities for Months

This news has been read 3312 times!

KUWAIT CITY, Jan 22: The latest report of the Employment Affairs Section at the Civil Service Commission (CSC) turned out to be a huge surprise, as it revealed that several employees and supervisors in the Ministry of Education (MoE) did not register their attendance through the fingerprint system, which means they did not work for months, reports Al-Qabas daily. The daily obtained a copy of the report, which criticized the ministry’s failure to take the necessary measures in such cases; indicating that the ministry did not take legal or administrative measures regarding the failure of some employees to adhere to the official working hours like imposing the salary deduction rule for the periods of unjustified delay or absence at the end of each month.

The report pointed out the ministry did not implement the law on the non-payment of salary or allowances for periods of absence from work for employees with more than 15 consecutive days of absence or 30 non-consecutive days within 12 months. In such cases, the rule on arbitrary resignation must be applied as per Article 35 of the CSC decision, the report added. The report also mentioned the names of the concerned employees, including directors, department heads, and observers in various sections at the ministry. It added that the ministry did not adhere to the provisions of CSC Resolution No. 41/2006 regarding the rules and regulations on the official work and its amendments, and circular number 42/2007 regarding the use of the fingerprint system as the sole proof of attendance at work.

Decision
Article 10 of the decision stipulates that employees must be committed to the specified working hours. This is proven through the fingerprint system or any other method that the administration deems appropriate if the fingerprint system is not possible in some cases. Other methods stipulated in the decision include the magnetic card, clock, attendance sheet and other tools, without prejudice to the provisions of Article Seven of this decision. The report pointed out that Article 11 of the same decision states that the responsibility to ensure the presence of employees in the workplace throughout the working hours falls on the shoulders of the direct superior, and that he is subject to disciplinary action if he does not take appropriate measures immediately after the violation is committed, and the next superior must monitor this.

Article 17 of the same decision stipulates that employees are allowed to sign when arriving within 30 minutes after the start of the specified work time, and whoever does not sign is considered late. Article 30 of the decision stipulates that “if an employee stops working without permission, he will be deprived of salary, allowances and job benefits for the duration of the break, without prejudice to disciplinary accountability. If the break reaches one of the two limits stipulated in Article 34 states that if the absence exceeds one day, the employee must notify the department to which he belongs by any means, whether personally or by someone acting on his behalf, of the reasons that led to his interruption, so that the department is aware of his condition.

Article 81, the employee is considered to have submitted his resignation effective from the day following the reaching of one of these two limits following the provisions of CSC Resolution No. 3/1981. Appropriate action will be taken in light of the employee’s excuses, either by accepting his resignation or his excuse.

This news has been read 3312 times!