What to do if your UAE gratuity is not paid after leaving a job

A Gulf News reader recently raised concerns about not receiving his end-of-service gratuity (EOSG) after working 7.5 years for his former employer. Although the Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MOHRE) issued a decision in 2022 ordering the company to pay him more than Dh60,000, the amount has still not been released. The employee withdrew his case after relying on the employer’s personal assurances, but the gratuity remains unpaid. He has since moved on to a new job, yet the financial and emotional toll continues.

For long-serving employees, gratuity disputes are personal. Employment is a contract, and statutory entitlements must be enforced formally, not left to trust.

Gulf News spoke to Dubai-based legal experts to understand what options, if any, remain in such cases, especially given the statute of limitations under UAE Labour Law. While employers are required to comply with MOHRE decisions, failure to do so can carry legal consequences.

The legal framework for end-of-service benefits is clear. Under Federal Decree-Law No. 33 of 2021:

The Labor Law is clear on the payment timeline: employers must pay all end-of-service benefits within 14 days from the contract's termination date.

"An employer's internal cash flow problems, such as awaiting payments from clients, do not legally justify withholding this court-ordered payment," Ahmed Elnaggar, CEO of Elnaggar & Partners told Gulf News

Procedurally, bringing an EOS claim is also relatively simple, especially through MOHRE. Employees often file these complaints on their own. Since the law is clear, MOHRE can typically issue a decision without referring the case to court.

Ludmila Yamalova, founder and managing partner of HPL Yamalova and Plewka DMCC, clarified an important distinction: - MOHRE is not a court. Its decisions do not carry the same enforceability as a judicial verdict.

In some situations, MOHRE’s decision can support a court enforcement request, but this depends on how the decision was issued and documented.

“It is understandable why an employee, relying on MOHRE’s decision and the employer’s assurances might have chosen not to pursue the matter further, to court. But three years later, if the employer still has not paid, the two-year statute of limitations for filing labour claims would have already expired.  This means that the employee may now be barred from bringing a fresh labour case for unpaid EOS,” Yamalova said.

Had the employee taken the matter to court and received a final judgment, enforcement would have remained valid for 15 years, offering long-term protection.

Despite the complications, Yamalova explained that two legal avenues may still remain open, depending on evidence and communication records. These options are not subject to the two-year labour law statute of limitations:

1. Settlement agreement - If exchanges between the employer and employee amount to a documented settlement, the employee may file a civil claim for breach of settlement.

2. Acknowledgment of debt - If the employer issued a written confirmation promising payment, this can be treated as a debt acknowledgment, which allows the employee to seek an order on petition for enforcement.

Elnaggar, highlighted that the situation is more challenging but not necessarily hopeless if a case has already been withdrawn and the employer did not pay the agreed upon EOSG.

If a final judgment was previously issued

Withdrawing the case would have required filing a settlement agreement with the court. Once recorded, this becomes an enforceable instrument.

"If the employer does not fulfill the settlement within the agreed time, the employee can ask the court to start or resume enforcement proceedings. The court can enforce the agreement without re-evaluating the original dispute, as long as the employee can show that the employer is responsible for not complying," Elnaggar said.

If no court judgment was issued

There are two possibilities:

Elnaggar stressed that even when MOHRE or the court issues a decision, the employee must actively pursue enforcement. Withdrawing a case based on verbal promises is a common mistake that stops the legal process entirely.

If an employer fails to pay end-of-service gratuity, the employee has a clear legal process to follow:

a) File a complaint with MOHRE - The first step is to submit a formal complaint to MOHRE. MOHRE will attempt mediation; if it fails, the case is referred to the Labour Court.

b) Labour Court judgment - Once the case reaches court, the Labour Court will issue a binding order for the employer to pay the EOSG. This judgment is a strong legal tool.

c) Enforce the judgment - After receiving a court judgment, the employee must initiate enforcement. “Withdrawing the case based on the employer’s assurances stops enforcement and is a common mistake. Proper enforcement may include freezing bank accounts or seizing assets to compel payment,” Elnaggar said.

d) Settlement after a court order - If both parties agree to settle after a court judgment and withdraw the case, the employee should sign a formal, registered settlement agreement. “This ensures that if the employer fails to pay, the employee can still bring a breach-of-contract claim,” he said.

Legal experts agree on one key takeaway - do not rely solely on assurances. Always secure a formal, enforceable judgment or settlement.

Employers may face financial challenges but they remain legally obligated to pay gratuity. Employment is a contractual relationship, not a personal favour and statutory entitlements must be treated as binding rights.

While this reader’s situation is more complex now, the case is not without hope. Depending on what documents, messages or assurances were exchanged, he may still rely on:

The key is gathering all evidence, reviewing the communications, and seeking legal advice to pursue the most viable enforcement route.

For employees facing similar issues, the lesson is clear - Always pursue formal enforcement, document every promise, and never withdraw a case without a legally registered settlement.

NOTE: This content is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Readers should consult with MOHRE and a qualified legal professional for guidance specific to their situation.