Labour And Immigration

A company’s internal employment policy cannot generally be used to reduce the minimum rights guaranteed to workers under UAE labour law. At the same time, employers are permitted to introduce schemes, regulations and contractual terms that provide employees with benefits more favourable than those prescribed by law. Where such a policy is valid and applicable to an employee, the more beneficial terms may prevail.

This principle is particularly relevant when an employee leaves a company and disputes arise over the calculation of annual leave payments or end-of-service benefits. A manager whose employment has been terminated may therefore be able to claim enhanced benefits under a company policy, even where the statutory calculation under UAE Labour Law would produce a lower amount.

Statutory Entitlements Upon Termination

Under Federal Decree-Law No. 33 of 2021 on the Regulation of Labour Relations, workers are entitled to payment of their statutory employment dues when their contracts come to an end. These include salary and other amounts due under the law, together with payment for accrued annual leave and, where applicable, end-of-service gratuity. The employer is generally required to settle the worker’s outstanding entitlements within 14 days from the date the employment contract ends.

The law makes a distinction between the salary paid while an employee is actually taking annual leave and the cash payment due for unused leave when employment ends. Under Article 29, a worker is entitled to annual leave, while the cash equivalent of accrued statutory leave at termination is calculated according to the basic wage. The implementing regulations likewise provide that, when service ends, the worker is entitled to the cash equivalent of the legally due annual leave balance based on the basic salary.

End-of-service gratuity is similarly calculated on the basis of the worker’s last basic wage, subject to the conditions and formula prescribed by the Labour Law. This means that allowances and other components of the overall remuneration package would not ordinarily be included in the statutory gratuity calculation.

Company Policies Can Provide Greater Benefits

The position changes, however, where an employer has voluntarily adopted a policy or employment scheme that gives workers better benefits than the statutory minimum.

Article 65 of the Labour Law expressly establishes that the rights provided by the legislation are minimum rights. It also makes clear that the law does not prejudice rights granted to a worker under another law, agreement, acknowledgement, regulation or employment contract where those rights are more beneficial to the worker.

The same article specifically permits an employer to establish and implement organisational programmes or regulations that provide workers with benefits more favourable than those prescribed by the Labour Law and its implementing regulations. If such a programme conflicts with the statutory provisions, the conditions that are more beneficial to the worker are to be applied.

This provision is important because it prevents an employer from simply arguing that a benefit contained in its own policy cannot be honoured because the Labour Law does not require it. The law establishes a floor for employment rights, rather than necessarily preventing employers from offering better terms.

When a Policy Can Strengthen an Employee’s Claim

In a case involving a manager whose employment has been terminated, the precise wording and application of the company policy would therefore be critical.

If the company’s regulations clearly state that a manager’s final annual salary dues are to be calculated on the basis of total salary, or that an annual increase allowance is to be included when calculating end-of-service benefits, the employee may have grounds to seek those additional amounts.

The existence of a policy alone, however, does not automatically establish that every provision applies to every employee or every situation. The employee may need to demonstrate that the policy was officially adopted, that it applied to the employee’s position and employment relationship, and that the relevant conditions were satisfied when the employment ended.

Employment contracts, employee handbooks, internal regulations, salary structures and written company policies can therefore become important evidence in determining whether an enhanced benefit was actually promised or granted.

The Difference Between Law and Company Policy

The distinction between statutory entitlement and enhanced contractual or policy-based benefits is important. For example, if the Labour Law provides that unused annual leave at termination is calculated using the basic wage, an employer cannot ordinarily reduce that statutory entitlement further. But if the employer has voluntarily undertaken to calculate the payment using a higher salary figure, that undertaking may provide the worker with a contractual or policy-based entitlement above the statutory minimum.

The same reasoning can apply to end-of-service benefits. Although the statutory gratuity is generally calculated using the basic wage, an employer may establish a more generous scheme under which additional salary components are taken into account.

The key question is therefore not simply whether the Labour Law requires the company to make the additional payment. It is whether the employer has created a binding obligation to provide a benefit that is more favourable to the worker.

Courts Can Determine Whether the Benefit is Enforceable

Where an employer rejects such a claim, the dispute may ultimately have to be determined through the UAE labour dispute resolution process and, where necessary, by the competent court.

A court can examine the employment contract, internal regulations, company policies and other evidence to determine whether the employee was entitled to the enhanced benefit and whether the policy was applicable at the time of termination.

An employee should therefore preserve copies of the relevant company policy, employment contract, salary records, written communications and any other documents showing how the benefit was applied to employees in the same category.

For a manager facing a final-settlement dispute, the fact that a benefit is not expressly required by the Labour Law does not by itself defeat the claim. Article 65 recognises the validity of more favourable employment arrangements, provided they can be established and are applicable to the worker’s circumstances.

Accordingly, a manager whose company policy provides for calculation of termination benefits on a more favourable basis than the statutory minimum may have the right to pursue the additional amount. Whether the company is legally bound by the particular policy, however, will depend on its wording, how it was adopted and applied, and whether its conditions cover the employee’s circumstances. Ultimately, the competent labour authorities or court can determine whether the policy creates an enforceable entitlement and whether the employee qualifies for the benefits claimed.

Saudi Arabia’s Ministry of Interior has warned individual employers that allowing their workers to take jobs with other employers or work independently could result in imprisonment, a fine of up to SR100,000 and a ban on recruiting workers for up to five years.

Under the regulations, employers found allowing such violations could face a prison sentence of up to six months, in addition to the financial penalty and restrictions on recruiting new workers.

The warning forms part of the Kingdom’s ongoing enforcement of residency, labour and border security regulations, which prohibit workers from taking employment outside the arrangements under which they were legally recruited.

The ministry urged both employers and workers to comply fully with the relevant regulations and warned against practices that breach the Kingdom’s residency and labour rules.

Authorities also called on members of the public to report violations to help strengthen compliance and enforcement.

Reports can be made by calling 911 in Mecca, Medina, Riyadh and the Eastern Province, while 999 is available for reporting violations in other parts of Saudi Arabia.

Hiring a domestic worker from India to work in the UAE involves requirements in both countries, from checking the worker’s passport status and completing the Indian government’s e-Migrate procedures to obtaining a UAE work permit, entry permit, insurance and residence documentation.

The employment of domestic workers in the UAE is governed principally by Federal Decree-Law No. 9 of 2022 Concerning Domestic Workers, which establishes the rights and obligations of domestic workers, employers and recruitment agencies. The law applies to domestic workers employed in occupations including housekeepers, cooks, private drivers, gardeners and other recognised domestic service roles.

For an expatriate resident wishing to recruit a domestic worker from outside the UAE, the process involves meeting MoHRE eligibility requirements as well as completing the necessary Indian emigration procedures.

Employer Obligations Under UAE Domestic Worker Law

The UAE Domestic Workers Law places a number of responsibilities on employers. These include providing suitable accommodation and the facilities necessary for the worker to perform the agreed duties, supplying appropriate food and clothing where required, paying wages on time and providing necessary medical care.

Employers must also treat domestic workers with respect and courtesy and must not subject them to violence or degrading treatment. The employer is generally responsible for the cost of returning the worker to the worker’s home country when the employment relationship ends in circumstances where repatriation is required under the law.

The law also regulates recruitment agencies and requires them to comply with approved contractual arrangements and recruitment procedures. Recruitment agencies are prohibited from charging domestic workers commissions or recruitment-related expenses and must ensure that workers receive information about the nature and conditions of the proposed employment before recruitment.

The employment relationship must be documented through the prescribed contract. The contract should clearly establish the nature of the work, remuneration and the respective rights and obligations of the employer and domestic worker.

Working Hours, Weekly Rest and Annual Leave

The law provides important protections concerning working time and leave. A domestic worker is entitled to a daily rest period of at least 12 hours, including at least eight consecutive hours of rest.

The worker is also entitled to a paid weekly rest day. Where the worker is required to work on the weekly rest day, an alternative day of rest or cash compensation must be provided in accordance with the applicable rules.

Annual leave is another statutory entitlement. Domestic workers are entitled to at least 30 days of paid annual leave for each completed year of service. The law also provides for leave entitlements where the period of employment is more than six months but less than one year.

The employer cannot treat a domestic worker simply as an informal household employee outside the protection of UAE law. The statutory rights provided by the Domestic Workers Law represent minimum protections, and a contract or other applicable arrangement may provide greater benefits.

Requirements For Recruiting a Domestic Worker From India

Indian nationals holding passports with ECR, or Emigration Check Required, status are subject to additional emigration procedures before travelling abroad for employment. The Indian Consulate in Dubai currently provides specific procedures for recruitment of Indian workers holding ECR passports through the e-Migrate system.

For domestic workers recruited from India, the UAE sponsor must complete the prescribed employment visa attestation process. The attested employment documents are then used for obtaining emigration clearance from the Protector of Emigrants in India.

The employer should therefore begin the Indian-side process before making arrangements for the worker to travel to the UAE. The employer must register through the e-Migrate system and provide the required information and documentation for foreign-employer registration. The registration process includes submitting the appropriate request to the Indian mission in the UAE.

Once the foreign-employer registration process is completed, the employer can proceed with the recruitment and UAE visa procedures. The Indian Consulate's current guidance states that recruitment of Indian female workers holding ECR passports and other eligible workers is to be processed through e-Migrate.

UAE Visa and MoHRE Requirements

The UAE-side application begins with obtaining a domestic worker work permit and entry permit through MoHRE's approved channels. The employer must satisfy the applicable eligibility requirements before the application can be approved.

For an expatriate employer or investor, the employer must hold a valid UAE residence permit. The proposed domestic worker must generally be at least 18 years old, while MoHRE's current work-permit service specifies an age limit of 60 for domestic workers, subject to stated exceptions.

For resident employers, MoHRE currently requires proof of accommodation through a valid tenancy contract or title deed. The current service requirements also state that an expatriate employer must provide a recent salary certificate confirming family income of at least Dh25,000. An investor or self-employed sponsor may instead be required to provide a bank statement demonstrating the applicable monthly income.

Other documents can include the employer's passport and Emirates ID, the domestic worker's passport and photograph, proof of marital status and the spouse's residence documentation where applicable. The employer may also be required to provide other documents depending on the nature of the application and the service channel used.

The domestic worker's passport must have the required validity, and the worker must not already hold an incompatible UAE work permit. Adequate insurance coverage is also required as part of the domestic worker work-permit process.

Entry Permit, Attestation and Emigration Clearance

Once the UAE application has been approved, an entry permit is issued through the relevant immigration authority. For a worker travelling from India on an ECR passport, the employment documents must then go through the required Indian mission attestation process.

The Indian Consulate's current guidance states that an employment visa for a housemaid recruited from India must be duly attested by the Embassy or Consulate. The attested employment documents can then be used by the worker to approach the relevant Protector of Emigrants office in India for emigration clearance.

This stage is particularly important because an ECR passport holder cannot simply travel to the UAE for employment without completing the prescribed clearance process. Employers should therefore avoid making travel arrangements until the required documentation and clearance have been obtained.

After the Domestic Worker Arrives in The UAE

The process does not end when the worker arrives in the UAE. The employer must complete the remaining immigration, employment and health-related formalities.

The domestic worker is required to undergo the applicable medical fitness examination. The employer must also arrange the required health insurance and complete the Emirates ID and residence procedures.

The final MoHRE employment contract must be completed in the prescribed format and should reflect the agreed employment terms. MoHRE's current service requirements include a signed domestic worker employment contract and medical insurance documentation, with adequate medical insurance specifically required for domestic workers in Dubai and Abu Dhabi.

Employers should also ensure that the worker's actual duties, salary, working arrangements and other conditions correspond with the terms agreed in the official employment documents. Recruitment arrangements should not be altered informally after arrival in a manner that undermines the worker's statutory rights.

Use Licensed Recruitment Channels

Employers who do not wish to undertake direct recruitment can use licensed domestic worker recruitment offices and approved service channels. The UAE has a regulated system for domestic worker recruitment, and MoHRE has taken enforcement action against unlicensed recruitment activities.

In February 2026, MoHRE said it had closed 230 social media accounts during 2025 for promoting domestic worker recruitment services without the required licences or affiliation with licensed recruitment offices. Employers should therefore be cautious about dealing with individuals or online agents offering to arrange domestic workers outside the authorised system.

Licensed recruitment channels can assist with recruitment, visa processing, medical examination, insurance and other procedures depending on the package and service arrangement. However, the employer remains responsible for complying with the legal obligations applicable to the employment relationship.

Compliance is Important For Both Employer and Worker

Hiring a domestic worker from India requires coordination between the UAE's domestic worker regulations and India's emigration requirements. An employer should not assume that obtaining a UAE entry permit alone is sufficient for an ECR passport holder to travel for employment.

The safer approach is to complete the e-Migrate registration and Indian mission requirements, obtain the appropriate UAE work permit and entry permit through the authorised channels, complete the required attestation and emigration clearance before travel, and then finish the medical, insurance, Emirates ID, residence and employment-contract formalities after arrival.

The UAE Domestic Workers Law is designed to establish a regulated employment relationship and protect the rights of domestic workers while setting clear responsibilities for employers and recruitment agencies. Employers who follow the prescribed procedures from the beginning can avoid delays in recruitment and visa processing while ensuring that the domestic worker's employment is properly documented and compliant with UAE law.

Employers in Qatar should prepare for a more regulated and actively enforced employment landscape following recent amendments to the country’s labour laws.

Employers face a significantly more robust compliance environment following the introduction of Law No. 9 of 2026, which came into force on June 25 and amends key provisions of Qatar’s existing labour legislation.

The amendments go beyond technical changes to the law and signal a broader policy shift towards stronger labour market oversight, greater workforce formalisation and increased use of regulatory tools by the Ministry of Labour.

The reforms affect almost every stage of the employment lifecycle, from recruitment and onboarding to dispute resolution, employee representation and post-termination restrictions.

While several aspects of the reforms have yet to be implemented, the direction of travel is clear. Employers operating in Qatar should begin reviewing their employment practices now rather than waiting for further guidance.

Stronger Enforcement and Wage Protection

One of the most significant developments is the expansion of the Ministry of Labour’s enforcement powers.

Historically, labour law compliance in Qatar has been enforced primarily through administrative sanctions and dispute resolution procedures. The amendments introduce a broader range of enforcement tools, including the ability to suspend some or all ministry services available to non-compliant establishments.

In certain cases, particularly those involving repeated violations or wage-payment issues, the consequences may extend beyond the offending entity and affect related businesses. Public naming of violators and additional financial penalties also form part of the revised enforcement framework.

These changes are particularly significant in the context of wage protection. They reinforce the government’s continued focus on ensuring the timely payment of salaries and may increase operational and reputational risks for employers that fail to meet wage-related obligations.

The potential extension of sanctions beyond a single legal entity will also be significant for multinational businesses operating through group structures in Qatar. Employers may therefore need to consider whether compliance failures within one entity could have wider implications for related businesses.

A Statutory Framework for Modern Working

The amendments also represent an important legislative response to evolving models of work. The revised exclusions provision expressly identifies part-time and freelance workers as categories falling outside the Labour Law’s default scope. However, the Council of Ministers retains the power to extend some or all labour protections to these workers or establish a separate regulatory regime for them.

Although the practical implications will depend on future implementing measures, the reform establishes a statutory basis for regulating non-traditional working arrangements. This is particularly relevant for businesses operating platform-based, delivery, gig-economy or flexible workforce models.

As Qatar’s economy continues to diversify, employers can expect greater regulatory attention on alternative forms of employment that have traditionally fallen outside conventional labour frameworks.

For businesses relying on freelance talent, independent contractors or platform-based operating models, the amendments should therefore be viewed not simply as an exclusion from the Labour Law, but as a potential precursor to future regulation.

Recruitment and Labour Market Oversight

Recruitment activity is also expected to come under greater regulatory scrutiny. The amendments strengthen licensing and compliance obligations applicable to recruitment activities and give the Ministry broader enforcement powers in relation to recruitment agencies and labour supply operations. Public disclosure of violations and enhanced financial sanctions signal a move towards more active supervision of labour market intermediaries.

For employers that rely heavily on outsourced recruitment channels, labour suppliers or overseas hiring programmes, due diligence on recruitment practices is likely to become increasingly important.

Businesses should also monitor future implementing regulations closely as greater detail emerges on licensing requirements, compliance standards and enforcement procedures. Employers may need to reassess their relationships with recruitment agencies and labour suppliers to ensure that third-party practices do not expose them to regulatory or reputational risks.

Digitalising Employment Dispute Resolution

Another notable feature of the reforms is the continued digitalisation of employment dispute resolution.

The amendments are intended to streamline labour dispute procedures, facilitate amicable settlement discussions and enable labour dispute committees to conduct proceedings electronically. Committee decisions are also expected to have greater practical enforceability.

The shift reflects a broader regional trend towards technology-enabled justice and administrative efficiency. In practical terms, employers may face faster dispute resolution processes and should place greater emphasis on maintaining comprehensive electronic employment records, documenting workplace decisions and developing early-stage dispute management strategies.

As proceedings become increasingly digitised, the quality, consistency and accessibility of documentary evidence may have a greater influence on outcomes. Employers should therefore ensure that contracts, salary records, disciplinary correspondence, HR decisions and other employment documentation are properly maintained and readily accessible.

Employee Participation and Workforce Certification

The amendments also strengthen employee representation by making joint employer-worker committees mandatory for larger establishments.

Companies employing 100 or more workers must establish committees comprising representatives of both management and employees. These committees are intended to promote workplace dialogue and assist in addressing operational and employment-related issues.

For many organisations, this will represent a significant governance change. Employers will need to consider committee structures, voting procedures, representation criteria, escalation mechanisms and the interaction between these committees and existing HR functions.

Rather than relying solely on informal consultation practices, larger employers may now require a more structured framework for employee engagement and workplace communication.

The reforms also support Qatar’s workforce development objectives through new certification requirements.

A new provision requires workers in designated professions to obtain approved training and pass examinations through Ministry-accredited training centres before commencing employment. The Ministry is expected to publish a list of affected occupations and issue supplementary guidance on implementation.

Although the full scope of the requirement remains unclear, the measure aligns with the government’s broader emphasis on skills development, professional competency and labour market localisation. Employers operating in technical, specialised or regulated sectors should monitor forthcoming announcements carefully to determine whether any of their workforce categories will be affected.

Non-Compete Restrictions and Industrial Action

The amendments also revisit two areas that have traditionally attracted considerable employer interest: non-compete restrictions and industrial action.

The maximum duration of post-termination non-compete obligations has increased from one year to two years. This could strengthen employers’ ability to protect confidential information, trade secrets and customer relationships.

However, enforcement will be subject to Ministry approval, suggesting that greater scrutiny may be applied to the reasonableness and necessity of restrictive covenants. Employers should therefore ensure that non-compete provisions are appropriately drafted, proportionate and supported by legitimate business interests.

At the same time, the legislation introduces a new ground for dismissal where a worker unlawfully incites other employees to strike and disruption results.

The amendment forms part of a broader package regulating collective labour action and appears intended to balance employee representation rights with business continuity concerns. Employers will nevertheless need to exercise caution when responding to industrial action and ensure that any disciplinary measures comply with the applicable legal requirements.

What Employers Should Do Now

While many of the headline reforms are already in force, several areas will depend on future ministerial decisions and implementing regulations. Further clarification is required in relation to part-time and freelance work, vocational certification requirements, recruitment controls and aspects of labour enforcement.

Nevertheless, the reforms provide a clear indication of Qatar’s policy priorities. Enhanced enforcement, increased workforce regulation, formal employee participation mechanisms and greater digitalisation of employment processes all point towards a more mature and structured labour market framework.

For employers, the message is clear: do not wait for enforcement to become the trigger for compliance reviews.

Businesses should begin by reviewing employment contracts, wage-payment procedures, recruitment arrangements, HR policies, non-compete provisions and employee grievance mechanisms. Larger organisations should also assess whether they are required to establish employer-worker committees and whether their internal governance structures are equipped to support them.

Employers using freelance, part-time or platform-based workers should monitor forthcoming regulations closely and consider whether their existing contractual arrangements may be affected by future changes.

Compliance will increasingly extend beyond ensuring that employment contracts meet statutory requirements. Businesses will be expected to demonstrate robust governance, sound workforce management practices and proactive engagement with an evolving regulatory environment.

Qatar’s latest labour reforms therefore mark more than a series of amendments to existing legislation. They signal the development of a more structured, technology-enabled and actively supervised employment market, making labour law compliance an increasingly important part of corporate risk management.

The Abu Dhabi Labour Court has issued a preliminary ruling ordering a company to pay Dh20,800 to an employee who worked for it for more than 27 years, after his employment was terminated without payment of his outstanding statutory entitlements.

The employee took legal action against the company, seeking payment of unpaid employment-related dues, including end-of-service gratuity, annual leave allowance, compensation for wrongful dismissal and notice pay.

In his claim, the employee sought Dh75,000 in gratuity, Dh4,800 as annual leave allowance, Dh4,800 as compensation for wrongful dismissal and a further Dh4,800 in lieu of notice.

The employee told the court that he had joined the company in 1998 and continued working there until 2026, receiving a monthly salary of Dh4,800.

The court noted that, under the applicable labour law, an employee who completes at least one continuous year of service with an employer is entitled to an end-of-service gratuity when the employment relationship ends, subject to the conditions and calculation rules prescribed by law.

After reviewing the employee's length of service and the applicable legal provisions, the court determined that he had worked for the company for 27 years, nine months and 16 days.

The court further found that his end-of-service gratuity was subject to the statutory ceiling of 24 months' basic salary. Based on the applicable calculation, the employee was therefore awarded Dh19,200 as gratuity.

The court also awarded him Dh1,600 as compensation for unused annual leave, bringing the total amount ordered to be paid by the company to Dh20,800.

The ruling highlights the importance of employers settling employees' statutory entitlements when an employment relationship comes to an end, particularly in cases involving long-serving employees.

A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from implementing the president’s latest attempt to impose new limits on automatic birthright citizenship, following an earlier legal defeat before the US Supreme Court.

In an order issued on Wednesday, a US judge in Maryland ruled that President Donald Trump’s August executive order, which expands the categories of non-citizen parents whose children would be ineligible for citizenship, is likely unlawful as it applies to a nationwide class of families whose legal status was already at issue in earlier court proceedings.

The new exclusions would include people who have taken part in a “commercial transaction to ensure” that they give birth in the US.

The latest setback to Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda puts the dispute over birthright citizenship on course to return to the Supreme Court. The US Justice Department could next ask a federal appeals court to lift the district judge’s order and allow officials to implement the president’s policy while the legal challenges continue.

US District Judge Deborah Boardman wrote in her decision imposing a preliminary injunction that the Supreme Court had “already decided that the children in the class are citizens at birth”.

“This court must, once again, preliminarily enjoin enforcement of the president’s most recent attempt to strip the right to citizenship from them,” she wrote.

Boardman said the administration had advanced a “distorted interpretation” of the Supreme Court’s ruling striking down Trump’s original executive order seeking to restrict birthright citizenship.

She said the president’s latest action would deny citizenship to members of a class she had already certified, covering children of non-citizen parents who are either not legally in the US or are in the country on temporary visas.

Spokespeople for the White House and the Justice Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Shana Khader, legal director at We Are CASA, one of the groups that brought the Maryland case, said in a statement that “the White House must recognise it will not succeed in stripping children of their right to citizenship, evading binding court decisions or placing the president’s anti-immigrant agenda above the Constitution”.

Supreme Court Rejected Trump’s Earlier Order

The Supreme Court struck down Trump’s original executive order seeking to curb birthright citizenship in June, delivering a major rebuke from a conservative-majority bench that has largely sided with the administration over the past year and a half.

“Citizenship, then and now, was the right to have rights — to freely participate in our political community,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote for the majority at the time.

“The framers of the Fourteenth Amendment extended that promise to every free-born person in this land. We keep that promise today.”

Trump subsequently vowed to explore other ways to restrict citizenship.

He signed two executive orders in early August targeting what the administration calls “birth tourism” — a term used to describe non-citizens travelling to the US with the intention of obtaining citizenship for their children.

One of those orders, which is not central to the latest legal challenges, directs US agencies to adopt new rules or update existing policies to allow immigration authorities to deny or revoke visas, or otherwise refuse entry to foreign nationals travelling to the US “for the purpose of giving birth on American soil”.

New Order Expands Citizenship Exclusions

The second executive order addresses categories of people whose children would not be eligible for citizenship.

In addition to the “commercial transaction” exclusion, the order calls for new exceptions covering babies born in the US to a broader category of foreign nationals who work for their governments or international organisations in the US, are members of designated terrorist groups or engage in fraud.

Opponents accused the administration of disregarding the Supreme Court’s ruling and again seeking to rewrite the Constitution’s guarantee of citizenship to nearly everyone born on US soil.

They filed challenges to the new policy as part of earlier class-action lawsuits in New Hampshire and Maryland that contested Trump’s original, now-defunct citizenship restrictions.

The judge in New Hampshire is also considering a request to block Trump from implementing key provisions of the new executive order.

Justice Department Challenges Legal Standing

The Justice Department argued that the challengers lacked legal standing because they had not shown that the existing class actions covered families affected by the president’s latest action.

The government also argued that the challenges were premature because federal agencies had not yet taken steps to implement Trump’s order. It further maintained that the Supreme Court had not definitively ruled out the possibility of expanding exceptions to birthright citizenship.

The case is Casa Inc. v. Trump, 25-cv-201, US District Court for the District of Maryland, Greenbelt.

A US federal judge on Friday declined to immediately block President Donald Trump’s latest executive order restricting eligibility for birthright citizenship, while sharply questioning its legal viability after the US Supreme Court rejected his previous attempt to limit the constitutional right.

US District Judge Deborah Boardman in Greenbelt, Maryland, rejected a request for a temporary restraining order filed by immigrant rights advocates who had previously secured a ruling from her blocking the Trump administration from enforcing its initial 2025 executive order restricting birthright citizenship.

Boardman, an appointee of Democratic President Joe Biden, said the plaintiffs’ lawsuit did not address Trump’s 2026 order and, therefore, she could not block its implementation at this stage.

However, she allowed the groups to amend their complaint and set an expedited briefing schedule, giving the plaintiffs an opportunity to challenge the new order.

The judge said the latest directive “tries to strike out exceptions to birthright citizenship with the stroke of a pen”.

“As far as I can tell, this is unprecedented,” Boardman said.

The US Supreme Court on June 30 rejected Trump’s initial attempt to end birthright citizenship for children whose parents were neither US citizens nor lawful permanent residents, commonly known as green card holders. The court found that the administration’s approach violated the citizenship clause of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution.

Following that decision, Trump signed a new executive order on August 6 that specifically targeted so-called “birth tourism”, in which women travel to the US to give birth so their children can obtain automatic citizenship.

The new order would also deny citizenship to children whose parents work for foreign governments in the US, those whose parents engage in fraud to obtain citizenship, or children whose parents are classified as “alien enemies”.

After Trump signed the order, lawyers pursuing a class-action lawsuit on behalf of babies who could be denied citizenship under the 2025 order asked Boardman to block enforcement of the new directive and ensure that their clients’ citizenship rights continued to be recognised.

US Department of Justice lawyers opposed the request, arguing that federal agencies had yet to issue public guidance setting out how the president’s directive would be implemented. Such guidance is expected by September 5.

At Friday’s hearing, however, Boardman appeared sceptical about waiting until then to consider the matter. She questioned where the Supreme Court’s ruling provided for any exception to birthright citizenship in cases involving birth tourism.

The judge’s decision leaves the new order in place for now, but the legal challenge is expected to proceed as the administration prepares to issue implementation guidance.

Maternity leave is a statutory employment right for women working in the UAE private sector. An employer cannot simply refuse maternity leave because of business requirements, staffing difficulties or the employee’s length of service. The entitlement is governed by Article 30 of Federal Decree-Law No. 33 of 2021 on the Regulation of Labour Relations, as amended, and applies to female employees in establishments covered by the UAE private-sector employment law.

Under the current law, a female employee is entitled to 60 days of maternity leave. The first 45 days are paid at full wage, while the following 15 days are paid at half wage. The entitlement is not dependent on completing a particular period of service, and Ministry of Human Resources and Emiratisation (MoHRE) guidance confirms that maternity leave is available even where the employee is within her probationary period.

When Can Maternity Leave Begin?

The law gives an employee flexibility over when she starts her maternity leave. An employer must grant maternity leave upon the employee’s request at any time beginning from the last day of the month immediately preceding the month in which she is expected to give birth. The expected date of delivery must be supported by a medical certificate issued by the relevant medical entity.

The UAE Government’s official guidance similarly states that a female employee may apply for maternity leave up to 30 days before the expected date of delivery. This means that an employer cannot insist that the employee continue working until the date of childbirth if she has properly requested her statutory leave and provided the required medical documentation.

What If Pregnancy or Childbirth Causes Medical Complications?

The law provides additional protection where pregnancy or childbirth results in illness affecting the employee or her child.

After using the 60 days of maternity leave, the employee may take up to 45 additional days of unpaid leave, either continuously or intermittently, where she or her child is suffering from an illness resulting from pregnancy or childbirth and she is unable to return to work. The condition must be established through a medical certificate issued by the appropriate medical entity.

There is also additional protection where a child is born sick or with a disability and requires a constant companion. In such circumstances, the mother may receive a further 30 days of fully paid leave following maternity leave, with the possibility of extending this by another 30 days without pay, subject to the prescribed medical evidence.

The law also recognises the needs of mothers after they return to work. For up to six months from the date of delivery, a female employee is entitled to one or two breaks each day to breastfeed her child, provided the total duration of those breaks does not exceed one hour. These breaks are part of the employee's paid working time.

Can an Employer Dismiss an Employee Because She is Pregnant or Takes Maternity Leave?

No. One of the important protections under Article 30 is that an employer may not terminate a female employee’s service or give her notice of termination because of her pregnancy, because she is taking maternity leave, or because she is absent from work in accordance with the maternity-leave provisions.

This protection is significant because maternity rights extend beyond the payment of salary during leave. An employer cannot lawfully treat pregnancy or the employee’s exercise of her statutory maternity rights as a reason to end her employment.

At the same time, the protection should not be interpreted as an absolute prohibition on termination in every circumstance. Employment may be terminated for lawful reasons unrelated to pregnancy or maternity leave, subject to the requirements of the UAE Labour Law. The key issue in a dispute may therefore be whether the termination was genuinely based on a lawful reason or was connected to the employee’s pregnancy or exercise of her maternity rights.

What Should an Employee Do If Maternity Leave is Refused?

If an employer refuses to provide maternity leave, withholds the statutory maternity pay or otherwise interferes with the employee’s rights, the employee may raise the matter with MoHRE.

The UAE Labour Law provides a formal mechanism for resolving disputes between employers and employees. Under Article 54, a worker who has a dispute with an employer concerning employment rights may submit a request to the Ministry. MoHRE examines the complaint and attempts to resolve the dispute amicably.

Employees should keep relevant evidence, including the employment contract, maternity-leave request, medical certificate, correspondence with the employer, salary records and any written refusal or notice issued by the company. Such records can help establish what was requested, when it was requested and how the employer responded.

If the dispute cannot be resolved through MoHRE’s process, it may be referred to the competent court for determination. The court can consider whether the employee’s statutory rights were breached and determine the financial or other remedies available under the law.

What Penalties Can an Employer Face?

It is important to distinguish between the employee’s right to claim her contractual and statutory entitlements and the administrative or legal penalties that may apply to an employer for labour-law violations.

The UAE Labour Law contains a specific penalties framework, which was amended by Federal Decree-Law No. 9 of 2024. The amended provisions increased certain labour-market fines, including penalties of between Dh100,000 and Dh1 million for specified serious violations such as employing workers without the required permits, using work permits for improper purposes, or closing an establishment without following procedures for settling workers’ rights.

However, these figures should not be presented as an automatic fine specifically for refusing maternity leave. The applicable penalty depends on the nature of the violation established by the competent authority and the provisions breached. An employee should therefore avoid assuming that a maternity-leave dispute automatically attracts a particular fixed fine.

The more immediate legal issue is that an employer covered by the UAE Labour Law must respect the statutory maternity entitlement and cannot penalise an employee because she exercises the rights provided under Article 30.

What Working Mothers Should Know

For women employed in the UAE private sector, maternity leave is not simply a benefit that an employer may grant at its discretion. It is a statutory entitlement.

The basic entitlement is 60 days: 45 days on full pay and 15 days on half pay. Additional unpaid leave may be available where pregnancy or childbirth causes qualifying medical conditions, while further paid and unpaid leave may apply where a child is sick or has a disability requiring a constant companion.

Employees should also remember that the rules differ between the private and public sectors. Federal government employees, for example, are entitled to 90 days of fully paid maternity leave, while local government employees may be governed by separate rules.

For a private-sector employee in Dubai or elsewhere in the UAE, therefore, an employer cannot lawfully refuse maternity leave merely because it is inconvenient for the business. Where an employee believes her statutory rights have been denied, the appropriate course is to document the issue and raise a formal labour complaint with MoHRE, followed, where necessary, by referral to the competent court.