Transfer to Another Place of Work

What a transfer to another place of work is

Transfer to another place of work (نقل العامل إلى مكان عمل آخر) is the move of a worker from the place where the work was agreed to be performed to a different place, with the same employer. It is governed by Article 58 of the Saudi Labor Law (نظام العمل), in two paragraphs: the first sets a requirement of written consent, and the second opens a limited exception for necessity.

The question arises in establishments with branches in more than one city, such as an establishment headquartered in Riyadh with one branch in Jeddah and another in Dammam. A decision that looks purely administrative, such as filling a gap at a distant branch, has a condition attached to it in the Labor Law.

What Article 58 of the Labor Law says

Paragraph 1 of Article 58 of the Labor Law provides that the employer may not transfer the worker from the original place of work to another place without the worker’s written consent, where the other place requires a change of residence (يقتضي تغيير محل إقامته). The condition has two parts: consent, and the consent must be in writing.

Paragraph 2 of Article 58 of the Labor Law provides that in cases of necessity arising from exceptional circumstances, and for a period not exceeding thirty days in the year, the employer may assign the worker to work in a place different from the agreed one without the worker’s consent. In return, the text requires the employer to bear the travel and accommodation costs of the worker during that period.

Royal Decree M/44, in force since 19 February 2025, did not amend Article 58 of the Labor Law, whose last amendment was by Royal Decree M/46 dated 5/6/1436H. A copy of the Article that predates M/44 is therefore not outdated for that reason.

Reading paragraph 1 of Article 58 of the Labor Law

• The test is a change of residence. The Article does not say “any transfer”. It speaks of a move to a place that requires the worker to change residence. The rule therefore turns on the effect of the move on where the worker lives, not on a change of address in the records.
• The consent is written. Oral consent is not enough, and consent cannot be inferred from the worker going to the new site. The text uses the word for “in writing” (كتابةً), so what is required is a document that can be consulted.
• The consent comes first. The Article bars the transfer where the worker has not consented, so the question is put before the move is carried out, not after it.

What distance counts as a transfer that requires a change of residence?

Article 58 of the Labor Law sets no distance in kilometres and names no cities. In the sources we reviewed, we found no numerical or administrative criterion that spells out what counts as a change of residence. Moving a worker from one district to another inside the same city is not like moving a worker from Riyadh to Dammam, but the line between the two is not written in the text.

As a precaution in practice, a transfer that changes where the worker lives, or that obliges the worker to relocate with their family, can be taken as falling within paragraph 1, with written consent requested wherever there is doubt. That is a precaution in application, not a definition found in the text.

We also found no provision in Article 58 of the Labor Law that deals with a transfer that does not require a change of residence. In that case the position is set by what the two parties agreed in the contract, because Article 52 of the Labor Law makes the type of work and its place (نوع العمل ومكانه) one of the particulars of the unified model contract. The contract and its attestation are set out under contract authentication.

The exception in Article 58 of the Labor Law: conditions that combine

The exception in paragraph 2 of Article 58 of the Labor Law does not open on a single condition. These conditions apply together:

• Necessity. The case must be one of necessity, not an administrative preference.
• Exceptional circumstances. The necessity must arise from exceptional circumstances, that is, not from a permanent condition of operations.
• The time limit. The period may not exceed thirty days in the year.

The Article does not define necessity or exceptional circumstances by a list. In the sources we reviewed, we found nothing that enumerates or illustrates the cases, so we name none.

The time limit is annual, not per occasion. Take a worker assigned to another branch three times in one year, for 15 days, then 10 days, then 7 days. Each occasion is under thirty days on its own, but the total is 15 + 10 + 7 = 32 days, so the limit is exceeded. With a third assignment of 4 days the total would be 15 + 10 + 4 = 29 days, and one day would remain. The figures are assumed to show how the calculation works and nothing more.

In counting the year, Article 10 of the Labor Law provides that periods and dates in the Labor Law are computed on the Hijri calendar unless the employment contract or the work regulation (لائحة تنظيم العمل) provides otherwise. We found no provision that fixes the day from which the year starts for the thirty days, so it is better to state it in the contract or the work regulation.

Who bears the cost under the exception

Paragraph 2 of Article 58 of the Labor Law binds the employer to the travel and accommodation costs for the whole period. That requirement is part of the exception, not a favour from the employer. An employer who sends a worker to another site on the ground of necessity and leaves the travel and accommodation costs with the worker has not met the conditions of the exception.

The text does not fix the amount of these costs or list their items, and we found nothing that details them. They are separate from what Article 61 of the Labor Law requires, which is suitable housing for the workers or a suitable cash allowance in its place. Those are general duties within the relationship, while the costs in Article 58 of the Labor Law attach to a temporary move.

Cases in one establishment

Take a trading establishment headquartered in Riyadh with a branch in Jeddah. The result differs with the facts of each case. The cases are assumed to show how the text applies, and they are not rulings on any actual facts.

• A permanent transfer to Jeddah. It requires the worker to move home, so it falls within paragraph 1 of Article 58 of the Labor Law. The worker’s written consent is required before the transfer, and silent acceptance does not take its place.
• Temporary cover for 21 days. The branch manager is suddenly absent and no replacement can be arranged. If necessity and exceptional circumstances are established, paragraph 2 of Article 58 of the Labor Law allows the assignment without consent, and the establishment bears the travel and accommodation costs. Only 9 days of the year remain (30 minus 21), so any other assignment in the same year is counted against them.
• A branch in another district of Riyadh. It may not require a change of residence, in which case paragraph 1 of Article 58 of the Labor Law does not reach it by its wording. What the contract says about the place of work applies.

In the second case the text does not say whether the sudden absence of a branch manager is a case of necessity. That is an assessment built on the facts and made by the competent authority, so it cannot be asserted in advance.

Changing the place of work in the contract

The annex to the Implementing Regulation (اللائحة التنفيذية) contains a model contract for indefinite term employment. Clause 14.8 of that model provides that the data on the profession and the work information may be amended with the consent of both parties, under the terms and procedures approved through the platform (المنصة), provided the amendment does not conflict with the Labor Law, among other instruments the clause names. These data include the city in which the work is based.

Three observations on the clause. It sits in the model for the indefinite term contract, and we found it in none of the other contract models we reviewed. Its wording is “consent of both parties through the platform”, and it does not mention writing. And it is qualified by the requirement of no conflict with the Labor Law, so it does not remove the requirement of Article 58 of the Labor Law for a transfer that requires a change of residence.

What resembles a transfer and is not one

• Transfer of services. The worker moves to a different employer, so the place of work is not the point. The difference between a change of profession, a transfer of services and a change of job title is explained under change of profession.
• Job rotation. It is a temporary move between jobs or departments to widen experience, and it is covered under job rotation. A transfer can combine a change of site with a change of work, and then both Articles 58 and 60 of the Labor Law are examined.
• Internal mobility. It is a worker’s move to another role within the establishment, presented under internal mobility from the side of retention and development. If the move requires the worker to change residence, Article 58 of the Labor Law governs the transfer unless it has the worker’s written consent.
• Transfer as a penalty. Transfer does not appear in the list of disciplinary penalties that Article 66 of the Labor Law sets out. How a penalty differs from a change in the content of the work is covered under demotion.

One point on numbering. The number 58 carries the transfer rule in the Labor Law, and in the model work regulation (النموذج الموحّد للائحة تنظيم العمل) the same number carries the list of disciplinary penalties. The instrument is therefore named together with the number each time.

If the worker is transferred without consent

Article 81 of the Labor Law lists the cases in which a worker may leave work without notice while keeping all statutory rights. Item 1 refers to the employer’s failure to meet its essential contractual or statutory obligations. Item 3 names, expressly, an assignment to work that differs materially from the agreed work, contrary to Article 60 of the Labor Law. The two Articles on the end of the relationship without notice are explained in our guide to dismissal without an award and leaving work without notice.

In the sources we reviewed, we found no text in Article 81 of the Labor Law that names Article 58 of the Labor Law or a transfer without consent. We therefore do not say that a transfer in breach falls under a particular item, and its effect is a matter for the statutory text and the competent authority. In the rows of the Schedule of Violations and Penalties (Ministerial Decision No. 112377 dated 21/8/1447H) that we reviewed, we found no row on the transfer of a worker.

What to record in the worker’s file

This is a practical recommendation, not a set of conditions taken from the Article:

• The written consent. The text of the consent, its date and the worker’s signature, and confirmation that it precedes the start of work at the new site.
• The two locations. The original and the new location, each by city name, so that the change of residence is plainly shown.
• The days under the exception. Where an assignment rests on necessity, its start and end dates and the total days used in the year, so that an excess does not come to light late.
• The costs borne. What the establishment paid in travel and accommodation costs during that period.

Provisions relied on for transfer to another place of work

The provisions relied on are those of the Saudi Labor Law as published by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Development: Article 58 (the written consent and the exception for necessity), Article 60 (assignment to materially different work, which a transfer can accompany), Article 52 (the type of work and its place as a particular of the model contract), Article 10 (Hijri periods), Article 61 (housing and transport duties), Article 66 (the list of disciplinary penalties) and Article 81 (the worker’s leaving without notice). From the Implementing Regulation, in the edition published by the same Ministry in April 2025: clause 14.8 of the model indefinite term contract in the annex. Article 58 of the Labor Law was last amended by Royal Decree M/46 of 1436H, and Royal Decree M/44 of 1446H, in force since 19 February 2025, did not amend it.

This is an explanation of the concept and of the statutory provisions cited, not legal advice.