Customer Service Localisation in Saudi Arabia: Decrees 208892 and 112203

Customer service localisation in Saudi Arabia is not carried by a single decree. This guide reads two of them: the decree on customer service professions (208892) and the decree on remote customer service professions (112203). The second is earlier than the first in date, and the scope read for it concerns work under the remote-work system and what is contracted for with a party other than the establishment.

This guide treats what each of the two decrees carries: what it requires, the professions it reaches, its date and its grace period, and, where a scope of application was read, what that scope states about direct and indirect contracting and about service outsourcing. The shared architecture of localisation decrees, the way they relate to the Nitaqat programme, the denominator of the percentage and the rounding rule are not set out here.

There are places in this area that this guide did not come across in a source, and they are stated as such where they belong rather than filled in with an estimate.

1. The two decrees: what each one lays down

The decree on customer service professions (208892) is dated 23/11/1443 AH corresponding to 22/6/2022. Its percentage is 100% for the Arabic and English customer service professions, and for the managers, leaders and supervisors of the operations teams. Its grace period is 6 months from the date of the decree, ending 23/5/1444 AH corresponding to 17/12/2022.

The decree on remote customer service professions (112203) is dated 18/6/1442 AH corresponding to 31/1/2021, and its grace period is 180 days from the date of issuance of the decree, ending 21/12/1442 AH corresponding to 31/7/2021.

And here is a difference in the form of the ruling itself that deserves notice. Decree 208892 states a percentage: 100%. Decree 112203, by contrast, requires “restricting work to Saudis” in the customer service professions and posts for those working under the remote-work system. This guide did not come across a percentage figure for decree 112203 in a source. What is read is the wording of the restriction and its scope. So no figure is attributed to it, and it is not said that its percentage is such and such.

The two decrees may meet on a single establishment, and their grace periods differ and neither stands in for the other. The grace period of 112203 ended 21/12/1442 AH corresponding to 31/7/2021, and the grace period of 208892 ended 23/5/1444 AH corresponding to 17/12/2022. An establishment that dealt with remote work in its time had not thereby dealt with what came after it.

Set out together, with each constraint carried in its own place:

2. The scope: direct and indirect contracting, and service outsourcing

The most important thing in 112203 is its scope, not its magnitude. What is read is that the requirement to restrict covers the customer service professions and posts for those working under the remote-work system, by direct or indirect contracting, and that it covers employment contracts and service outsourcing that require the provision of remote work relating to the business that constitutes the main activity of the establishment.

This wording carries three things, each of them read in its own place:

• The form of contracting does not move the work outside the scope. The wording names direct and indirect contracting together, and it names employment contracts and service outsourcing together. The text names both forms, and it does not confine itself to one of them.
• Remote work is inside the scope. The subject of the decree is those working under the remote-work system, as the phrase appears in its text without a definition of it.
• And in the scope there is a constraint that has to be carried with it. The work covered is that which relates to the business constituting the main activity of the establishment. This is a constraint in the text itself, and whoever drops it has widened the decree beyond what it carries.

So an establishment that reads the decree as leaving it outside because the service is performed under a contract with another party has read the form of contracting and has not read the text of the scope. The reading required is to look at what the work performed is and whether it relates to the establishment’s main activity, and then at the form of the contract after that. The contract forms themselves and what the Law requires of each are treated in the employment contract in the Saudi Labor Law: form and mandatory contents.

What is not in this wording should be stated as well: this guide did not come across in it a definition of the remote-work system itself, nor a criterion distinguishing the business that constitutes the main activity of the establishment from other business. The wording uses the two descriptions and does not define them, and whoever defines them from his own resources has added to the text what is not in it.

And here is a limit not to be crossed: service outsourcing in this wording is a description of what the scope of 112203 reaches. It is not a reference to the rules on outsourcing between establishments. Those are other rules under another decree, decree 60339, whose subject is non-Saudi labour between two establishments. This guide did not come across a text linking the two decrees to one another, so no ruling is built on joining them.

3. The targeted professions are read from the classification, not from the common name

The targeted professions in 112203 are those classified under Minor Group (42) of the fourth Major Group in the Saudi Standard Classification of Occupations.

This means that the entry point of the question is not the title current inside the establishment but the position of the profession in the classification. The internal title does not bring a post into the decree and does not take it out of it, and the reference on that is the classification itself. As for the effect of the work actually performed in determining who falls within this decree, this guide did not come across it in its text.

Then there is a point at which to stop: the document defining this group was not read by this guide. Both decrees refer to Council of Ministers Resolution 660 dated 24/10/1441 AH adopting the Saudi Standard Classification of Occupations, and that is a document not read here. For that reason the professions falling within Minor Group (42) are not enumerated in this guide, and it is not said of any particular profession that it is inside it or outside it. The reference on that is the classification itself.

4. The supervisory categories inside decree 208892

The percentage in 208892 does not stop at whoever handles contact with the customer. What is read is that the 100% reaches the Arabic and English customer service professions, and reaches as well the managers, leaders and supervisors of the operations teams.

What shows in practice who falls into this layer is the span of control in the establishment: who runs an operations team, how many teams there are, and under what title. The supervisory layer above the team is stated in the decree itself, and it is not a consequence to be inferred. An establishment that dealt with the front line and left out whoever runs it has dealt with part of what its decree requires.

5. Reckoning in Nitaqat: a recorded reference and a document not read

The guide for 112203 contains a section headed “Reckoning in the Nitaqat programme”, which refers, for the reckoning of the Saudi worker, to Ministerial Decision 61706 dated 3/4/1442 AH on raising the minimum for reckoning the wages of Saudis in Nitaqat.

This decision was not read by this guide, so nothing is said of its content: no threshold, no effect, and no method of reckoning. What is recorded here is the existence of the reference alone. That the required Saudization percentages and their variation by activity and establishment size sit outside the scope of a Nitaqat-facing guide is stated separately in attesting employment contracts on Qiwa and its effect on the establishment’s classification.

6. Two different violations tables

The two decrees do not carry their penalty in their own text. Each of them refers to the table of violations and penalties, and what is read is that their references differ:

• 112203 refers to decree 178743 dated 27/9/1440 AH.
• 208892 refers to decree 92768 dated 5/5/1443 AH.

Neither of the two tables was read by this guide. So no fine amount attributed to either decree is published here, nor the scale on which it rises. The practical use of recording these two numbers is that they are what one asks with. An establishment that wants to know what follows a breach of its decree returns to the table its own decree refers to, not to a table it heard of in another decree. The difference between the two references here is enough to show that the answer is not one answer merely because the subject is one subject.

As for the relationship between these older references and the table published by the Ministry today, this guide did not come across it in a source.

7. What separates the two scopes, and what was not read in it

What is read in the scope of one of the two decrees is a pattern of work, and no scope-of-application wording was read for the other, so it is not said that this is the divider between them. Decree 112203 has as its subject those working under the remote-work system, and its scope names the two forms of contracting and constrains that by what relates to the main activity of the establishment. As for 208892, what is read for it in this guide is its percentage, whom it reaches, its date and its grace period. No scope-of-application wording was read for it.

Two limits follow from that, and neither is to be crossed:

• It is not said that 208892 applies to every establishment whatever the number of its workers, because the wording of its scope was not read. Nor is the contrary said. This is a place to return to its own guide.
• Nor is it said what the ruling is when the two decrees meet on a single worker who works in customer service under the remote-work system. This guide did not come across a text treating that meeting specifically.

What is useful for the establishment at this point is that the fact be recorded rather than the ruling estimated: that your file hold the work pattern of every employee in customer service and the date it changed, and that the headcount plan show who works under the remote-work system. Then, when you return to the procedural guide or to the competent authority, your question rests on a recorded fact rather than on an estimate. The recording of the contract type itself, and when a contract converts from one type to another, is treated in fixed-term and indefinite-term contracts and when a contract converts.

What the text does not address

• A percentage figure for decree 112203: what is read is the requirement to restrict and its scope, and this guide did not come across a published percentage for it. That is not a statement that there is no percentage in it.
• The content of Ministerial Decision 61706 referred to for the reckoning in Nitaqat: it was not read, so it is not described.
• The professions falling within Minor Group (42): the document defining them, Council of Ministers Resolution 660, was not read here, so they are not enumerated and no ruling is given on a particular profession.
• A wage floor for counting in these two decrees: this guide did not come across a published floor for them in the guides it read, and that is not a statement that there is no floor in them. Where a decree elsewhere does state one, the measure is the contribution wage registered at GOSI, set out in the contribution wage at GOSI.
• A threshold of application by number of workers in decree 208892: no scope-of-application wording was read for it here, so it is not said that it applies to every establishment whatever the number of its workers, nor is the contrary said.
• A professional accreditation condition in either decree: no mention of one was read in the sources read, and not having read it is not a denial.
• The definition of the remote-work system, and the criterion for what constitutes the main activity of the establishment: both are used in the wording of the scope and are not defined in it.
• The meeting of the two decrees on a single worker: what the ruling is where the worker is in customer service and works under the remote-work system was not come across by this guide in a text treating that meeting specifically.
• The amount of the fine and the outcome of the reference to the two tables 178743 and 92768: neither of them was read.
• Support and employment programmes: the guide for 112203, issued in 2021, names the names of support programmes, and it states no eligibility condition and no amount. Because that is a report about that year’s guide and not about what is available today, it is not described here as a benefit that can be relied on.

And a caution that has to be added: a profession this guide did not come across is not thereby outside localisation. It may be reached by an activity decree, or a regional decree, or a decree whose guide has not been published.

What your system should record

• The registered occupational title of every worker in customer service, and its code in the Saudi Standard Classification of Occupations, not the internal title alone. The relationship between the registered title and what the contract has to carry is treated in the mandatory particulars of the Saudi employment contract.
• The work pattern as it is recorded with you, and the date it changed whenever it changed. The subject of decree 112203 is those working under the remote-work system, and a recorded fact is more useful than an estimate when returning to the guide.
• The language of the service the worker performs, Arabic or English.
• The level of the post: whether it is in the front line or in management, leadership or the supervision of operations teams.
• The contracts concluded with other parties for the provision of remote work, what the work performed under them is, and whether it relates to the main activity of the establishment.
• The registered contribution wage of each worker, which is the figure the reckoning at GOSI rests on and which is defined in GOSI contributions.
• The dates of the two decrees and the ends of their two grace periods, tied to the posts each of them reaches. Whether your contracts are attested, which is a separate obligation with its own effect, is treated in attesting employment contracts on Qiwa.

Checklist

• Do you know which of your posts falls within Minor Group (42) of the classification, by the classification and not by the internal title?
• Do you have workers in customer service working under the remote-work system?
• Do you have a contract with another party under which a service is provided remotely? What is the work performed under it? And does it relate to your establishment’s main activity?
• Have you looked at the managers, leaders and supervisors of the operations teams, or confined yourself to whoever handles contact with the customer?
• Does your review cover customer service in English as it covers it in Arabic?
• Do the titles registered for your workers match the actual work they perform?
• Do you know the end of the grace period in the decree that reaches your posts?
• And when you need an answer on what was not read here, do you return to the procedural guide itself and to the competent authority rather than estimating?

Why this turns into a problem

Customer service is among the posts most capable of being performed from outside the establishment’s premises and under a contract with another party. For that reason the first error here falls in one place: that the form of contracting is read instead of the work performed. The text names direct and indirect contracting, and it names employment contracts and service outsourcing, and it constrains that by what relates to the main activity of the establishment. An establishment that stops at the shape of the contract has not read the wording that determines the scope.

The second error is that the internal title is read instead of the classification. A post may carry a name with you that does not indicate its position in the classification, and the reference is the classification itself. As for the effect of the work actually performed, it was not read in the text of this decree.

The third error is that what has not been published is filled in with an estimate. In this area there are express places that were not read: the content of 61706, the two violations tables, and the enumeration of Minor Group (42). The soundest thing to do with them is to keep them written as such in your file until they are read from their source, rather than filling them with a figure that looks plausible.

Then the effect of that appears late. An establishment is not notified of its falling outside what its decree requires on the day it falls outside, and many of the facts required cannot be recovered retrospectively: a work pattern that was not recorded on the day it changed, or a contract whose subject was never documented, or a title that was never tied to a code.

This is where it pays to have an employee’s facts in a single file. That is what Qoyod HR provides: a single employee file holding the contract, the documents and their expiry dates with an alert before them, an attendance record for each employee, and their leave, salary and end-of-service entitlements. It is a standalone HR system with its own subscription, and the link with Qoyod accounting is available now. As for what your decree requires and what its scope is, both are read from its procedural guide, and no system reckons them.

For more guides and templates, browse the HR Resource Centre.

Frequently asked questions

Which two decrees does this guide read for customer service localisation?

The decree on customer service professions (208892), dated 23/11/1443 AH corresponding to 22/6/2022, and the decree on remote customer service professions (112203), dated 18/6/1442 AH corresponding to 31/1/2021. The first states a percentage of 100% for the Arabic and English customer service professions and for the managers, leaders and supervisors of the operations teams, and what the second requires is restricting work to Saudis in the customer service professions and posts for those working under the remote-work system.

Does the remote customer service decree cover work contracted for with another party?

What is read in the scope of decree 112203 is that the requirement to restrict covers the customer service professions and posts for those working under the remote-work system, by direct or indirect contracting, and that it covers employment contracts and service outsourcing that require the provision of remote work relating to the business that constitutes the main activity of the establishment. The text names both forms together, and it constrains that by what relates to the main activity of the establishment.

What is the localisation percentage in the remote customer service decree?

This guide did not come across a percentage figure for decree 112203 in a source. What is read is the wording of restricting work to Saudis and its scope as it appears, not a percentage. So no figure is attributed to it here, and that is not a statement that there is no percentage in it.

Does the percentage in decree 208892 cover supervisors and managers?

Yes. What is read is that the 100% reaches the Arabic and English customer service professions, and reaches as well the managers, leaders and supervisors of the operations teams. The supervisory layer is stated in the decree itself.

How do I know whether a post of mine is among the targeted professions?

The targeted professions in decree 112203 are those classified under Minor Group (42) of the fourth Major Group in the Saudi Standard Classification of Occupations. The document defining that classification, Council of Ministers Resolution 660 dated 24/10/1441 AH, was not come across by this guide, so the professions falling within that group are not enumerated here. The reference on them is the classification itself and the competent authority.

What is the fine for breaching either decree?

No amount is published here. The two decrees refer to the table of violations and penalties: 112203 refers to decree 178743 dated 27/9/1440 AH, and 208892 refers to decree 92768 dated 5/5/1443 AH. Neither of the two tables was come across by this guide, so what is recorded is the reference alone.

Statutory references

This guide rests on the procedural guide for the decree on customer service professions (208892) and the procedural guide for the decree on remote customer service professions (112203) published by the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Development, and on the two signed ministerial decisions attached to them, as to what each decree requires, its targeted professions, its date, its grace period and its reference to the table of violations and penalties, and the scope of application where it was read.

What is referred to in these two guides and was not read is recorded by its name without any description of its content: Ministerial Decision 61706 dated 3/4/1442 AH, Council of Ministers Resolution 660 dated 24/10/1441 AH, and the two tables of violations and penalties 178743 and 92768.

No percentage, date or grace period that was not read from the guide of its own decree is published in this guide, nor any fine amount, nor any conversion of a Hijri date into a Gregorian one or the reverse. Decrees that are updated from year to year have their dates reconsidered from their page at the Ministry before anything is built on them.

Subjects that border these two decrees and are not settled in this guide: registration with the General Organization for Social Insurance, and the contribution rates applied to a registered wage. Neither is read from the guides of these two decrees.

This guide is an organisational explanation and not legal advice. In a live dispute or a particular case, the statutory text and the competent authority remain the reference.