The reputation of states is much like the reputation of individuals; it is built over time and affects opportunities for success and trust-building. As is well known, Jordan’s international reputation is one of the country’s sources of strength, reflecting stability, moderation, openness, and the ability to build partnerships. Therefore, the challenges highlighted in some international reports should not be treated as condemnation, but rather as opportunities to improve policies, especially when solutions are possible through simple and low-cost reforms.
اضافة اعلان
Among these challenges is Jordan’s classification in the Global Slavery Index, which points to worrying indicators linked to certain labour conditions, particularly among migrant workers. This does not mean that Jordan adopts or legalizes slavery, but it does draw attention to the fact that some existing policies and practices may allow serious labour violations to occur. In some cases, these violations may amount to forced labour or severe exploitation, which fall within the framework of modern slavery.
From the perspective of those concerned with labour policies and human rights, we believe that simple amendments to policies regulating non-Jordanian labour can strengthen Jordan’s positive image, protect workers, and regulate the labour market at the same time. The problem does not necessarily lie in the Labour Law alone, as the law, in principle, grants workers the right to terminate their employment contract in specific cases, including non-payment of wages or exposure to serious violations. However, this right becomes practically limited when the work permit is tied to a specific employer, and the worker’s legal residency is linked to the work permit.
This connection turns a labour dispute from an ordinary contractual disagreement into a matter related to the worker’s residency and legal status. A migrant worker may find themselves threatened with losing their residency, facing fines, detention, or deportation if they leave work or attempt to change employers, even when leaving the job is justified. This creates an imbalanced dependency relationship, making the worker less able to file a complaint, claim unpaid wages, or leave an abusive work environment.
Dozens of countries around the world have recognized the seriousness of this problem and have introduced reforms to migrant labour policies, particularly those related to sponsorship systems or similar arrangements. These reforms have moved toward expanding workers’ freedom to change employers within the economic sectors in which they are permitted to work, reducing the link between their legal status and a single employer, providing transitional periods to regularize their status, and facilitating the submission of complaints in multiple languages.
Therefore, the most important amendment Jordan can begin with is to decouple residency permits from work permits, so that the end of an employment relationship or the emergence of a labour dispute does not automatically lead to the loss of legal residency. Workers should also be granted a safe transitional period to search for another job within the sector in which they are permitted to work, or to file a complaint or settle a dispute without the threat of detention or deportation.
In addition, it is necessary to reorganize absence reports, or what is often referred to as “absconding” from work, to prevent their use as a tool of pressure. Legal assistance and translation services should also be provided to migrant workers; protections should be expanded for domestic and agricultural workers; and workers should not be made to bear the consequences of violations that are primarily committed by employers.
Improving Jordan’s position in international reports can be achieved not merely by objecting to them, but by closing the gaps on which they are based. Simple reforms such as these can make a significant difference in protecting workers, regulating the labour market, and strengthening Jordan’s image and international reputation.
