Nurse's 16-Year Absence Leads to Legal Battle and Loss

TDT | Manama

The Daily Tribune - www.newsofbahrain.com   

A nurse who was absent from work for over 16 years has lost her legal battle to be reinstated or receive her due benefits. The nurse, who had been in an accident during her absence, returned to the hospital and requested to be either retired due to her inability to perform her duties, or be provided with a suitable alternative position. She also requested to be examined by a medical board to assess her fitness for work. However, the hospital considered her to have resigned implicitly and terminated her employment.

The nurse filed a lawsuit demanding to be examined by a medical board, to have her employment record reviewed, and to have the hospital's decision to deny her retirement due to unfitness overturned. She also sought to have her employment terminated according to the provisions of Article 25 of Decree-Law No. (48) of 2010 concerning civil service.

The first instance court, after reviewing the medical report which stated the nurse was unable to work as a nurse but could perform office duties, ruled against the nurse. The court found that the nurse's absence of over 16 years without any explanation constituted an implicit resignation, and therefore she had no legal standing to pursue the case. The court also stated that the nurse needed to demonstrate a direct and personal interest in the case to have her legal rights protected.

The nurse appealed the decision to the High Appeals Court, arguing that the lower court had misapplied the law. She claimed that she had contacted the hospital to clarify her legal status but received no response, which prompted her to file the lawsuit.

The High Appeals Court upheld the lower court's decision, stating that the nurse's absence for 16 years without any contact with the hospital was sufficient evidence of her intent to abandon her position. The court emphasised that a public employee's work life is a day-to-day commitment, requiring daily attendance and adherence to specific work hours. The court also highlighted that any absence, even for a short period, requires permission or notification to the employer. The nurse's prolonged absence without any explanation or attempt to obtain leave, even for a period without pay, was deemed a clear indication of her intention to leave her job.

The court concluded that it would be pointless to require the hospital to warn or reprimand the nurse for her absence, as her employment had already been terminated due to her prolonged absence. Therefore, the court dismissed the appeal, upholding the original ruling and ordering the nurse to pay court costs.