I have received a letter from a reader expressing dismay about an article I wrote on Saudization. The reader, Hassan Al-Malak, was reacting to my comments about a newspaper advertisement from a Saudi company which wanted a telephone operator. The company said the applicant should have a secondary school certificate, a good knowledge of English and one-year practical experience. He wrote: “In your article you said that although the ad gave priority to Saudi applicants, it was nevertheless intended to circumvent Saudization laws. This, you added, was done by including conditions that are difficult to meet and that only create more obstacles for Saudis seeking jobs. I am surprised at your describing these conditions for employment as ‘frustrating.’ We are in a country awash with those who have completed secondary school. They are thus supposed to have a knowledge of English and some computer skills. Practical experience is no exception since all modern telephone exchange systems use complicated technology.
“I worked for 20 years in the contracting business and during that period I advertised many times for project engineers, site engineers, designers etc. Of the hundreds of applications I received, not a single one was from a Saudi. For the job of liaison officer, which by law must be filled by a Saudi, companies find themselves obliged to appoint two or three people to do the job. This is done to compensate for time lost as a result of absences and irresponsible behavior. Even our banks which have Saudized most front-desk jobs still suffer from lines of customers waiting to be served because only one or two out of six cashiers are on duty. Away from offices and in the open market, the situation is that the plumber, electrician, barber, baker and everybody else are non-Saudi. Even jobs requiring skilled work, such as computer and satellite communications, have almost no Saudis at all and the market is fully dominated by those who may be only half-educated from Bangladesh and India. There are of course many Saudis who are sincerely committed to their work and who do their jobs competently and conscientiously.
“Sir, you have turned a blind eye on the millions of jobs which require only minimum skills and do not attract Saudis at any level. Take for example the contracting sector and jobs such as cleaners, laborers and airport workers. We hear no demands that these jobs be Saudized because our society wants foreigners to do these ‘undesirable’ jobs. The salaries for these jobs are far below what Saudis would accept. Our social system frowns on us taking such jobs and for several generations now, those jobs have been seen as for foreigners only.”
To Brother Hassan, I say we are racists on this point. It is a matter of supply and demand and what is shunned today may be accepted tomorrow. I am sticking to the opinion I expressed in my earlier article. Thank you for your comments even though they were not generally favorable about Saudis.
***
I know of few banks that refuse to accept cash deposits unless there is a substantial suspicion that the money is drug money or has been acquired illegally. Saudi banks, however, seem to be the exception with a philosophy different from that of other banks of the world. They refuse to accept telephone, electricity, water and other utility bills. Were it not been for strict orders from the central bank, the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency (SAMA), no bill could be paid through the banks and millions of people would have suffered all manner of inconveniences. Saudi banks cite strange excuses and justifications for their actions. They say that the bill payer has no bank account with them and their refusals are aimed at avoiding congestion. They also claim that the amount is too small for the trouble and that accepting utility payments only keeps bank employees from attending to more important business.
The real cause, I believe, is in the small number of banks operating in the Kingdom. Who would believe that a country like Saudi Arabia — occupying a central position in the region’s economy, where billions of dollars are in circulation and trade is carried out with almost every country in the world — has only eight banks? I have written about this before and suggested that the number of banks should be increased to serve additional customers and raise the level of service.
It seems that SAMA is content with poor banking service, the continued refusal to open accounts for ordinary customers with a few hundred riyals rather than a few million, the long delays and the confusion associated with trying to pay utility bills. All these expose the real face of Saudi banks which continue to scorn small depositors and refuse to accept them. This is not a racial but an economic discrimination that must be rejected.
I don’t know the ratio of operating banks in the Kingdom to the total number of inhabitants. In Egypt where there are 42 banks, the ratio is one bank for every 1.5 million inhabitants. This means the Kingdom needs at least 13 banks instead of only eight. Why not allow more banks? I hope for an answer from some officials. Perhaps they can give me a satisfactory answer.