Saudi Arabia to Slap Fake 'Sickie' Workers with £20k Fines or Jail. Should Britain Do the Same?

Saudi Arabia has just made it a crime to fake sick leave, punishable by up to one year in prison or a penalty of SR 100,000 (approximately £20,800).

The Ministry of Health, citing the rise of social media services offering illegitimate sick‑note guarantees, warned that only the official 'Sehhaty' platform can issue valid medical leave. Any attempts to bypass it, either by patients or healthcare professionals, will face legal consequences.

Saudi authorities have also deployed a digital system that cross‑verifies medical records to curb abuse.

The new penalties in Saudi Arabia have sparked debate over whether similar rules could one day apply in Britain.

What Saudi Arabia Has Announced

Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Health confirmed that any employee found guilty of falsifying a sick note will face criminal penalties. The fine could reach 100,000 Saudi riyals (around £20,800), and in serious cases, offenders could be jailed.

Officials also warned doctors who issue fraudulent medical certificates that they too will face legal consequences, including the possibility of losing their licence to practise. Employers have been urged to verify staff medical records through an official government database.

The move reflects Saudi Arabia's broader push to modernise its labour market and curb practices that undermine productivity. With many firms relying on public-sector style work routines, the government says tackling false absences is essential for improving efficiency.

Why the Crackdown Matters

Faking illness to skip work, often dubbed 'throwing a sickie' in Britain, has long been a workplace issue worldwide. Surveys in the UK suggest thousands of employees admit to calling in sick without genuine cause each year, often citing stress or exhaustion.

While British law allows workers to self-certify sick leave for up to seven days without a doctor's note, Saudi authorities argue such flexibility is open to abuse. By enforcing heavy penalties, they hope to set a deterrent that prioritises accountability over leniency.

Critics, however, warn that strict punishments could discourage genuinely ill employees from taking time off, fearing suspicion or retaliation. Worker rights groups have also cautioned that the policy may lead to unequal treatment of employees depending on their industry or employer.

Could the UK Ever Follow Suit?

The Saudi approach has reignited debate in Britain about how far governments and employers should go to address fake sick leave. While there are no proposals for fines or criminal action in the UK, some business groups argue that stricter enforcement could help curb absenteeism.

At present, the UK system relies heavily on trust and medical certification. Experts say stricter rules, such as random audits of medical notes or penalties for repeat offenders, could be considered in future if absenteeism significantly impacts productivity.

Employment lawyers stress, however, that introducing criminal penalties similar to Saudi Arabia's would likely face legal and cultural resistance in Britain, where employment protections and workers' rights are firmly enshrined in law.

Faking a sick day, or pulling a 'sickie', is widespread in Britain. A 2025 survey found that 68 per cent of UK workers admitted to calling in sick when they weren't, often to run errands, shop, or rest.

The same study estimated lost productivity could cost small businesses up to £45,000 a year.

Another survey revealed that nearly one in three Britons fake a COVID‑19 diagnosis to take time off, 34 per cent of men and 25 per cent of women admitted to the ruse.

In 2019, bogus sick days cost UK employers around £5.6 billion, accounting for over 51 million days of absence, according to HR Grapevine.

What Happens Next

Saudi Arabia will come into effect later this year, with government agencies tasked with monitoring compliance. Employers across the kingdom are expected to tighten internal processes for recording and verifying absences.

For Britain, the debate remains hypothetical. Yet the announcement has drawn attention to the balance between protecting employees' health and ensuring workplaces are not undermined by abuse of sick leave policies.

As one UK employment consultant put it: 'Most workers take sick leave legitimately. But when people abuse the system, it raises questions about fairness for colleagues left covering shifts, and for employers footing the bill.'