Hello everyone,
I’m hoping to get some insight from people who’ve worked abroad or have experience with international hiring practices.
I’ve noticed that in many overseas roles (especially in the Gulf and parts of Asia), employers issue an offer letter first, with the actual employment contract only being processed after arrival in the country. The offer letter often outlines salary, benefits, duration, and start date, but usually includes clauses like “subject to paperwork, references, and approvals.”
How legally binding is an offer letter if the formal contract is signed only after arrival?
If the contract terms differ from the offer letter, what protections does the employee actually have?
Thanks in advance for any insight you’re willing to share.
Is an offer letter legally binding if the contract is issued after arrival?
Response
Disclaimer: ** THIS IS NOT LEGAL ADVICE**
Short Answer:
Offer letters are not contracts; they are worth almost zero in some places and actually zero in many places.
Long Answer:
The first issue is what you mean by "legally binding". From which most ITs mean what do they need to be successful in some form of tribunal action that they can enforce on the IS.
Typically, to enforce a contract you have to have a contract to begin with. In employment matters this is generally accepted that the standard is an actual contract that conforms to the regulatory requirements of the region. Offer letters dont usually meet this standard, and an ISs legal team is going to start with that issue to begin with. The grey area is that more common in western jurisdictions an offer letter can with successful argument form the basis of a contractual agreement, often as part of a verbal contract. You find it much less common of an option is Asian and ME regions. What an IS is going to argue is that the offer letter isnt a contract but 'consideration' of a potential future contract that may not materialize (be executed) in the future. They will argue the offer letter promises nothing and only suggests further consideration.
The second issue is what is meant by "protections", which usually means what enforcement options does an IT have against an IS. Contrary to most ITs thinking, contracts dont offer much in the way of protections. You are not in the VAST majority of circumstances ever going to realize full performance in terms of the fully yearly salary plus other comp if an IS breaks contract prior to commencement of work. Every work agreement has some exit or termination provision either in the contract, part of a policy, or contained in some form of regulation. In most cases youre going to get some variable of X weeks/months in termination, dismissal, or severeness. Thats essentially it. The IS is going to dismiss you; whether its a formal termination, withdrawal of an offer, or voiding of a contract. The only issue really isnt are they going to give you a years worth of coin, its whether they have to remit some number of days to you in salary. Its to an ISs benefit thus to 'withdraw the offer', because it doesnt acknowledge to begin with that the offer was a contract, and thus they owe you nothing. If you actually have a contract than the ITs position is a bit btter as they may have to provide some valid cause for voiding the contract, but while thats an actual hurdle its a low one. Absent that if the IS has to dismiss you to terminate the contract then they would have to comply with whatever separation requirements either in the contract or provided by regulations. Usually this isnt a lot, its typically a months salary (sometimes two and rarely three). Usually it doesnt include any costs or expenses incurred as part of the relocation allowance/benefit (part of the OSH package). So youre not going to get reimbursed for CRBs or visa/immigration expenditures. An IT also isnt going to get reimbursed for any airfare or other travel expenses they have incurred. Leadership thinks you havent done anything for them so the severance or separation they have to provide you is your reimbursement. In their mind they owe you nothing.
Really though, protections and enforcement all assume you have access to whatever tribunal system you would have to pursue a claim and remedy through (often this may mean some type of civil court). The vast majority of ITs simply dont have access to the civil judicial system to file suite (either themselves or through legal counsel) to recover damages, even if they can make a claim for the full contract value. In the majority of regions this means that what an ITs can file remotely is a complaint with a labor board or union. The IT files a complaint and sends the documentation they have. The IS is going to argue the offer letter isnt a contract, and they owe the IT nothing. If that isnt successful then they will argue that the contract was voided for cause (which they will have to provide and prove), and they owe the IT nothing. If they are unsuccessful and the IT wins then either two things happen, but they ultimately have the same outcome. Either the IS will be required to employ the IT or pay the IT whatever the separation/severance requirement is (and they might, maybe get reimbursement for expenditures). They might also get some multiple of that separation/severance amount in damages if the IS acted in bad faith (but its rare). If the IS is required to employ the IT, the IS will simply and immediately dismiss the IT. Theres very likely some probationary period or lack of tenure protections in the early periods of an employment agreement. Regardless, they will have to pay the separation/severance coin. In either case a successful outcome only amounts to a very small portion of the annual salary or contract coin.
If an IT pursue whatever protections or enforcement remedies they have, if the IT used a premium recruiting agency they will likely get dropped. Even if the agency agrees its unfair there is very little they can do, they cant make an IS do anything. With the best remedy they have being dropping the IS, but thats usually bad for business. Pursuing formal action is something the agency rep will discourage and advise against. Often it comes down to, if the IT drops the matter the agency will continue to rep the IT, maybe even extend their membership or agree to "help" the IT in some additional way (often helping them to find another job), but if they pursue formal action against the IS then the agency will drop them.
There isnt much beyond that. ITs have a lot of delusions about whats available to them. To give you some clarity:
1) Embassies have almost zero influence. In some cases an embassy will have some minor amount of influence with an IS (through some kind of association with the embassy) but in only the most egregious cases will an embassy even provide a modicum of intercession on an ITs behalf. They really dont have any power to make a phone call and make an IS do anything.
2) Accrediting agencies dont care. Employment matters are almost exclusively outside the realm of accreditation, especially when there isnt any misconduct or academic dishonesty. Even if there is, even in cases where an IT is a whistleblower on organized academic dishonesty, the remedy is ultimately at worst the withdrawal of accreditation rather than some kind of compensation or reappointment of an IT to a position. Accreditation agencies just dont have the kind of power needed to make an IS do anything in that regard.
3) Local Courts and tribunals have no jurisdiction. Suing an IS in your local home jurisdiction will amount to a lot of nothing. The IS will ignore the complaint likely depositing it directly in the bin and trash. Even if they do respond, it will amount to a letter stating the Court has no jurisdiction over the IS or its leadership. This applies equally to legal letters written on the ITs behalf either from some associations office of counsel or private legal counsel. ISs know the only legal process that matters is the one in their region not the ITs.
4) Credentialing bodies do not see employment disputes as misconduct. This works both ways, but you cant report a leader for misconduct over an employment dispute (well you can but it will go nowhere), nor can leadership file a misconduct allegation over an employment dispute either. The exception to this is in some regulatory jurisdictions a credential can be sanctioned for contract abandonment, but in IE this is an empty threat as the requirement is that the contract abandoned must be in the jurisdiction of the regulating agency and/or a regulated DS (public/, maintained DS).
5) Social Media may be the greatest tool an IT has. ISR cant make an IS do anything nor is there any type of legal defense fund. If an IS wants to keep things quiet the threat of public exposure may be the best tool an IT has. An IT isnt going to get much more than an IS would have to remit through a formal complaint process though. Usually the best deal an IT can get is a months (maybe a terms worth) in salary and/or reimbursement of expenses. This may or may not come with the condition of an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement). The IT gets a small amount of coin in exchange for not filing any complaints, or publishing any reviews.
Short Answer:
Offer letters are not contracts; they are worth almost zero in some places and actually zero in many places.
Long Answer:
The first issue is what you mean by "legally binding". From which most ITs mean what do they need to be successful in some form of tribunal action that they can enforce on the IS.
Typically, to enforce a contract you have to have a contract to begin with. In employment matters this is generally accepted that the standard is an actual contract that conforms to the regulatory requirements of the region. Offer letters dont usually meet this standard, and an ISs legal team is going to start with that issue to begin with. The grey area is that more common in western jurisdictions an offer letter can with successful argument form the basis of a contractual agreement, often as part of a verbal contract. You find it much less common of an option is Asian and ME regions. What an IS is going to argue is that the offer letter isnt a contract but 'consideration' of a potential future contract that may not materialize (be executed) in the future. They will argue the offer letter promises nothing and only suggests further consideration.
The second issue is what is meant by "protections", which usually means what enforcement options does an IT have against an IS. Contrary to most ITs thinking, contracts dont offer much in the way of protections. You are not in the VAST majority of circumstances ever going to realize full performance in terms of the fully yearly salary plus other comp if an IS breaks contract prior to commencement of work. Every work agreement has some exit or termination provision either in the contract, part of a policy, or contained in some form of regulation. In most cases youre going to get some variable of X weeks/months in termination, dismissal, or severeness. Thats essentially it. The IS is going to dismiss you; whether its a formal termination, withdrawal of an offer, or voiding of a contract. The only issue really isnt are they going to give you a years worth of coin, its whether they have to remit some number of days to you in salary. Its to an ISs benefit thus to 'withdraw the offer', because it doesnt acknowledge to begin with that the offer was a contract, and thus they owe you nothing. If you actually have a contract than the ITs position is a bit btter as they may have to provide some valid cause for voiding the contract, but while thats an actual hurdle its a low one. Absent that if the IS has to dismiss you to terminate the contract then they would have to comply with whatever separation requirements either in the contract or provided by regulations. Usually this isnt a lot, its typically a months salary (sometimes two and rarely three). Usually it doesnt include any costs or expenses incurred as part of the relocation allowance/benefit (part of the OSH package). So youre not going to get reimbursed for CRBs or visa/immigration expenditures. An IT also isnt going to get reimbursed for any airfare or other travel expenses they have incurred. Leadership thinks you havent done anything for them so the severance or separation they have to provide you is your reimbursement. In their mind they owe you nothing.
Really though, protections and enforcement all assume you have access to whatever tribunal system you would have to pursue a claim and remedy through (often this may mean some type of civil court). The vast majority of ITs simply dont have access to the civil judicial system to file suite (either themselves or through legal counsel) to recover damages, even if they can make a claim for the full contract value. In the majority of regions this means that what an ITs can file remotely is a complaint with a labor board or union. The IT files a complaint and sends the documentation they have. The IS is going to argue the offer letter isnt a contract, and they owe the IT nothing. If that isnt successful then they will argue that the contract was voided for cause (which they will have to provide and prove), and they owe the IT nothing. If they are unsuccessful and the IT wins then either two things happen, but they ultimately have the same outcome. Either the IS will be required to employ the IT or pay the IT whatever the separation/severance requirement is (and they might, maybe get reimbursement for expenditures). They might also get some multiple of that separation/severance amount in damages if the IS acted in bad faith (but its rare). If the IS is required to employ the IT, the IS will simply and immediately dismiss the IT. Theres very likely some probationary period or lack of tenure protections in the early periods of an employment agreement. Regardless, they will have to pay the separation/severance coin. In either case a successful outcome only amounts to a very small portion of the annual salary or contract coin.
If an IT pursue whatever protections or enforcement remedies they have, if the IT used a premium recruiting agency they will likely get dropped. Even if the agency agrees its unfair there is very little they can do, they cant make an IS do anything. With the best remedy they have being dropping the IS, but thats usually bad for business. Pursuing formal action is something the agency rep will discourage and advise against. Often it comes down to, if the IT drops the matter the agency will continue to rep the IT, maybe even extend their membership or agree to "help" the IT in some additional way (often helping them to find another job), but if they pursue formal action against the IS then the agency will drop them.
There isnt much beyond that. ITs have a lot of delusions about whats available to them. To give you some clarity:
1) Embassies have almost zero influence. In some cases an embassy will have some minor amount of influence with an IS (through some kind of association with the embassy) but in only the most egregious cases will an embassy even provide a modicum of intercession on an ITs behalf. They really dont have any power to make a phone call and make an IS do anything.
2) Accrediting agencies dont care. Employment matters are almost exclusively outside the realm of accreditation, especially when there isnt any misconduct or academic dishonesty. Even if there is, even in cases where an IT is a whistleblower on organized academic dishonesty, the remedy is ultimately at worst the withdrawal of accreditation rather than some kind of compensation or reappointment of an IT to a position. Accreditation agencies just dont have the kind of power needed to make an IS do anything in that regard.
3) Local Courts and tribunals have no jurisdiction. Suing an IS in your local home jurisdiction will amount to a lot of nothing. The IS will ignore the complaint likely depositing it directly in the bin and trash. Even if they do respond, it will amount to a letter stating the Court has no jurisdiction over the IS or its leadership. This applies equally to legal letters written on the ITs behalf either from some associations office of counsel or private legal counsel. ISs know the only legal process that matters is the one in their region not the ITs.
4) Credentialing bodies do not see employment disputes as misconduct. This works both ways, but you cant report a leader for misconduct over an employment dispute (well you can but it will go nowhere), nor can leadership file a misconduct allegation over an employment dispute either. The exception to this is in some regulatory jurisdictions a credential can be sanctioned for contract abandonment, but in IE this is an empty threat as the requirement is that the contract abandoned must be in the jurisdiction of the regulating agency and/or a regulated DS (public/, maintained DS).
5) Social Media may be the greatest tool an IT has. ISR cant make an IS do anything nor is there any type of legal defense fund. If an IS wants to keep things quiet the threat of public exposure may be the best tool an IT has. An IT isnt going to get much more than an IS would have to remit through a formal complaint process though. Usually the best deal an IT can get is a months (maybe a terms worth) in salary and/or reimbursement of expenses. This may or may not come with the condition of an NDA (Non-Disclosure Agreement). The IT gets a small amount of coin in exchange for not filing any complaints, or publishing any reviews.
Re: Is an offer letter legally binding if the contract is issued after arrival?
This is a really important question and one that catches a lot of people off guard when working internationally. In many countries, especially in the Gulf and parts of Asia, the offer letter is often not considered fully legally binding in the same way a signed employment contract is—particularly when it’s explicitly marked as “subject to approvals” or “final contract.” In practice, it functions more as a conditional intent than a guarantee.
That said, the offer letter still carries weight. If the final contract materially differs (salary, role, benefits, duration), reputable employers will usually revise or reconfirm terms before arrival. Your strongest protections tend to be practical rather than legal: getting everything in writing, clarifying that the contract will match the offer letter, and asking in advance to review a draft contract if possible.
If discrepancies appear after arrival, leverage often depends on local labor laws, visa sponsorship rules, and whether you’ve already resigned from a prior role. Many experienced expats recommend not relocating without either a reviewed draft contract or explicit written confirmation that the offer terms will be honored. When in doubt, consulting a local employment lawyer or expat forum for that specific country can be invaluable.
That said, the offer letter still carries weight. If the final contract materially differs (salary, role, benefits, duration), reputable employers will usually revise or reconfirm terms before arrival. Your strongest protections tend to be practical rather than legal: getting everything in writing, clarifying that the contract will match the offer letter, and asking in advance to review a draft contract if possible.
If discrepancies appear after arrival, leverage often depends on local labor laws, visa sponsorship rules, and whether you’ve already resigned from a prior role. Many experienced expats recommend not relocating without either a reviewed draft contract or explicit written confirmation that the offer terms will be honored. When in doubt, consulting a local employment lawyer or expat forum for that specific country can be invaluable.