You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

July 13, 2012

Debunking the Myths of Fixed-Period Employment Contracts

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Fixed-term employment contracts are easily misunderstood by employers. Some mistakenly believe that fixed-term contracts will absolve them of the duty to make severance payments to their employees, while others assume that labeling an employment contract “fixed-term” will grant it such status. However, the law sees fixed-term employment contracts very differently, and this article will bust the many major myths surrounding such contracts in Thailand.

Myth 1: An employment contract is a fixed-term contract if it is labeled as such.

On the contrary, a fixed-term contract must satisfy a number of requirements as set out in the Labor Protection Act (LPA). The LPA requires such an agreement to contain a clause specifying a predetermined fixed period for employment and therefore specifying a termination date. It must be a written agreement and contain, at minimum, (1) a clause setting forth the term of employment, and (2) a clear indication that employment will terminate at the end of such period.

Myth 2: An employer can extend a fixed-term employment contract.

The fixed-term contract must not contain a clause allowing either party to extend the period of employment. Otherwise, a court may determine that the contract does not qualify as a fixed-period employment contract.

In addition, if an employer enters into multiple, back-to-back, fixed-term contracts with the employee, the court may believe that the employer actually intended to hire the employee on a permanent basis. The court may, by its discretion, invalidate the provisions of the contract that establish a fixed term of employment.

Myth 3: No payments are due on termination, if the employer terminates a fixed-term contract.

Employers may avoid paying severance, remuneration in lieu of advance notice, and/or compensation for unfair termination only where the fixed-term employment contract is made in accordance with the LPA and Supreme Court precedent opinions.

In order for a fixed-term employment contract to absolve an employer of the responsibility to pay statutory compensation on termination, the contract must:

  1. Be in writing (as of the start of the employment period);
  2. Be specifically for a special project that is not within the normal business or trade of the employer, where the schedule for start and completion of work is fixed; or apply to work of a temporary nature that has a fixed schedule for its start and completion; or apply to seasonal work for which the employee is engaged; and
  3. Be for a period of two years or less. The work specified in the contract must also be of the type that can be completed within two years.

As indicated above, the employer must terminate the contract on the expiration date. Any extension may cause a court to determine that the contract is not a fixed-period employment contract.

Myth 4: No payments are due on termination, if the contract recites the requirements in the LPA and the employer terminates the contract on the expiration date.

The Supreme Court has determined that the following situations, in which the employer may have intended to enter into a fixed-term agreement, did not actually qualify as fixed-term contracts:

  • The employer’s business was in construction and the employee was hired as a construction worker; the Supreme Court ruled that the employee was employed in the normal business or trade of the employer.
  • The contract contained a clause allowing the employer to terminate it prior to the designated termination date if the employer had no work to assign to the employee.
  • The contract contained a clause entitling either party to terminate it prior to its termination date.
  • The contract was for a period of employment longer than two years.

In such cases, the Supreme Court held the employment contracts were not fixed-term, and the employees were therefore entitled to severance pay and remuneration in lieu of advance notice.

If, however, a contract is considered to be a fixed-period employment contract under the law, and the employer terminates the employee based on the expiration of the contract, it would be considered fair termination. The employee would not be entitled to severance, remuneration in lieu of advance notice, or compensation for unfair termination. Please note that the LPA is a law regarding public order and good morals, and any employment contract provisions that fail to comply with the LPA will be void. It is important to seek legal advice both prior to drafting and prior to seeking to enforce a fixed-term employment contract.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

December 15, 2023
Employment law specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins’ office in Bangkok provided the Thailand chapter to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce from International Employment Lawyer. This global guide, which covers 45 jurisdictions worldwide, examines the issue of workplace restructurings, particularly in relation to the needs of multinational companies. The Thailand chapter was written by partners Pimvimol (June) Vipamaneerut and Chusert Supasitthumrong along with associates Chomanut Arif, Dusita Khanijou, and Ketnut Pukahuta. The Q&A-style chapter focuses on key areas related to workplace restructuring, covering each of the following topics in detail: Reduction in workforce; Restructuring or reorganization of the business; Changing terms and conditions; and Areas to watch. A PDF of the Thailand chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also provided the Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Vietnam chapters to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce 2024. To browse the full guide for all 45 jurisdictions, please visit the International Employment Lawyer website.
December 15, 2023
Employment law specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam provided the Vietnam chapter to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce from International Employment Lawyer. This global guide, which covers 45 jurisdictions worldwide, examines the issue of workplace restructurings, particularly in relation to the needs of multinational companies. The Vietnam chapter was written by partner Kien Trung Trinh, counsel Sarah Galeski, and associate Dung Thi Phuong Le. The Q&A-style chapter focuses on key areas related to workplace restructuring, covering each of the following topics in detail: Reduction in workforce; Restructuring or reorganization of the business; Changing terms and conditions; and Areas to watch. A PDF of the Vietnam chapter can be downloaded through the button below. Tilleke & Gibbins also provided the Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Thailand chapters to the Guide to Restructuring a Cross-Border Workforce 2024. To browse the full guide for all 45 jurisdictions, please visit the International Employment Lawyer website.
December 15, 2023
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2023. This guide outlines the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource for planning international business strategy and researching new markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand is available through the button below.
October 20, 2023
On September 18, 2023, the Vietnamese government issued Decree No. 70/2023/ND-CP (“Decree 70”) amending and supplementing certain provisions of Decree No. 152/2020/ND-CP (“Decree 152”), which regulates foreign workers working in Vietnam and the recruitment and management of Vietnamese workers working for foreign entities in Vietnam. While Decree 70 relaxes some conditions relating to foreign workers, the general goal of protecting and prioritizing domestic labor over foreign labor remains. The major changes introduced in Decree 70 are summarized below. 1. Amended Definitions and Requirements for Worker Classifications Decree 70 introduces several changes to the requirements for foreign workers to be classified as “experts” and “technical workers.” Under Decree 152, foreign workers needed to hold bachelor’s degrees or receive training directly related to their intended job positions in Vietnam. However, under Decree 70, experts are only required to have a university degree or higher and at least three years of relevant work experience suitable for their intended positions in Vietnam. Similarly, it is no longer necessary for technical workers to have training in a specific technical field to be eligible to work in Vietnam. Instead, a technical worker is defined as someone who has undergone at least one year of training and possesses at least three years of working experience suitable for their intended job position. Additionally, Decree 70 clarifies and expands the scope of the term “executive director”. Accordingly, an executive director can be (i) the head of a branch, representative office, or business location of an enterprise (which helps clarify the previous definition of “executive director” in Decree 152); or (ii) an individual who oversees at least one field within an agency, organization, or enterprise while being under the direct supervision of the head of that agency, organization, or enterprise. 2. Application for Work Permit The general procedure for