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​ 

February 22, 2021
Following the recent imposition of sanctions on Myanmar individuals and companies by the US, the UK and Canada have now imposed new sanctions. As with the US sanctions, these new measures impact UK and Canadian citizens and companies, and non-UK and non-Canadian companies and citizens with interests in those jurisdictions. The EU has indicated that it is planning to issue similar sanctions in the near future. New UK Sanctions In addition to the 16 individuals already sanctioned by the UK government, on February 18, 2021, the UK government announced that three individuals have been sanctioned for serious human rights violations and are now subject to asset freezes and travel bans. The full list of Myanmar individuals and companies sanctioned by the UK is available on the website of the Office of Financial Sanctions Implementation. Breaches of UK financial sanctions are criminal offences punishable in the UK by up to 7 years imprisonment and heavy fines. New Canadian Sanctions Also on February 18, timed to coincide with the UK sanctions, new Canadian sanctions were imposed on nine individuals. As with the UK, Canada already had a number of individuals in the Myanmar military on its sanctions list, and the new additions bring the total number of individuals sanctioned by Canada to 54. All assets of these individuals in Canada are now frozen, and they are banned from travelling to Canada. Canadian businesses or entities may not do business with any of the 54 individuals. Full details of the impact of the sanctions are available on the Government of Canada’s website, as is a database of the Myanmar individuals and companies subject to them. Breach of Canadian sanctions carries with it up to 5 years’ imprisonment in Canada and/or a large fine. Other Countries The EU is reportedly drawing up sanctions
January 26, 2021
On January 1, 2021, the government of Vietnam issued Decree No. 152/2020/ND-CP dated December 30, 2020, providing guidance concerning foreigners working in Vietnam (Decree 152). Foreign investors and expatriates should be aware of some notable new points.
January 12, 2021
Due to the resurgence of the COVID-19 pandemic in Thailand since December, 2020, Thailand’s Ministry of Labor recently published two regulations under the Social Security Act (SSA) in the Government Gazette: The Regulation on Entitlement to Compensatory Benefits in the Event of Unemployment Due to Force Majeure from the Pandemic of Dangerous Communicable Disease Under Relevant Law Relating to Communicable Diseases B.E. 2563 (2020) (the Force Majeure Regulation); and The Regulation on Determination of the Amount of Contributions to the Social Security Funds B.E. 2563 (2020) (the SSF Contribution Regulation). Details of the two regulations are provided below. The Force Majeure Regulation This regulation is similar to a previous regulation from April, 2020, during the first wave of the pandemic, stating that the definition of force majeure under the Social Security Act B.E. 2533 (1990) (the SSA) includes hazards from pandemics of dangerous communicable diseases (including COVID-19). This definition therefore affords protection to insured persons (i.e., employees) in the event that the COVID-19 pandemic results in their being unable to work, or their employers being unable to operate their business normally. This regulation allows the Social Security Office (SSO) to pay compensation to employees who: are insured persons who qualify to receive compensatory benefit in case of unemployment in accordance with the SSA; have to cease working temporarily during the period from December 19, 2020 onwards; and do not receive wages from their employer during the temporary cessation. This applies only if the circumstances above result from the following force majeure events related to hazards from COVID-19 (or other pandemics of dangerous communicable diseases that affect the public under the Communicable Diseases Act B.E. 2558 (2015)): The employee cannot work, or the employer does not allow the employee to work, because of quarantine or to comply with a COVID-19
November 3, 2020
Many Thai and international companies have expanded rapidly into Myanmar in recent years, in what had seemed to be an unstoppable expansion of cross-border trade resulting from the country’s emergence back onto the global stage. For those companies, the COVID-19 situation in Myanmar has been a cause for much concern and uncertainty—doubly so for those who had hired staff in the jurisdiction, as a lack of clarity regarding their obligations as employers was compounded by a lack of information on the situation on the ground.