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​ 

May 10, 2021
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins’ offices in Myanmar, Thailand, and Vietnam have contributed chapters on labor law in these jurisdictions to the Global Employment Law Guide, published by Lex Mundi. The guide provides answers to key employment-related legal questions in 57 jurisdictions around the world, with all entries provided by member firms in the global Lex Mundi legal network. Each chapter contains in-depth information on the jurisdiction’s legal framework governing employment relationships, including coverage of the following topics: Employment categories and contract types Employee rights and protections Employment termination Leave and social benefits Restrictive covenants COVID-19 vaccination mandates and post-pandemic workplace reopening Readers can browse the contributions, generate country-specific reports, and compare attorney-client privilege in multiple jurisdictions. For more information, please visit the Lex Mundi website.
March 2, 2021
Maintaining positive employee relations is a top concern for virtually all companies. Many companies in Thailand—especially those located in the country’s industrial estates—have labor unions, while others rely on other non-union pathways for attending to the concerns of employees. In all of these cases, the union or collective group of employees also chooses members of the “employee committee” that is charged with fostering good relations and open communications with the employer through regular meetings dedicated to discussion of workplace matters. Companies with a workforce of 50 or more employees need to understand the roles of the employee committee and the specific rights accorded to the committee members, which are different from the rights of the other employees. Besides the obvious benefits that this understanding has for relations with their employees, it is also important if an employer takes disciplinary action against employee committee members, as violation of a committee member’s rights could result in the employer facing criminal penalties. The legal basis for these employee committees is the Labor Relations Act B.E. 2518 (LRA), which stipulates that in any workplace with at least 50 employees, the employees or their labor union of the business establishment is entitled to establish an employee committee. Members are elected (or, in the case of a labor union, appointed) to three-year terms on the committee, with the total number of committee members depending on the size of the workforce, as shown in the table. Membership Requirements Among partially unionized workforces, labor unions are generally given precedence when it comes to control of the committee. If a labor union whose members account for more than 20% of the total employees in a workplace, the union gets to appoint the majority of the employee committee members (e.g., four out of a seven-person committee, five of a
February 23, 2021
As many are already aware, following the change of government in Myanmar on February 1, 2021, a draft Cyber Security Law was proposed which attracted widespread criticism. However, less attention has been paid to significant amendments to two existing laws, some of which have a similar effect to parts of the draft Cyber Security Law. In other words, while the draft Cyber Security Law has not progressed further and is under public scrutiny, significant elements of it have found their way into law in Myanmar by other routes. Because these amendments are already law, it is very important that individuals and businesses in Myanmar understand their implications. Amendments to the Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens The Law Protecting the Privacy and Security of Citizens (2017), or the “Privacy Law,” was amended on February 13, 2021, less than two weeks after the military government came into power. These amendments chiefly address the power of the government to conduct searches, seizures, and arrests; to extend detention without judicial oversight; and to carry out broad surveillance and investigation activities that could intrude on individual privacy. The amendments accomplish this by suspending various sections of the Privacy Law for as long as the State Administration Council (the military body now governing Myanmar) is in power. The suspended sections include the following: Section 5: Search, seizure, and arrest without civilian observation The relevant part of Section 5 of the Privacy Law states, “The responsible authorities shall … when acting in accordance with existing law, not enter into a person’s residence or a room used as a residence, or a building, compound or building in a compound, for the purpose of search, seizure, or arrest, unless accompanied by minimum of two witnesses who should comprise Ward or Village Tract Administrators…”. The suspension