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

February 5, 2020

Fair Treatment of Employees under Thai Labor Law

Bangkok Post: Human Resources Watch

Labor disputes typically arise when one party—often the employee—feels unfairly treated, for reasons that may stretch far beyond the law, and consequently he or she will feel entitled to restitution. Thailand’s labor laws encompass several safeguards that help employers meet a standard of fairness when dealing with dissatisfied or aggrieved employees.

By upholding high moral standards and treating employees fairly, these practices will foster good morale, encourage productivity, and boost employee retention rates. Reviewing and understanding these rules is an important first step in providing a fair and enjoyable workplace for employees. Below is a summary of some of the issues that may give rise to resentment, misunderstanding, or other labor-related disputes.

Remuneration and benefits

Compensation is a fundamental issue that is responsible for inciting many labor disputes. At the very least, employers must always be aware of the latest minimum wage. In Thailand, the latest minimum wage levels took effect on January 1, 2020. The current minimum wage varies by province on a sliding scale ranging from THB 313 to THB 336 per day. Compared to the previous minimum wage, this represents an increase of THB 6 for nine provinces and THB 5 for the remaining provinces.

Employers should also be aware of various requirements and obligations when terminating employees without cause. One of these obligations is the disbursement of severance pay. Severance pay in Thailand is calculated based on the length of an outgoing employee’s service to the employer, and it is important to stay on top of the required rates, because these entitlements may change when the related laws are amended. For example, last year’s amendments to the Labor Protection Act (LPA) increased the amount of severance pay to 400 days’ wages for employees who have completed 20 years of service or more.

Leave and holidays

Employers should also be fully aware of all holiday and leave entitlements. As for public holidays, employers in Thailand must allow their employees to take at least 13 publicly recognized holidays, in addition to their weekly holiday entitlement of at least one day per week. Many employers choose to grant more than the minimum requirement of 13 public holidays, which can help boost workforce morale. Employers should also be aware that the government sometimes announces additional public holidays during the year, and when this occurs, each business owner must decide how to handle the additional holiday.

Employees are also entitled to other types of leave, such as sick leave for days on which they are actually sick, but are only entitled to paid sick leave for 30 working days per year. Other allowances are maternity leave of up to 98 days (45 paid), inclusive of holidays, for pre-natal examinations before the delivery and for giving birth; necessary business leave of at least three days per year with pay, and more.

IP ownership rules for employers and employees

Misunderstandings over the ownership of intellectual property (IP) generated by employees can also be a source of conflict, so this should be clearly delineated in employment agreements so that both parties understand their rights and obligations in compliance with relevant laws.

This ownership is addressed differently from one piece of Thai IP legislation to the next.

For copyrighted work, such as drawings, photographs, or computer software, the Copyright Act assigns ownership of the copyright to the employee who creates the work, unless the employer and employee have agreed otherwise in writing. However, when a company hires a third party to create a copyrightable work, the copyright belongs to the employer unless the parties have agreed otherwise.

For inventions and designs, this situation is reversed. The Patent Act gives the employer the right to patent an invention or design developed by an employee within the scope of his or her employment, unless the employment agreement itself (not a separate agreement) says otherwise. However, the employee is still entitled to be named as the inventor and to receive special remuneration if the employer benefits from the invention.

For trade secrets and trademarks, the Trade Secret Act and the Trademark Act do not address ownership of trade secrets and trademarks created by employees. Thus, employers should make it clear with employees in writing that any trade secrets and trademarks created by employees during their employment belong to employers.

Unfair labor practices

Thailand’s Labor Relations Act also defines specific “unfair labor practices” that violate employees’ right to participate in unions. The term on its own may sometimes alarm employers, but it is also misunderstood. Unfair labor practices are actually defined in fairly narrow terms, encompassing three general categories of conduct: (1) retaliation (e.g., termination for labor union involvement), (2) wrongful pressure (e.g., forcing an employee to resign for union activity), and (3) termination while employees are under collective bargaining agreements, except in certain cases of egregious misconduct or extenuating circumstances.

Unfair labor practices should be reported to the Labor Relations Committee within 60 days of the violation. If the committee finds that an unfair labor practice occurred, it may order reinstatement. This can be appealed to the labor court, which might revoke the committee’s order or require compensation instead of reinstatement.

Designing the right employment policies and procedures

Understanding the standards set out by Thai labor law will enable responsible employers to formulate suitable employment policies for their specific situation. Companies in Thailand will usually provide some combination of policies and procedures that serve to meet the requirements, with some going beyond the minimum standards set out by law. Finding the correct balance can help to keep a company’s workforce satisfied and avoid the penalties and tension that may be aggravated by feelings of unfair treatment in the workplace.

 

This article was originally published in the Bangkok Post and is reproduced here with permission and thanks. The original story can be viewed on the Bangkok Post website.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 24, 2026
Indonesia has updated its fee framework for intellectual property (IP)-related government services, with implications for IP owners, licensees, lenders, digital platforms, and businesses operating in the country. Government Regulation No. 30 of 2026 on Types and Tariffs of Non-Tax State Revenue Applicable to the Ministry of Law (GR 30/2026) was promulgated on July 2, 2026, and will take effect on August 1, 2026. Key Takeaways GR 30/2026, which replaces the relevant IP service fees under Government Regulation No. 45 of 2024, reorganizes the fee schedule into separate categories for copyright, industrial designs, patents, layout designs of integrated circuits, trade secrets, trademarks, geographical indications, IP enforcement, and other categories. The most commercially relevant changes include a new copyright recordation tariff exemption for songs and music, higher fees for several trademark and geographical indication services, new IP enforcement service fees, and a new fee type for registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects. In addition, this is the first major update for trademark fees in approximately 10 years. GR 30/2026 is significant not only as a fee update but also as a further indication of Indonesia’s increasing recognition of IP as a financeable commercial asset. By expressly assigning fees to the registration of fiduciary security over IP rights objects, the regulation places IP-backed collateral filings within the Ministry of Law’s administrative service framework. While GR 30/2026 does not create a new secured-transactions regime, this development is relevant for lenders, borrowers, and IP owners structuring financing arrangements secured by trademarks, patents, copyrights, industrial designs, or other registrable IP rights in Indonesia. Copyright: New Fee Exemption for Songs and Music Recordation For copyright, GR 30/2026 creates a fee-exempt category for recordation of works or related-rights products for songs or music, while maintaining a separate category for other works and related-rights products. It
July 21, 2026
Thailand’s Ministry of Digital Economy and Society (MDES) published a notification establishing an expedited court-ordered takedown mechanism for online content in cases of “urgent necessity.” The notification, which was issued on July 17, 2026, under the Computer Crime Act B.E. 2550 (2007), as amended, took effect the following day. It significantly expands the categories of content subject to rapid government-initiated removal. Content Categories Subject to Takedown The notification defines “urgent necessity” (section 20, paragraph 5, of the Computer Crime Act) as circumstances where any delay in suppressing computer data may impact national security, religion, the monarchy, good morals, social culture, or public order. In this regard, it establishes four broad categories of content: Computer Crime Act offenses. National security offenses. IP and other criminal offenses, where it is contrary to public order or good morals and a competent officer has requested its suppression. Content contrary to public order or good morals, a broad residual category encompassing 14 subcategories approved by the Computer Data Screening Committee. The fourth category is the most expansive. Its 14 subcategories include: Content defaming, mocking, satirizing, or devaluing the monarchy. Online gambling advertising or facilitation. Offering illegal firearms for sale. Offering baraku (hookah) products or e-cigarettes for sale. Offering cannabis inflorescences or processed cannabis products for sale. Advertising or soliciting prostitution. Content inciting violence, hatred, or social division. Unauthorized overseas employment advertising. Offering boiled kratom juice for sale. Online sale or advertising of alcoholic beverages. Content satirizing or degrading Buddhism. Money lending at interest rates exceeding legally prescribed limits. Advertising or disseminating information about surrogacy services. Forgery of documents, cards, or official documents. Enforcement Procedure In cases of urgent necessity, a competent official assigned by the MDES permanent secretary must file a petition with supporting evidence to the court with jurisdiction, requesting an order to
July 15, 2026
Ambush marketing refers to a strategy in which a business associates itself with an event, campaign, or brand without paying for official sponsorship rights. The tactic is most visible in sports, concerts, and festivals, where official sponsors have invested substantially for exclusivity. Ambush marketers may use suggestive wording, event-themed imagery, athlete endorsements, venue-adjacent promotions, or social media campaigns implying a commercial connection with the event. Common Forms of Ambush Marketing Ambush marketing typically takes one of the following forms: Direct ambushing: using event names, logos, or mascots suggesting authorization Coattail ambushing: sponsoring an athlete or broadcaster connected with the event Subtle ambushing: themed advertising, venue-adjacent campaigns, or similar visual cues The legal analysis in each case turns on whether the marketing crosses from permissible event-based advertising into infringement, passing off, deception, or wrongful exploitation of goodwill, and the risk assessment is necessarily fact-specific. Thailand has no dedicated ambush marketing statute, so legality depends on execution. A campaign that merely comments on a public event may be permissible, but one that uses protected marks, creates consumer confusion, misrepresents sponsorship status, or makes unsubstantiated claims may trigger liability under various Thai laws, as laid out below. Ambush Marketing and Thailand’s Trademark Act The Trademark Act B.E. 2534 (1991) is the primary tool for addressing campaigns that use registered trademarks, event names, logos, mascots, or confusingly similar signs. The law gives registered trademark owners the exclusive right to use their mark for registered goods, and infringement risk arises when a nonsponsor uses an event mark or a confusingly similar sign in advertising. Even referential or playful use may create liability if it causes public confusion as to sponsorship or commercial connection. The law also preserves passing-off claims for unregistered marks. This matters because event names, taglines, or mascots may not always be
July 13, 2026
When Decree No. 186/2026/ND-CP (Decree 186) takes effect on July 15, 2026, it will introduce the most significant reform of Vietnam’s administrative IP enforcement framework since Decree 99/2013/ND-CP was issued in 2013. These changes are expected to make administrative enforcement faster, more accessible, and better suited to the realities of modern IP disputes. Below are the principal reforms and their practical implications for rights holders and enforcement practitioners. The End of Notarization and Consular Legalization Among the most welcome procedural changes is the abolition of the notarization and consular legalization requirement for powers of attorney (POA) submitted in administrative enforcement proceedings. Under the previous regime, foreign rights holders were generally required to execute a POA, then have it notarized and consular legalized (if seeking customs recordal). In practice, this process frequently delayed enforcement by four to eight weeks, often long enough for infringing goods to disappear before authorities could intervene. Decree 186 removes this bottleneck, now requiring only an original or certified copy of the POA. If the document is in a foreign language, a Vietnamese translation is sufficient, provided it is certified by a competent authority or confirmed by the authorized Vietnamese IP representative. Consular legalization and notarization are no longer required. For rights holders, the practical impact is substantial. Administrative enforcement files that previously took weeks to prepare can now be completed in a matter of days, allowing much faster responses in time-sensitive matters such as warehouse raids, border interventions, and trade-fair enforcement. The decree also introduces a useful administrative simplification. Where an original POA has already been submitted to the same enforcement authority and remains valid, applicants may rely on a copy of that earlier submission by identifying the previous case file. This eliminates unnecessary duplication for rights holders pursuing multiple enforcement actions before the same