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​ 

June 4, 2026
On May 19, 2026, the Cabinet of the Royal Thai Government approved, in principle, revisions to Thailand’s visa exemption scheme and visa on arrival (VOA) program, as proposed by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Tourism and Sports. The revisions represent a tightening of Thailand’s immigration framework and will affect a broad range of short-term visitors. Background On July 15, 2024, Thailand expanded its visa exemption scheme by increasing the permitted period of visa-exempt stay from 30 days to 60 days in order to promote tourism, support the country’s post-pandemic economic recovery, and facilitate international travel. Under this revised scheme, passport holders from 93 countries and territories (an increase from the previous 57 countries and territories) have been permitted to enter Thailand without a visa and remain in the country for up to 60 days per entry for purposes including tourism, business engagements, urgent work, and ad hoc assignments. In addition, eligible visitors may apply at the Thai Immigration Bureau for a further 30-day extension of stay. Key Changes The proposed revisions would revoke the current 60-day exemption and reinstate the previous stay period, thereby reducing the maximum permitted stay for eligible travelers to 30 days per entry. In addition, the number of countries and territories eligible under the 30-day visa-exemption scheme is expected to be reduced to 54. The scope of the VOA scheme would likewise be significantly narrowed, with the number of eligible countries reduced from 31 countries to just four (Azerbaijan, Belarus, Serbia, and India). Further, Thailand is expected to introduce a new 15-day visa exemption category for nationals of Seychelles, the Maldives, and Mauritius. The revised framework would also limit each country or territory to a single visa exemption privilege in order to simplify Thailand’s immigration framework and reduce overlapping immigration privileges.
May 22, 2026
Intellectual property specialists from Tilleke & Gibbins in Vietnam have contributed an updated Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview for Thomson Reuters Practical Law, an online publication that provides comprehensive legal guides for jurisdictions worldwide. The Vietnam overview was authored by Linh Thi Mai Nguyen, Thanh Phuong Vu, Chi Lan Dang, Son Thai Hoang, and Duc Anh Tran. The chapter provides a high-level examination of key aspects of IP transactions law in Vietnam, including IP assignment and licensing, research and development collaborations, IP in mergers and acquisitions (M&A), lending and taking security over intellectual property rights, settlement agreements, employee- and consultant-created IP, competition law, taxation, and non-tariff trade barriers. Key topics covered in the chapter include: IP assignment: Basis and formalities for assignments of patents, utility models, trade marks, copyright, design rights, trade secrets, confidential information, and domain names in Vietnam. IP licensing: Scope, formalities, and recordal requirements for licensing patents, trade marks, copyright, design rights, and trade secrets. Research and development collaborations: Treatment of improvements, derivatives, and joint ownership of IP, including exploitation and enforcement issues. IP aspects of M&A and security: Due diligence, warranties, transfer formalities, and taking security over intellectual property rights. Practical Law, a legal reference resource from Thomson Reuters, publishes a range of guides for hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The Intellectual Property Transactions Global Guide is a valuable resource for legal practitioners seeking comparative insight into transactional IP issues across multiple jurisdictions. To view the latest version of the Intellectual Property Transactions in Vietnam overview, please visit the Practical Law website and enroll in the free Practical Law trial to gain full access.
May 13, 2026
Laos has significantly broadened its industrial property administrative review framework, most notably by extending it to cover copyright and related rights for the first time. Decision No. 0306/IC on the Administrative Resolution of Disputes Concerning Industrial Property Registration, New Plant Variety Registration, and Copyright and Related Rights Recordation took effect on April 24, 2026, replacing the previous rules from 2023, which had covered only industrial property and new plant variety matters. Decision No. 0306/IC governs how Laos’ Department of Intellectual Property (DIP) and provincial offices handle formal challenges to industrial property registrations and applications. The proceedings covered include oppositions to pending applications, appeals of refused applications, requests for cancellation of existing registrations, and—newly—disputes concerning the recordation and interpretation of copyright and related rights. These administrative proceedings within the DIP are heard by a government-appointed Administrative Dispute Resolution Committee, which functions similarly to the opposition and review boards found in other jurisdictions. Key Changes Decision No. 0306/IC covers four categories of administrative proceedings: Oppositions: Third-party challenges to a pending industrial property application before it is granted. Refusal appeals: Challenges to the DIP’s decision to refuse their application. Cancellation or deletion requests: Applications to invalidate an existing registered right on the grounds that it should not have been granted. Copyright and related rights disputes: Challenges to or interpretations of copyright and related rights recordations, including determinations of whether a work qualifies for copyright protection under Lao law. The most significant development is the committee’s new jurisdiction over copyright matters. The committee is now empowered to resolve disputes concerning copyright and related rights recordation—this includes the authority to determine whether a work qualifies for copyright protection and to interpret the scope of an existing recordation. Parties who believe a competitor has improperly recorded copyright over a work, or who wish to contest
April 30, 2026
Vietnam’s Decree No. 134/2026/ND‑CP, which took effect on 9 April 2026, plays an important role in detailing and implementing Vietnam’s Intellectual Property (IP) Law in the context of rapid digital transformation and the growing application of artificial intelligence (AI). The new decree provides comprehensive guidance on the application of copyright and related‑rights regulations, addressing key issues such as authorship, ownership, statutory exceptions and limitations, registration procedures, and enforcement mechanisms. Through these measures, Decree 134 seeks to achieve an appropriate balance between safeguarding the legitimate interests of rightsholders and fostering innovation, research, and technological advancement, thereby strengthening the state’s framework for the effective management, protection, and exploitation of intellectual property in the digital and AI‑driven environment. Some notable aspects of Decree 134 are discussed below. Copyright for AI-Created Works Decree 134 provides important guidance on the determination of copyright and related rights in works created with the assistance of AI. Article 5a reaffirms the principle that human creativity remains central to copyright protection, clarifying that copyright or related rights arise only where a human makes a substantial and decisive intellectual contribution, exercises effective control over the creative outcome, and assumes responsibility for the content and its legality. At the same time, the provision confirms that AI is regarded solely as a technological tool rather than a rights‑holding subject, thus ensuring consistency with the fundamental concepts of authorship and ownership under the IP Law. By introducing requirements on transparency, proof of human contribution, and compliance with AI‑specific labelling and technical marking obligations, Decree 134 establishes a clear and enforceable legal framework for the responsible use of AI in creative activities. Lawful Use of Copyrighted Texts and Data Article 37a of Decree 134 sets out the specific conditions under which copyrighted texts and data may be lawfully used for scientific research, experimentation,