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

March 25, 2020

Options for Employers in Thailand During the COVID-19 Outbreak

Subscribe to Updates

As Thailand, and the world, face the growing COVID-19 crisis, the impact has begun to spread beyond people’s health and into the economy as a whole. While some businesses may be able to move to remote working practices to minimize economic distress, others may require a physical presence that becomes difficult or impossible to maintain, or may face substantial changes to their operations, resulting in hardship or emergency measures.

In this rapidly developing situation, employers may thus find themselves faced with unforeseeable events that require them to take drastic actions related to their workforce. In such instances, it is important that employers know their options. This article identifies some of the more common scenarios that are arising, and what employers in Thailand can do under Thai labor laws when faced with them.

1.  An employee is quarantined by authorities for being in a risk group

The employer does not need to pay wages to the employee during the quarantine period, under the principle of “no work no pay.”

2.  An employee falls ill with COVID-19 and needs to take sick leave

The employer is required by law to pay wages to the employee, but not exceeding 30 days in a year. 

3.  Authorities issue an order requiring the employer’s business to temporarily close down

The employer is not required to pay wages during the closure period ordered by the authorities—again under the principle of “no work no pay.”

4.  The employer decides to temporarily cease operations

If the COVID-19 outbreak critically impacts the employer’s business, for example by causing a greatly reduced number of customers or a greatly decreased amount of purchase orders, and the employer needs to close down the business temporarily or stop production, the employer may apply for a temporary cessation of operations. An example of this would be where an employer has to reduce production by 50 percent and needs to ask employees to work for only three days a week, rather than the normal five. Another example would be where the employer separates employees into groups and assigns each group to work for a certain time and then take time off on a rotating basis.

Under section 75 of the Labor Protection Act (LPA), an employer is entitled to temporarily cease operations, during which time they must pay employees at least 75% of their regular working-day wages, subject to the following conditions:

  • There is a necessity and a significant cause for the employer to take this step, such as the employer’s business being unable to operate as usual.
  • The necessity is not considered to be force majeure  under Thai law. If an event is deemed to have arisen due to a force majeure  event, the employer is entitled to forgo paying wages to employees—this is discussed in more detail below.
  • The employer has to elect whether to seek a temporary cessation of operations on a whole or partial basis.
  • The employer has to inform a labor inspection officer, and the employees, three business days in advance of the intended cessation of operations.
  • The employer has to pay employees throughout the entire period of cessation.
  • The cessation period depends on the situation on a case-by-case basis. Once the previously cited reason for cessation of operations has subsided, making the measure no longer necessary, the employer has to cancel the cessation measure.

The LPA does not indicate what qualifies as a “necessity” for employers to invoke the measure. Thai Supreme Court precedent, however, does offer some guidance, indicating that both (1) a reduction in customer purchase orders and (2) financial difficulties faced by the employer are viewed as situations of necessity. Furthermore, the situation has to be significant and must seriously impact the employer’s business. It cannot be a result of the employer’s own failure to conduct business efficiently.

5.  The employer decides to lay off employees

Under Thai labor law, if the COVID-19 virus impacts the employer’s business to the point that the business cannot operate, the employer may terminate or lay off employees, taking care to observe the following conditions:

  • Employees must be informed of the planned layoffs at least one pay period in advance, in accordance with the LPA. Otherwise, the employer is required to pay remuneration in lieu of advance notice. If relevant employment contracts, collective bargaining agreements (CBA), or work rules state a longer period for informing the employee of layoffs, the employer must comply with the contract or CBA.
  • Statutory severance depends on each employee’s length of service, from 30 days’ pay at the employee’s most recent wage rate for those who have worked with the employer for at least 120 days consecutively, but less than one year; up to 400 days’ pay for employees who have worked with the employer for at least 20 consecutive years.
  • Employers must make necessary remuneration for other benefits under the employment contract, work rules, and laws, such as unused annual leave and so on.

In addition, if the employer has a CBA with a labor union or the employees regarding temporary cessation of operations or layoffs, the employer must abide by the procedures stated in the CBA. Failure to do so could result in the employees claiming violation of the CBA.

6.  Force majeure prevents the employer from paying wages

At present, the court has not taken a clear position on whether the COVID-19 situation is or can result in a force majeure  event, and it is likely to be addressed by the court on a case-by-case basis. Situations arising from events deemed as force majeure , resulting in the employer not being able to operate, enable the employer to withhold all wages from employees.

Force majeure  is described under Thai law as referring to events that a person is not able to protect against, despite taking the appropriate care that should be reasonably expected from him or her in such a situation. Earthquakes and tsunamis are examples of force majeure —for example, the collapse of a factory due to an earthquake, resulting in the employer being unable to operate, would justify withholding of wages.

Interestingly, the Supreme Court has ruled that the following events do not qualify as force majeure :

  • A seasonal wildfire where the party does not undertake any preventive action;
  • A violent storm that usually occurs every season;
  • Flooding of a factory’s premises; and,
  • A factory fire.

However, if the above incidents result in the shutdown of a factory, the employer would still be entitled to apply for temporary cessation of operations under LPA section 75.

While it remains unclear what situations, if any, will constitute force majeure  during the COVID-19 crisis, this is sure to be a topic of dispute between employers and employees in the coming months.

Business Survival Strategies

Although the measures described in this article, such as temporary cessation of business operations and layoffs, may not be the answer to all of an employer’s problems in this current economic crisis, for some it may be a question of survival. Acting prudently to handle these challenges is of utmost importance, which in this case means being fully informed of each potential action before implementing one course or another.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Dispute Resolution and Litigation

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 23, 2025
In cross-border disputes, a recurring concern for claimants is whether they can protect respondents’ assets located in jurisdictions other than the seat of arbitration. This article explores whether Thai courts can issue interim measures, such as freezing orders, under Section 16 of the Thai Arbitration Act (2002) to support an arbitration seated outside of Thailand. Requesting Interim Measures Section 16 provides that a party to an arbitration agreement may request that the court impose interim measures, either before or during arbitral proceedings. If the court determines that it would have been able to impose such measures had the proceedings been conducted in court, it may proceed as requested. Notably, Section 16 does not limit its application to arbitrations seated in Thailand. It simply refers to “a party to an arbitration agreement,” which arguably includes both domestic and international arbitrations. Further, it allows for applications even before arbitration is commenced, provided that the arbitration is initiated within thirty days from the issuance of the order (or other period the court prescribes). A Hypothetical Scenario Consider the following scenario: Company A, incorporated in the Netherlands, and Company B, incorporated in the Cayman Islands, have entered into a contract containing a clause requiring arbitration at the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC). A dispute arises, and Company A commences arbitration at SIAC. Company B holds significant assets in Thailand, such as bank accounts or real estate. Concerned that Company B might dispose of its assets before an award is rendered, Company A applies to the Thai court seeking a freezing order over those assets. Can the Thai court issue such an interim measure? The answer is not straightforward. Thai law is silent regarding whether Section 16 applies to arbitrations seated outside Thailand, leaving the door open for argument. Some academic sources suggest that
Read More
July 7, 2025
On June 20, 2025, Cambodia’s Ministry of Economy and Finance issued Instruction No. 19116 to clarify when board members and company directors must receive salaries and pay payroll taxes. Board members and company directors who are not considered employees are subject to a withholding tax. This category consists of people who complete services for a nonresident individual and people who perform independent work for a company in Cambodia. Board members and company directors who are considered employees, including those appointed by a foreign head office to temporarily manage a company in Cambodia, must pay payroll taxes on any salary they receive, regardless of whether they are paid by a local or foreign branch of the company. The above obligations apply regardless of whether the person has a work permit. Board members and company directors are exempt from paying payroll tax if they: Are not present and not performing a regular management role at the company despite being registered on the company’s statutes or patent tax card; Participate only in board meetings and occasional shareholder meetings; and Do not receive a salary from a company in Cambodia. Overall, this instruction provides an important clarification regarding the tax obligations of board members and company directors. Companies should pay attention to the classification of their board members and directors and be mindful of the exemption.   This article was written with the assistance of Tilleke & Gibbins interns Amelia Gemma Erickson and Amrin Keat.
Read More
July 7, 2025
On June 27, 2025, Thailand issued the new Ministerial Regulation Prescribing the Criteria and Rates for Receiving Unemployment Benefits (No. 2) B.E. 2568 (2025), which amended a similarly named ministerial regulation by boosting the rate of social security benefits to alleviate hardships for employees who are terminated. The new ministerial regulation took effect the following day. Under this new ministerial regulation, eligible terminated employees are entitled to receive unemployment benefits under the Social Security Fund (SSF) for a maximum of 180 days per year, at the rate of 60% of the employee’s monthly wages at the time of termination, up from 50% previously. However, the maximum wage used as the basis for calculating the benefit remains capped at THB 15,000 per month. Therefore, the maximum unemployment benefit that an employee can receive from the SSF is now THB 9,000 (up from THB 7,500) per month for a period of up to six months. To qualify for the unemployment benefits from the SSF, employees must be registered with the Social Security Office and must have contributed to the SSF for at least six months within the 15 months prior to the start date of the relevant unemployment period. This new ministerial regulation was enacted to increase the amount of financial support provided to insured persons in the case of termination, as part of the government’s objective of alleviating economic hardship under current economic and social conditions in Thailand. For more details on unemployment benefits in Thailand, or on any aspect of employment law in the country, please contact Pimvimol (June) Vipamaneerut at [email protected], Dusita Khanijou at [email protected], Ketnut Pukahuta at [email protected], or Chomanut Arif at [email protected].
Read More
July 4, 2025
On July 1, 2025, new minimum daily wage rates for Bangkok and certain business types nationwide were published in the Government Gazette, taking effect on the same day. The daily minimum wage rate for Bangkok has been increased to THB 400 per day, while the minimum wage rates for other provinces remain unchanged from the rates that took effect on January 1, 2025. However, daily minimum wage rates have also been increased to THB 400 nationwide for type 2, type 3, and type 4 hotels under the Hotel Act and for entertainment establishments under the Entertainment Place Act. This THB 400 rate applies to all businesses that meet the criteria, even if the province’s general rate is lower. The new minimum wage rates supersede any lower wages agreed upon in existing employment contracts or conditions of employment that were in force before this announcement came into effect. As a result, these employees must be paid their wages at the newly prescribed rate for work performed from July 1, 2025, onward.
Read More