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

September 5, 2014

Subcontracted Workers and Employer Liability

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

Businesses in Thailand, particularly manufacturers, have used workers employed as subcontractors through agreements with third parties to meet fluctuating demand, reduce labor costs, and otherwise benefit from the flexibility that subcontracted employees provide.

However, the addition of Section 11/1 of the Labor Protection Act (LPA) in 2008 and its interpretation by the Supreme Court in 2012 makes a number of significant changes to Thailand’s labor law that may expose employers using subcontractors to liability. The following article explains the current law and looks at situations where employers are likely to incur liability under Section 11/1. The goal is to raise employer awareness and thereby reduce the risk of liability resulting from subcontracted employees.

LPA Section 11/1

The LPA generally provides strong protection to employees in Thailand. Enacted in 1998, it sets the standards and employee benefit rules with which employers must comply, including those related to minimum wage, working hours, overtime pay, etc. Employer violations of the LPA carry both civil and criminal penalties, and employees have ample access to the labor courts.

Within a few years of the LPA being enacted, the Labor Ministry found that businesses were using subcontractor agreements to avoid their obligations under the Act. The ministry viewed this as an abuse resulting in an inequality between the wages and benefits of regular and subcontracted employees. In 2008, parliament amended the LPA to include Section 11/1 in an attempt to clearly define the obligations of businesses using subcontracted employees. Its aim was to protect subcontracted employees who do the same work as regular employees, where such jobs were part of the “production process or business” of the company.

LPA Section 11/1 states:

“Where an operator authorizes a person to provide personnel to work, which is not a job placement business, and such work is part of the production process or business under the responsibility of the operator, and whether or not such person will supervise the performance of work or be responsible for payment of wages to those who do such work, the operator shall be deemed the employer of those engaged to do such work.

The operator shall arrange for an employee hired for a wage who works in the same manner as an employee under a direct employment contract to, without discrimination, receive fair rights, benefits, and welfare.”

Although the addition of Section 11/1 appeared to be a clear call to businesses to change their practices, many may not have been aware of the amendment or may have believed that the benefits they provided to subcontracted employees were already “fair.”

Whatever the reason, they continued to provide different benefits and welfare to subcontracted employees, resulting in the filing of lawsuits for violations of Section 11/1. The LPA sets forth criminal liability in the form of a fine not exceeding THB 100,000 for violations of this section.

Case Study

The following example may help to clarify Section 11/1 and an employer’s obligations:

A vehicle manufacturer operating a production facility in Thailand produces each vehicle using multiple production processes. All of the processes are essential to the production of the vehicle and are thus considered part of the “production process or business” of the company. The company provides its regular employees with a Cost of Living Adjustment, a food allowance, and a transport allowance.

If this company hires a subcontractor to provide employees to work in any stage of the production, and the work is the same as that performed by its regular employees, then the subcontracted employees will be deemed employees of the company for the purposes of Section 11/1. Thus, the company must provide “fair rights, welfare, and benefits” to all subcontracted employees, without discrimination. But what does “fair” mean?

Fair Rights, Welfare, and Benefits

In 2012, the Supreme Court faced such a case. In that case, the company provided what it believed to be “fair” rights, welfare, and benefits to the subcontracted employees, but which were actually significantly less than those provided to its regular employees.

The Supreme Court ruled that the company, in order to comply with Section 11/1, must pay its subcontracted employees the same benefits and welfare as it did to its regular employees. In other words, “fair” means the “same” when it comes to providing benefits to subcontracted employees.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of Section 11/1 means that subcontracted employees can no longer be used as a method for reducing labor costs, and employers utilizing subcontracted employees must be aware of their obligations in order to avoid potential claims in the future.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Practices

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

November 24, 2021
Attorneys from Tilleke & Gibbins have provided the latest update to the Thailand contribution to Doing Business in…, a Q&A-style guide published by Thomson Reuters Practical Law that presents an overview of the legal framework for doing business in 63 jurisdictions worldwide. The Thailand chapter of the guide outlines Thailand’s legal system and key laws applicable to foreign companies doing business in the country. The chapter specifically covers the following main topics: Legal system: Thailand’s court system and codified legal system. Foreign investment: Lists of reserved business activities, restrictions on doing business with certain jurisdictions, exchange controls and currency regulations, and grants and incentives available to investors. Business vehicles: Ordinary partnerships, registered ordinary partnerships, limited partnerships, private limited companies, and public companies. Environment: Main laws and regulations, factory operation. Employment: Laws, employment contract requirements, work permits, and termination and redundancy. Tax: Taxes on employment, tax and nontax resident employees and businesses, corporate income tax, value added tax, special business tax, municipal tax, stamp duty, dividends, interest, intellectual property royalties. Competition: Important aspects of Thailand’s regulatory regime surrounding competition, centered around the updated Trade Competition Act. Antibribery and corruption: Laws, compliance requirements, regulatory authority. Intellectual property: Patents, trademarks, registered and unregistered designs, and copyright. Marketing agreements and advertising: Regulation of marketing agreements, Thailand’s Consumer Protection Act, direct marketing, role of the Consumer Protection Board and Food and Drug Administration. E-commerce: E-commerce laws and regulations, marketing and sales via online platforms. Data protection: An outline of Thailand’s Personal Data Protection Act. Product liability: Procedures and regulations for product liability and product safety, including the Unsafe Goods Liability Act and the Consumer Case Procedure Act. Product liability: Key regulatory authorities for trade competition, environmental issues, and financial services. To browse, download, or print the Thailand chapter, please visit the Practical Law website.
Read More
October 25, 2021
Michael Ramirez, a counsel in Tilleke & Gibbins’ dispute resolution group in Bangkok, has updated the firm’s contribution to the Global Attorney-Client Privilege Guide, published by Lex Mundi. The newly expanded guide provides information on what constitutes attorney-client privilege in over 70 countries around the world. The Thailand section of the guide contains in-depth information on the function and applications of attorney-client privilege in Thailand (or, as explained in the guide, an equivalent concept enshrined in Thai law), including coverage of the following topics: Privilege in corporations Common interest doctrine Litigation funding Crime-fraud exception Work product doctrine/litigation privilege Other privileges including mediation, accountant-client and settlement negotiation The interactive guide features expert contributions by Lex Mundi member firms from jurisdictions worldwide. 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.
Read More
October 14, 2021
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has published an updated edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand for 2021. This guide outlines all of the key factors for starting and operating a business in the Thai market. Issues covered include: Investment incentives Financial facilities Exchange controls Import and export regulations Structures for doing business Requirements for the Establishment of a Business Operation of the Business Cessation or Termination of the Business Labor legislation, relations, and supply Tax Immigration requirements This publication is part of Lex Mundi’s Guides to Doing Business series prepared by member firms in more than 100 jurisdictions worldwide. The guides serve as a useful resource when planning an international business strategy or researching a new market.
Read More
September 13, 2021
Businesses in Vietnam recognize the need to vaccinate their workers in order to keep their factories and workplaces open. In this article, we explore whether employers may require their employees to be vaccinated, as well as associated disclosure and privacy issues under Vietnamese law.
Read More