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 2, 2021

Thai Employment Law: The Employee Committee and the Special Rights of Its Members

Informed Counsel

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 nine-person committee, etc.). Moreover, if a union’s membership accounts for more than 50% of the employees, it is entitled to appoint all employee committee members. Any labor union appointees would have their term begin on the date of their appointment, regardless of when an election is held for the non-union members of the employment committee.

In a situation where a workplace has multiple labor unions that have appointed separate employee committees, exceeding the number of the employee committee members stated by the LRA, the employer is entitled to refuse to recognize the employee committees.

Employers must meet with their employee committee at least once every three months, or whenever the labor union or more than 50% of employee committee members request it. The topics to be discussed include employee welfare, new work rules, employee complaints, and disputes and compromises in the workplace.

If an employee committee considers that an employer has acted unfairly against or caused excessive trouble for employees, the committee (or the relevant employee or the labor union) may lodge a petition with the Labor Court.

Protection of the employee committee

The LRA requires employers to first obtain permission from the Labor Court before terminating the employment of committee members, reducing their wages, taking disciplinary actions against them, otherwise obstructing them from carrying out their duties, or performing any act resulting in a committee member being unable to continue working.  If an employer breaches the LRA by doing one of these things without permission from the court, the employer (including directors or authorized persons who act on behalf of the juristic person) risks facing criminal penalties, such as imprisonment for up to one month, a fine of up to THB 1,000, or both. These penalties will remain even if the employer later succeeds in obtaining permission from the Labor Court to terminate the employee—a position upheld by the Supreme Court because the offense was committed before the court issued an order, thus constituting a violation of the LRA.

This court order requirement extends to any scenario wherein an employee committee member violates company work rules, and the disciplinary action ultimately taken against that employee depends on both the employer’s work rules and the consideration of the court. This means that even if the work rules state that an offence can be punished by termination, the court may still opt to punish the offender less severely than what the rules would otherwise prescribe, particularly if it considers that the offence is not grievous enough to warrant outright termination. (This position is again supported by Supreme Court precedent.) If, on the other hand, the court does issue an order permitting the termination of an employee, any subsequent termination would not be considered an unfair labor practice, and the employee would not be entitled to submit a complaint to the Labor Relations Committee.

Some employers may also be surprised to learn that even if they close down their business permanently and terminate all employees, they must ask the Labor Court for permission to terminate the employee committee as well. Otherwise, the employer may face the criminal penalties described above.

Consequently, an employer should be aware of the potential risks before considering any type of disciplinary or other action against a member of an employee committee, as it can be construed as a violation of the LRA and punished with criminal penalties accordingly. Some might find this difficult to remember when involved in the thick of a labor dispute, a situation of employee wrongdoing, or simply the day-to-day challenges of running a business with a large workforce, but staying in control and acting prudently—with foresight into legal requirements and consequences—can help employers stay on the right side of the law.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 23, 2021
Since July 13, 2021, the Thai government has issued a series of resolutions offering relief measures for persons insured under sections 33 (regular employees), 39 (former employees still paying contributions to the SSO) and 40 (freelancers) of the Social Security Act B.E. 2533 (1990) (the SSA) who have been affected by the COVID-19 prevention measures under the Emergency Decree on Public Administration in Emergency Situations B.E. 2548 (2005), including the business closures required in some provinces. The latest cabinet resolution extends relief measures to SSA-insured persons in 29 provinces designated as maximum control areas (or “dark red” provinces). The provinces are grouped into three categories based on when they received that designation (which, in turn, impacts the duration of the relief which they receive): Two types of relief measures have been announced—one for parties under section 33 of the SSA, and one for parties under sections 39 and 40.   Section 33 (Regular Employees) Monetary assistance is available for Thai nationals insured under section 33 of the SSA (and their employers) engaged in the following business activities: Administrative and support activities Arts, entertainment, and recreation Automotive repair Construction Food and accommodation Information and communication activities Professional activities in science and academia Services Transportation and storage Wholesale/retail Employers must submit an application to the Social Security Office (SSO) through the online portal (www.sso.go.th/eservices) in order for them and their employees to receive the assistance payments. Each qualifying employee receives THB 2,500 per month if they are registered with the SSO within the deadline, while registered employers receive THB 3,000 per qualifying employee, up to a maximum of 200 employees (i.e., THB 600,000), as summarized in the table below.   Section 39 (Former Employees Still Paying SSO Contributions) and Section 40 (Freelancers) THB 5,000 assistance payments are available for Thai employees insured
August 23, 2021
Ho Chi Minh City has been locked down for months in an effort to fight the challenging fourth wave of the Covid-19 pandemic. We explore the various options available to employers to cut labor costs, as well as government relief measures to support both workers and employers.
August 5, 2021
With the latest wave of COVID-19 continuing to have a serious impact on Thailand, many businesses have been looking for ways to survive. Some have temporarily reduced employees’ wages, while others have resorted to a complete or partial halt to operations. In these unprecedented circumstances, it is vital that business owners understand the legal criteria and steps for implementing a temporary cessation of operations in Thailand, as outlined in this article. Any business can apply for a temporary cessation of operations under section 75 of the Labor Protection Act (LPA) if there is a necessity and a significant cause, such as the business being unable to operate as usual, and if the necessity is not considered force majeure under Thai law. (If it is deemed force majeure, an employer may be able to withhold all wages—more on this below.) If these criteria are met, the employer can choose whether to seek temporary cessation of operations on a whole or partial basis, depending on the actual situation and necessity. The employer then has to inform a labor inspection officer and the employees at least three business days in advance of the intended cessation of operations. Once this is done, operations may be halted, but the employer must pay employees at least 75 percent of their wages, calculated based on the rate on their latest working day, and these payments must continue throughout the entire cessation period. “Necessity” and force majeure Though the LPA does not indicate what qualifies as a “necessity” allowing an employer to call for a temporary cessation, past rulings from the Supreme Court provide some guidance on this issue. For instance, reduced purchase orders from customers and financial difficulties faced by the employer can amount to a situation of “necessity.” Additionally, the situation has to be significant
July 28, 2021
Lawyers from Tilleke & Gibbins’ labor and employment team including Kien Trung Trinh, Sarah Galeski, and Nam Ngoc Trinh have written the Vietnam chapter of Practical Law’s Employment and Employee Benefits Global Guide. The 2021 edition of the handbook provides a high-level comparative overview of employment laws and regulations across 32 jurisdictions around the world. Tilleke & Gibbins also contributed the Myanmar chapter of the guide. The Vietnam chapter covers a wide range of typical employment matters, such as limitations on working hours, paid leave requirements, minimum wage, and health and safety obligations. In addition, the guide provides insight on a number of topics of special interest to foreign investors doing business in Vietnam, including the following: Mandatory contents of a labor contract; Visas and permits required for expatriate employees; Employers’ obligations for protecting employees’ privacy and personal data; Procedural requirements for the dismissal of an employee; Employer and parent company liability. The 2021 edition also includes a special section on Covid-19 related provisions of labor law. To read the Vietnam chapter, click on the link below.