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

December 8, 2025

Thailand’s Rules on Retirement and Severance Pay for Workers Over 60

As Thailand transitions into an aged society, retirement policy and workplace protections for older workers have come into sharper focus. With public sentiment increasingly open to working beyond the traditional retirement age, questions about employee rights and employer obligations are more relevant than ever.

In October 2025, Prime Minister Anutin Charnvirakul proposed increasing the statutory retirement age to 65 for government officers, citing Thailand’s aged-society status and the potential social and economic benefits of longer working lives. While academics and stakeholders have raised concerns about systemic impacts, public opinion remains divided, with many workers signaling a willingness to continue working beyond the current norm.

Against this backdrop, it’s worth revisiting what the Labor Protection Act B.E. 2541 (1998) (LPA) requires in regard to retirement and severance pay. This article explains the current legal landscape under the LPA, with a focus on retirement and severance pay for employees over 60, recent judicial developments, and practical options for structuring postretirement engagements.

Retirement as Termination Under the LPA

Under the LPA, retirement—whether set by agreement between employer and employee or unilaterally stipulated by the employer—is deemed a termination of employment. As a result, employees who retire under such terms are entitled to severance pay.

The law also adds a default rule: if there is no agreed or prescribed retirement age, or if the prescribed retirement age exceeds 60, an employee aged 60 or older may declare an intention to retire. The declaration takes effect 30 days after notice, and the employer must pay severance accordingly.

In short, retirement triggered by agreement, the employer’s work rules, or an employee’s valid notice is treated as a termination, and statutory severance pay is owed.

Hiring or Rehiring Employees Over 60

Practical issues arise when an employer’s work rules set a retirement age that does not exceed 60, yet the employer hires or rehires an individual older than 60. The LPA’s default retirement-by-notice mechanism applies only where there is no retirement provision at all or where the prescribed age exceeds 60. It does not expressly address situations where the employer maintains a 60-year retirement rule and the individual’s employment commences after reaching 60.

Recent judgments from the Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases have addressed “retirement on demand” scenarios and, notably, have treated the retirement rule as inapplicable to employees whose employment began after the stated retirement age in the work rules. In effect, for such employees, the court deemed there to be no applicable retirement rule to trigger retirement as termination or retirement by notice. The result is a protection gap: employees hired after age 60 in establishments with a 60-year retirement rule may be unable to rely on the LPA’s retirement statute to retire with severance pay. In practice, these employees may have to continue working until resignation or employer-initiated termination, with severance pay and other outcomes depending on the grounds for dismissal.

From a policy perspective, this gap may discourage the rehiring or hiring of older workers and may reduce their bargaining leverage—particularly in lower-wage roles where bespoke contractual terms are uncommon.

Continued Employment Beyond Retirement Age

According to a recent Supreme Court judgment, if an employee continues working for the same employer beyond the designated retirement age without having received severance pay, the employment relationship is considered continuous. If the employer later terminates employment, statutory severance is calculated on the employee’s total length of service, using the final wage rate.

This confirms that employment may lawfully continue beyond the retirement age and that severance pay must then reflect the entire continuous service, not merely the postretirement period.

Reemployment After Retirement

If an employee retires, the employment ends, and severance is paid, the employer may rehire the individual under a new employment contract. If that new employment lasts at least 120 consecutive days, the employer must pay statutory severance for that subsequent period upon termination, calculated based on the final wage under the new contract.

Fixed-term arrangements do not automatically avoid severance. To qualify for the LPA’s fixed-term exemption, the contract must meet all of the following criteria:

  • Employment is in a special project outside the employer’s ordinary business with fixed commencement and completion, the work is temporary with fixed commencement and completion, or the work is seasonal and limited to a particular season.
  • The total term does not exceed two years.
  • The contract is in writing from the outset, specifies the end date, and contains no extension clause.

Even where a fixed-term exemption is structured, if the employee effectively continues performing the same duties as before retirement in a manner inconsistent with the exemption criteria, the employer may still owe severance when the engagement ends.

Engagement as an Independent Contractor

Employers sometimes consider consultancy or services agreements after an employee’s retirement. If the relationship is truly a hire-of-work situation rather than employment, statutory severance under the LPA does not apply. However, the actual nature of the relationship matters more than the form of the agreement, as courts will consider issues of control, integration, exclusivity, supervision, and economic dependence to determine whether the arrangement is, in fact, employment for LPA purposes. If it is recharacterized as employment, severance and other LPA obligations may be required.

Practical Guidance for Employers and Employees

Navigating retirement and postretirement employment requires careful attention to both legal requirements and practical business needs. Employers and older employees looking to enter into employment relationships should consider the following recommendations:

  • Clarify the retirement framework in writing. Ensure work rules and contracts align with the LPA and specify whether and how retirement applies to employees hired after 60.
  • Decide clearly on whether to pursue continued employment or true reemployment. If employment continues past the retirement age without severance, anticipate severance on total service upon later termination. If instead there is a clean break and rehire, there should be clear documentation of the end of the first employment and payment of severance.
  • Use fixed-term contracts only where the LPA’s exemption criteria are genuinely met. Avoid duties and practices that undermine the exemption (e.g., rolling renewals, core business work not truly temporary in nature).
  • Vet consultancy arrangements carefully. Align the actual working relationship with independent contractor hallmarks if severance avoidance is a business objective, and avoid control and integration features characteristic of employment.
  • Address the post-60 hiring gap. When hiring after 60 under an age 60 retirement rule, consider expressly agreeing to a contractual retirement mechanism consistent with the LPA, or clarifying that no retirement provision applies and setting expectations regarding termination and severance.

Whether extending employment, rehiring, or engaging consultants, careful structuring and documentation can mitigate severance exposure and compliance risk under the LPA. By proactively addressing these considerations with the help of advice tailored to the specific circumstances and business objectives, employers and employees can foster fair, compliant, and mutually beneficial postretirement working arrangements.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 30, 2026
Thailand’s cabinet has approved a draft ministerial regulation introducing significant changes to the calculation of old-age pension and old-age gratuity benefits under the Social Security Fund. The reform would replace the current pension calculation method with a career average revalued earnings (CARE) model designed to better reflect an individual’s lifetime contributions while supporting the long-term financial sustainability of the Social Security Fund. The changes are also intended to improve fairness and align Thailand’s pension framework with international practices. Key proposed changes under the draft ministerial regulation are outlined below. CARE-Based Formula for Old-Age Pension Calculations Currently, old-age pensions are calculated based on the insured person’s average salary over the preceding 60 months. The proposed regulation would replace this approach with the CARE model, under which pension benefits will be calculated based on earnings throughout an individual’s entire working life. Historical earnings will be revalued to reflect their present value before the pension benefit is calculated. According to the Ministry of Labor, this change is intended to better align pension benefits with an individual’s lifetime contribution history and provide a fairer basis for calculating benefits. Pension Accrual Rate for Contributions Exceeding 180 Months Under the current rules, insured persons who contribute for more than 180 months receive an additional pension accrual of 1.5% for each completed 12-month contribution period, with any remaining months disregarded. The proposed regulation would instead calculate the additional accrual on a monthly basis at a rate of 0.125% of actual monthly contributions; this aims to make pension benefits more accurately reflect the actual duration of each individual’s contribution history. Transitional Protections for Insured Persons The draft regulation includes transitional protections for both existing pension recipients and those who will become eligible within five years of the CARE model taking effect. For existing recipients, the following protections
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.
April 29, 2026
Vietnam’s education sector is entering a new regulatory era. On December 10, 2025, the National Assembly adopted a series of new and amended laws in the field of education, including the 2025 Law on Vocational Education, the 2025 Law on Higher Education, and the amended Law on Education No. 123/2025/QH15 (Amended Law on Education). These laws together took effect on January 1, 2026, marking a significant reform of Vietnam’s legal framework governing the education sector. The legislative package introduces a new lawmaking approach under which foundational and principle-based provisions are codified in the Amended Law on Education, while the Law on Higher Education and the Law on Vocational Education serve as specialized statutes providing supplementary, sector-specific regulatory detail tailored to their respective subsectors. The Amended Law on Education fundamentally restructures how educational institutions are established, governed, and licensed, with direct implications for private investors, foreign-invested entities, and education service providers operating in Vietnam. Below are several highlights of the key changes under the amended law, especially in the private sector, that stakeholders should understand: Change in the National Education System In addition to primary education, lower secondary (junior high school) education is now compulsory in Vietnam. Accordingly, diplomas are no longer awarded upon completion of lower secondary school but only for upper education levels. The national education system is also expanded through the introduction of vocational high school as a new level of vocational education. Such reform creates additional learning pathways that not only enable learners to pursue both further education and participate in the labor market, but also better align education and training with socioeconomic development needs. New Hurdle for Joint Investors: Mandatory Corporate Entity Requirement Where two or more investors jointly establish an education institution, the investors are no longer permitted to directly establish such an institution.
March 31, 2026
Against the backdrop of Vietnam’s rapid economic and technological transformation and its ambition to build a knowledge-driven economy, the National Assembly of Vietnam adopted Law on Higher Education No. 125/2025/QH15 on December 10, 2025, The new law took effect on January 1, 2026, replacing Law on Higher Education No. 08/2012/QH13 of 2012 and its subsequent amendments after more than a decade of implementation. The new law reflects a significant policy shift toward enhancing the institutional autonomy of higher education institutions (“HEIs”)—universities and other university-level institutions. By granting broader autonomy, Vietnam aims to enable HEIs to operate more proactively, better respond to market needs, and improve the quality and efficiency of education and research activities. Comprehensive Institutional Autonomy in HEIs The new law marks a significant shift by granting HEIs comprehensive autonomy as a statutory right, within the bounds of the licensed scope of educational operation and the legal framework, rather than a conditional right as provided under the former law. Under the new law, HEIs are empowered to exercise autonomy over their academic expertise, training, scientific research, international cooperation, organizational structure, personnel, finance, and other higher education activities. The expansion of institutional autonomy is also accompanied by a correspondingly strengthened framework of institutional accountability. However, Vietnam maintains a certain degree of control and imposes restrictions on institutional autonomy in sensitive and strategically important areas. These controls and restrictions include limitations on training autonomy in the majors of teacher training, national defense, and security; and restrictions on financial and personnel management autonomy for HEIs under the administration of the Ministry of National Defense and the Ministry of Public Security. New Model for Curriculum Development The new law removes the concept of “opening a training major” and focuses regulation on how training programs are developed and delivered. Under the previous regime,