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​ 

September 9, 2026
On August 25, 2026, Thailand’s cabinet approved in principle a draft amendment that would extend mandatory social security coverage to three categories of workers currently excluded from Thailand’s compulsory social security system. The amendment, proposed by the Ministry of Labour, would modify the Royal Decree Prescribing Businesses and Employees Excluded from the Social Security Act B.E. 2560 (2017). Newly Covered Workers The cabinet-approved proposal would remove the exclusions for the following three categories of employees, bringing them within Thailand’s mandatory social security system: Workers in seasonal cultivation (pho pluk), forestry (pa mai), and livestock (liang sat) businesses that do not employ workers year-round and whose operations do not include other types of business activities. Notably, fishery (pramong) workers were excluded from this amendment following objections raised at a Social Security Board meeting on April 30, 2025, because employers and employees in the fishery sector can already agree to opt into social security coverage under fishery labor laws. Domestic workers and other employees of individual employers where the work performed is not part of a business operation (e.g., housekeepers, gardeners, drivers). This group has actively demanded inclusion in the social security system. Workers employed in street-stall businesses operating fixed street stalls (kan kha phaeng loi). The rationale for including street-stall workers is that their employers have fixed, identifiable places of business that can be inspected. Accordingly, workers engaged in itinerant street hawking (kan kha re) remain excluded. The expanded coverage would apply to both Thai and foreign employees who possess valid identity documents and work permits, including migrant workers who have been granted special permission to work in Thailand. The Social Security Act B.E. 2533 (1990) does not restrict social security registration based on nationality, allowing these workers to register as insured persons under section 33. Employer Obligations and Employee
September 4, 2026
Thailand’s cabinet has approved two draft amendments aimed at improving labor-related judicial proceedings. The proposed amendments to the Act on the Establishment of Labor Courts and Labor Case Procedure B.E. 2522 (1979) and the Act on Procedures for Human Trafficking Cases B.E. 2559 (2016) are intended to make the process more efficient, appropriate, and fair. Key elements of these proposed amendments are outlined below. Expansion of Labor Court Jurisdiction Under the current framework, labor courts generally hear labor disputes, while criminal offenses under labor laws are handled separately. Matters involving both labor and criminal issues may therefore require the parties to pursue proceedings before different courts. To address this, the proposed amendments would expand the jurisdiction of labor courts to cover certain criminal offenses under labor laws. The government states that the change is intended to allow related issues to be heard by judges with expertise in labor law and to reduce the need for parallel proceedings. The proposed amendments also set out the following rules for cases involving multiple offenses. Where a single act gives rise to multiple offenses and at least one of those offenses falls within the jurisdiction of the labor court, the labor court may hear the related offenses as part of the same case. Where multiple connected acts give rise to different offenses, the labor court may hear the matters together or transfer part of the case to the appropriate court, taking into account convenience and the interests of justice. Criminal Offenses Covered The proposed amendments would extend labor court jurisdiction to criminal offenses under 11 labor-related laws, including laws concerning: Home workers protection Labor protection Labor protection in fisheries work Employment and job-seeker protection Management of foreign workers Social security Occupational safety, health, and working environment Compensation Maritime labor State enterprise labor relations
August 31, 2026
Thailand has introduced a new regulatory framework that may expose foreign nationals who violate the Foreign Business Act (FBA) to deportation. The Regulation of the Office of the Prime Minister on Deportation B.E. 2569 was published in the Government Gazette on August 27, 2026. The regulation establishes an administrative process for referring foreign nationals for deportation where this is deemed necessary in the interests of public order or public morality. It does not create new substantive deportation powers, but it expressly identifies unlawful business conduct under the FBA—including nominee arrangements—as grounds for referral. Grounds for Deportation Referral The regulation sets out five grounds that may give rise to a referral to the relevant authorities: Unlawful entry into, or unlawful stay in, Thailand in violation of immigration laws. Unlawful employment or engagement in work in violation of laws governing the employment of foreign nationals. Carrying on business in violation of the FBA, including through the use of nominee arrangements. Forging official documents or using forged official documents. Committing an offense punishable by imprisonment of five years or more. The framework takes a broad approach, extending not only to the perpetrators of these acts but also to those who facilitate, instigate, or otherwise support such acts. Deportation Risk Following a Criminal Judgment Where a foreign national has committed any of the above offenses and has fully served the sentence imposed pursuant to a final judgment, the interior minister has the power to order deportation. This power also applies where a court has issued a final judgment sentencing a foreign national to imprisonment but has suspended the execution of the sentence, or has imposed a fine. A deportation order may also specify a period during which the foreign national is prohibited from reentering Thailand. FBA Noncompliance: Broader Consequences Noncompliance with the FBA—including
August 20, 2026
As part of its membership in Lex Mundi, Tilleke & Gibbins has released the latest edition of its Guide to Doing Business in Thailand, providing an overview of the legal, regulatory, and commercial considerations for companies establishing or expanding operations in Thailand. The 2026 edition offers practical insight into the country’s business environment, investment framework, and operational requirements. The guide covers a wide range of topics relevant to foreign and domestic investors, including: Investment incentives and promotion schemes Financial facilities and banking regulations Exchange controls and money transfers Import and export regulations Business structures and incorporation options Requirements for establishing a business Operational and compliance considerations Business cessation and insolvency procedures Employment and labor laws Taxation Immigration and visa requirements Prepared by Tilleke & Gibbins lawyers across multiple practice areas, the publication outlines key aspects of doing business in Thailand, including foreign investment restrictions, regulatory compliance obligations, corporate structures, employment requirements, and recent legal and economic developments affecting investors. The publication forms part of Lex Mundi’s Country Guides series, a global collection of jurisdiction-specific reference materials prepared by member firms around the world. Together, these guides help companies evaluate opportunities, compare regulatory environments, and plan international business activities across multiple markets. The full Guide to Doing Business in Thailand 2026 is available through the button below.