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 3, 2019

Unfair Labor Practices: What Employers Need to Be Aware Of

Subscribe to Updates
Bangkok Post: Human Resources Watch

While most employers understand what “unfair termination” means, many may be unfamiliar with the term “unfair labor practice” and what it entails. The Labor Relations Act (LRA) gives three general categories of conduct considered to be unfair labor practices: retaliation, wrongful pressure, and termination while under collective bargaining agreements.

Retaliation

Actions deemed retaliation are prohibited. These include the following scenarios:

  • Termination or doing anything that results in employees, employee representatives, or committee members of labor unions or labor federations being no longer able to work with the employer while the labor union or employees take steps to prepare petitions, submit labor demands, or sue or give evidence to officers under labor protection laws.
  • Termination or doing anything that results in the employee no longer able to work with the employer because of labor union membership.
  • Hindering employees from holding labor union membership or asking employees to resign from union membership.
  • Giving (or promising) money or property to employees either to not apply or to resign from union membership; also prohibited are such gifts or promises to a labor union officer to not accept employee membership applications.
  • Hindering a labor union or labor federation from conducting activities, or hindering employees from exercising their rights as union members.
  • Interfering in a labor union’s or labour federation’s activities without legal authority.

Wrongful pressure

An example of wrongful pressure would be an employer directly or indirectly forcing an employee to be a union member or resign from union membership. The concept of wrongful pressure can also be connected to issues of retaliation—that is, doing anything that leads to the employer committing one of the actions detailed in the previous section.

Termination under collective bargaining agreements

While a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) between employees or a labor union and employers is in effect, the employer is prohibited from terminating anyone who is involved with labor demands. This includes employees, labor union committee and subcommittee members, employee representatives, and committee and subcommittee members of labor federations. However, exceptions to this rule exist if an employee commits one of the following offenses:

  • Performs duties dishonestly or intentionally commits a criminal offense against the employer.
  • Intentionally causes serious damage against the employer.
  • Through negligence causes serious damage against the employer.
  • Violates work rules or regulations, or disobeys orders that are legal and fair, despite having already been given a written warning by the employer (though the written warning requirement is waived for serious matters).
  • Abandons his or her duties for a period of three consecutive work days without reasonable cause.
  • Acts in any manner that supports or induces violation of a CBA or an order of a labour dispute arbitrator.

If an employer has need to terminate an employee for reasons other than the grounds listed above, the employer can terminate the employee even while the CBA is in effect. For example, if an employer suffers losses and cannot operate the business of a particular department, the termination is not an unfair labour practice (in fact, this very issue came up in a case before the Supreme Court in 2005). Another example—which again has been at issue in a case before the Supreme Court—would be the termination of an employee who has health problems and takes too many sick days in a year. In this situation, terminating the employee while the CBA is in effect is also not considered an unfair labor practice.

Procedural requirements

If anyone commits an unfair labor practice, the aggrieved person can submit a complaint to the Labor Relations Committee (LRC) within 60 days from the date of the violation. The LRC then needs to consider the complaint and issue an order within 90 days of receiving it. This step is crucial – if a person submits a petition to the labor court accusing another party of committing an unfair labor practice without having first proceeded with the LRC, the court must dismiss the petition.

The LRC will investigate the facts and evidence from both parties and will then issue an order – either dismissing the complaint (if the court believes the accusation is not true) or ordering the employer to take action to rectify or make amends for the unfair labor practice. This often takes the form of forcing an employer to reinstate a terminated employee or compensate the employee or concerned persons.

If a violator does not comply with an LRC order within a deadline stated by LRC, the violator will face criminal penalties such as imprisonment for up to six months, a fine of up to THB 10,000, or both.

In addition, if the LRC finds that an employer committed an unfair labor practice, and also orders the employer to reinstate the employee, the employer can petition the labor court to revoke the LRC’s order. However, if the court considers that the employer committed an unfair labor practice and the employee can no longer work with the employer, the court may order the employer to pay compensation to the employee instead of reinstatement.

 

This article was originally published in the Bangkok Post and is reproduced here with permission and thanks. The original story can be viewed on the Bangkok Post website.

Related Professionals

Practices

Employment

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

April 3, 2023
Most employers know that terminating employees for poor job performance is not easy. But it is actually legally possible—if employers have the right approach and take specific precautionary measures. However, failing to take these precautions can mean that an employer is either stuck with an incompetent employee or on the losing end of a lawsuit for unfair termination. This article will lay out some essential considerations for employers in Thailand regarding termination of employment for poor performance. First, understand that “poor work performance” is a lack of performance or ability, or an inability to work with other employees. It does not constitute a violation of work rules or regulations. In some cases, however, an employee’s failure to act in accordance with lawful instructions or commands of the employer, resulting in poor work performance, could also be considered a violation of work rules or regulations. This may be the case if the work rules or regulations clearly state that an employee must strictly comply with the employer’s instructions or commands. Second, an employer can, in fact, terminate an employee due to poor work performance. For example, this may be possible in the following scenarios: Records show that an employee’s work performance has fallen below the employer’s required standards, and the employee has not tried to improve his or her work performance for three consecutive years. In addition, it does not appear that the employer was biased when giving ratings or scores for the employee’s work performance. The job description of the employee includes coordination with employees in other departments, but the employee has not been able to do so. Therefore, the employee was reassigned to a new job function, but the employee still did not improve. This suggests that the employee has a lack of interpersonal skills and is not
Read More
March 23, 2023
On March 19, 2023, Thailand’s new work-from-home (WFH) legislation amending the Labour Protection Act (No. 8) B.E. 2566 (2023) was published in the Government Gazette. It will come into effect on April 18, 2023. The amendment aims to enhance employee protections to accord with current global standards, provide alternative working arrangements for employers and employees, increase workforce efficiency, and strengthen employees’ job security and a better quality of life. As we detailed previously, the new WFH legislation allows employers and employees to reach agreements that permit employees to work remotely. Since there are no accompanying criminal punishments relating to this new provision, and the legislation incorporates the term “may agree,” it appears that this WFH provision is not mandatory but is primarily intended to facilitate and encourage remote working agreements between employers and employees. For more details on the WFH legislation, or on any aspect of employment law in Thailand, please contact Tilleke & Gibbins at [email protected].
Read More
February 24, 2023
Many companies have moved to Southeast Asia to benefit from the advantages of this vibrant and diverse market. The region is already a manufacturing hub for a multitude of industries—computer and automotive products in Thailand, textiles in Cambodia, and footwear and electrical goods in Vietnam, to name a few—and an increasing number of companies worldwide are reconfiguring their supply chains to include regional suppliers. A key challenge is keeping up to date with employment law trends in these jurisdictions to ensure compliance with local regulations—and avoid costly, time-consuming business interruption. Here we outline trends and recent regulatory developments in Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam, and consider what they mean for employers. Cambodia The Ministry of Labour and Vocational Training (MLVT) is likely to pursue a more proactive enforcement strategy in 2023. Last May, the MLVT announced companies would be required to submit a twice yearly self-declaration on labour compliance through a new online system. The self-declaration form requires companies to confirm and upload evidence of compliance, and the MLVT online system—through which the ministry can easily determine if a company is compliant –generates a report that lists all fines. Companies should comply with the self-declaration requirement and carefully review the form to understand what fines will apply for non-compliance. On 1 October 2022, regulations relating to the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) pension system came into effect, and employers and employees began making NSSF pension contributions. Over the next five years, total compulsory pension contributions will amount to 4% of an employee’s wage, half of which is paid by the employer and half deducted from the employee’s salary. The contribution wage is capped at KHR 1.2m (USD 300). Employers are currently required to pay a relatively small amount (KHR 24,000, or around USD 6). This will increase to 10.75% over
Read More
January 19, 2023
The Thai parliament has passed the so-called Work from Home Bill—formally known as Labour Protection Act (No. 8) B.E. 2566 (2023)—which amends the country’s Labour Protection Act (LPA) to reflect current circumstances. The accompanying legislative remark states that the proposed amendments to the LPA will provide additional options for work arrangements between employers and employees, upgrade the level of labor protection, increase work stability, and improve quality of life for employees in Thailand. The legislation adds a single section to the LPA providing that an employer and an employee “may agree in the employment contract” that the employee is allowed “to bring work . . . to perform at home or at the residence of the employee or anywhere that the employee can work remotely through information technology, if the nature of the work permits.” The provision further provides that employers are responsible for ensuring that remote work agreements are in writing, either physically or electronically, and may include the following details: Period of the agreement; Normal working hours, rest periods, and overtime work; Criteria for overtime work, holiday work, and various types of leave; Scope of work and control or supervision by the employer; and Responsibility for arranging supplies and equipment, including necessary costs relating to the work. The amended LPA gives employees who work from home the right to refuse contact from the employer or the supervisor beyond working hours. In addition, employers must treat remote employees equally to on-premise employees. The most notable question surrounding this legislation is whether employers must allow employees to work remotely. The phrase “may agree” suggests that employers do not have to agree to allow an employee to work remotely. Another important aspect of the amendment is that there is no criminal punishment attached to it, which suggests that the legislation
Read More