BrianCR

or maybe a government that understood the word compassion

Illegal resorts to be made legal. Is like the American government making 11 million illegal people trafficked into the country citizens. It seems all governments do not understand the meaning of the word illegal. In Thailand the illegal resorts belong to politicians, police or military, In the USA be giving the illegal humans, trafficked into the country, citizenship than they will have the right to vote for the party that did not understand the meaning of illegal.

Or maybe a government that understands the word compassion? Anyone tell me why homo sapiens spend most of their lives making life difficult for each other?

I assume the survey didn't include foreigners/expats or else those numbers would change.

We should be included as well! I believe with a little effort we can win this competition for Bangkok!!

Below, in both Thai and English are the rules which come under the Labour Protection Act 1998 (section 119). Anything outside of this scope is a case for wrongful dismissal and remember, even if you were dismissed for a reason below, some of these reasons need to be proceeded by 1) a verbal warning, followed by 2) a written warning (a written warning is valid for a period of 6 months after which and subject to the employee not breaking the same rule, the warning is not valid)

A boss need not pay compensation to an employee whose employment is terminated in any of the following cases:

• (1)Dishonesty in carrying out duties or deliberate commission of a crime against the boss.

• (2)Intentionally causing the boss to suffer damage.

• (3)Negligence, causing the boss to suffer serious damage.

• (4)Violation of the work rules and regulations or the boss' lawful and legitimate regulations or orders, where the boss had already issued a written warning, except that in serious cases the boss need not issue such a warning. A letter of warning shall be enforceable for not more than one year calculated from the date on which the employee committed the offence.

• (5)Abandonment of post for three consecutive working days, regardless of whether there was a holiday in between or not, for no appropriate reason.

• (6) Imprisonment under a final judgement ordering imprisonment, unless the sentence was for an offence which was committed out of negligence or a petty offence.

มาตรา 119 นายจ้างไม่ต้องจ่ายค่าชดเชยให้แก่ลูกจ้าง ซึ่งเลิกจ้างในกรณีหนึ่งกรณีใดดังต่อไปนี้

(1) ทุจริตต่อหน้าที่หรือกระทำความผิดอาญาโดยเจตนา แก่นายจ้าง

(2) จงใจทำให้นายจ้างได้รับความเสียหาย

(3) ประมาทเลินเล่อเป็นเหตุให้นายจ้างได้รับความเสียหาย อย่างร้ายแรง

(4) ฝ่าฝืนข้อบังคับเกี่ยวกับการทำงานหรือระเบียบหรือคำสั่ง ของนายจ้างอันชอบด้วยกฎหมายและเป็นธรรม และนายจ้างได้ ตักเตือนเป็นหนังสือแล้ว เว้นแต่กรณีที่ร้ายแรงนายจ้างไม่จำเป็น ต้องตักเตือน

หนังสือเตือนให้มีผลบังคับได้ไม่เกินหนึ่งปีนับแต่วันที่ลูกจ้างได้ กระทำผิด

(5) ละทิ้งหน้าที่เป็นเวลาสามวันทำงานติดต่อกันไม่ว่าจะมีวัน หยุดคั่นหรือไม่ก็ตามโดยไม่มีเหตุอันสมควร

(6) ได้รับโทษจำคุกตามคำพิพากษาถึงที่สุดให้จำคุก เว้นแต่ เป็นโทษสำหรับความผิดที่ได้กระทำโดยประมาทหรือความผิดลหุ โทษ

Hope all this helps you and good luck with your case

Isn't this the same person who used to run an animal sanctuary in Chiang Mai?

Oh goody, another crackdown in the Land of Crackdowns

In answer to your question I have received severance pay twice and from two separate schools! First time was after having a big row with the dickhe*d who ran the department during which, in temper, he told me I was sacked. Well, first I had received no written (or verbal) warnings over anything and secondly he forgot in his wisdom to put it in writing to me. I informed the school directors that they were in breach of labour law and was rewarded (although they didn't want to reward me) with three months salary.

Second time was after working at the same school for 4.5 years I went to sign a new contract only to be informed (very politely)that as I was (then) 67 years old the school would not be able to give me a new contract. I consulted labour laws and discovered that age is not a reason for dismissal and that they couldn't claim redundancy as under the same law they couldn't fill the position with anyone else. I prepared my case then threatened to take them to a labour tribunal - they backed down before that happened and i got 6 months salary off them.

Many westerners are simply not aware that if you are working legally you are entitled to the same labour protection as Thai people. Incidentally one year contracts do not mean that legally you have been employed by that school for one year as the contracts in the eyes of the labour laws, accrue and so you can claim for the full period that you have been employed. Anyone want further advice on an individual problem let me know

Brian

================================

Brian

Thanks for your generous reply

Did you collect these severance payments within the last 5 - 6 years ?

The Private School Act is only about 5 yrs old.

It is what exempts private schools from severance and many other obligations of Thai Labor Law.

Prior to that, a teacher at a private school was covered.

If what you say is true is there any reference to this in the Thai labour act, as the labour law would take precidence over the "private school act" anyway....

to me on face value what your stating there doesnt make sense....if this act related to goverment schools, I could see some logic to it..but a private school is operated as a "business"...therefore the labour act rules stand and under those rules a person would be entitled to severance under the prescribed conditions

See if I can add a few more interesting points:

Culicine - Your information is incorrect on a few points firstly your friend did not get 7 months salary as six is the maximum. All the comments regarding a labour court making statements such as you state are complete dribble - most cases are settled either by a threat of action at school level (schools don't want to lose face) but to do this you will need to be friendly yet, stern with them so, making them believe that you intend to carry out your plan of taking them to the labour department

The labour department is your second step where you will meet with a tribunal officer and with whom you will present your case (as Soutpeel said) the DOL are very employee pro and are paid to protect you, not the school or company!

Step 3: After looking at your evidence the tribunal officer will tell you if he/she believes that you have a case (to make a case is fairly easy) then, he/she will telephone your employer and invite them to either make the payment (specified by the labour department) to you OR, if they don't they must attend the labour department on a date specified. Should they choose to not pay and attend you will need to be present and the officer will negotiate with the employer on your behalf. Should the school make a lower offer of payment the officer will ask you if you wish to accept if, your answer is no the meeting will end and the labour department will inform the school of a date in which to attend a formal (usually with 3 judges) labour court. If your answer is yes, you get paid and the case is closed.

If, after attending the labour department they refuse to handle your case this will be for one of two reasons - 1) you don't have a case and 2) because the officer is too lazy. If you really feel you do have a case go to a lawyer and they will speak with the labour department on your behalf. The labour department will explain why you don't have a case or after speaking with your lawyer will suddenly stop feeling lazy.

If after going through all of this the labour department still refuses to handle your case ONLY A FOOL will bother to take a private action in a court - you will NOT win without the backing of the labour department and it will cost YOU money.

If you now need to know what makes a case for wrongful dismissal click like to this and later i will start writing again - now I'm going for a cup of coffee

The renovation work along the beach road to include the walking area is tremendous, the pace and quality of work included. One can only imagine how it will look a few months after completion with the loitering back in place. I get the point that Pattaya is a haven for loitering but can't they confine the loitering to a specific area and leave the beach alone? Put all the power lines along the beach underground, prevent motorcycles from riding along the walking area and ban the sale of alcoholic beverages from the bicycle ladies. If you want the beach area to be the showcase of the city, then remove the things tarnish the showcase. Severely restrict the vehicles that can park temporarily along the beach road, prevent buses from even entering the beach road.

In short, its not just the loitering ladyboys, its about compliance with a clear strategy which makes the beach a respectable showcase for everyone.

Sounds to me like a junkie who went to the temple to sleep it off and had a convulsion! RIP and don't drink unopened temple milk!

Thanks for your generous reply

Did you collect these severance payments within the last 5 - 6 years ?

The Private School Act is only about 5 yrs old.

It is what exempts private schools from severance and many other obligations of Thai Labor Law.

Prior to that, a teacher at a private school was covered.

Forget the private school stuff the labour laws apply to both private and Government. The 3 month payment was from a private school about 5 and a half years ago and the 6 month payment was from a Government school about 10 months ago - I have now really retired from teaching lol

What a load of BS that is.. First of all I don't know any farmers that have insurance or a credit card.. A poor attempt to please the farmers well it ain't gonna work that's for sure

I am an American but I find my government's ongoing Human Rights, Human Trafficking, etc., etc., a bit tiresome. We have a few things in the US that we need to resolve before we lecture others. Far more persuasive to lead by example.

This is tied to trade. If you want to sell product to the USA, make sure that that given industry doesn't use illegal or forced labour. I don't think that is an unfair request do you?

http://www.polarisproject.org/human-trafficking/labor-trafficking-in-the-us/agriculture-a-farms

I understand your position. I personally favor more libertarian solutions. A free press to inform the citizenry and a public that demonstrates its committment to Human Rights and boycots products produced by slave labor.

Again, better to lead/influence by example.

so everyones guna stop eating fish in thailand and no country going to import thai fish because of slavery on boats,,,i dont think so,im not having a dig at the above poster,,its a f******d up world we live in,as long as WE can do our little bit to have the moral highground maybe its a start,i know i sleep well at night ,,,,,

Coincidence indeed and it's only the tip of the iceberg as to what these people have to put up with in the hands of their Thai 'captors'

Shouldn't the phrase that reads "weeping in remorse" read weeping of course!!!

I don't see a problem Thai law states - "that after dark police may enter a property without a search warrant if they know or have good cause to believe that a crime is being committed" - gambling is a crime I believe?

Khun Somsak was doing them a favour, if left in Pattaya they may have become Public Relations Hostesses. Under his cunning plan they would have moved to Chiang Mai and become his Personal Relations Hostesses!

He may have been Cambodian but doesn't RIP come into this - or is that just for westerners?

Reporting at its best - Pattaya style!

Feel sad for the boys concerned. They will 99% end up becoming gay men.

As a young boy I first had sex with a woman when I was 12 years old and was terrified I would grow up as a lesbian! does that make any sence to you?

Yeah, NONSENSE!

Now, here's a poster who knows something about nothing and who doesn't even recognize sarcasm when he reads it!

Could he have a trial first or does he have to be guilty because he has been arrested by people who most posters consider totally corrupt?

What are you talking about the police must have had strong evidence to get an arrest warrant for gods sake, dirty bastard. It happens a lot that is why a lot of these guys come here because they know for a few bart they can do what they cannot in their own country.

Could he have a trial first or does he have to be guilty because he has been arrested by people who most posters consider totally corrupt?

What are you talking about the police must have had strong evidence to get an arrest warrant for gods sake, dirty bastard. It happens a lot that is why a lot of these guys come here because they know for a few bart they can do what they cannot in their own country.

Public Relations Hostess? Is this a joke?