paully

^ Nobly explained, IJWT.

Am I missing something or had the contracts expired and not been renewed??? Surely, if they haven't severed an existing contract then the schools are not compelled to renew them or pay severance as it is their perogative entirely, whether they want to continue with your employment in the school or not.

The word "contract" say's it all - what's all the nonsense and fuss about!!!

You wouldn't have "a leg to stand on" in England or any other Western country - let alone in the Thai courts!!!:jap:.

You've made the error of assuming that the employment contract is only the original written version signed by the OP and his employer. However, if he was kept on after his original fixed contract expired, he was therefore in a state of employment, still employed by the employer and his contract of employment therefore continued. He thus does 'have a [legal] leg to stand on', be it in England or Thailand.

Theoretically yes, one is entitled to seek redress. But in practice this may require the seeker to pay a heavy penalty. Thais in thailand live a certain way, they know that rocking the boat is not a very good thing to do. Some westerners ignore this, and prefer to live the way they think they should be entitled to, regardless of which country they are in.

In other countries pursuing this redress may have already caused one's death.

As Scott has - in effect- already pointed out, if the OP has lost his job he hardly needs to be worried about his ex-employer's face, does he? What penalty would he really suffer by taking up his perfectly legitimate rights under Thai law? A Thai employee in the same position as he might well do the same. Not exactly a risk of death attached to it.

Private Schools are covered under the Private School Act. The private school act specifically exempts certain conditions covered under Thai Labor Law.

But it doesn't clearly exempt all claims for redress against the employer as some seem to believe, Scott.

Learn from the experience, do nothing, and move on. If one wishes to live by the law, decide everything by the law, live with full contract security, then keep on teaching in one's home country. But no, we come to thailand to gain benefits from our teaching jobs that we can't get in our home countries. If we're prepared to take the benefits, prepared to live an easier life in general, then we should be prepared to take the rough with the smooth.

Amazing how people think that living in thailand should run in accord exactly with how it is in their home country.

But it should accord with how it is under Thai law, no?

Thai employment law, surprisingly enough, has many similarities with US or UK employment law including protections for the employee, the right to claim compensation from the employer in the event of unlawful termination (or severance) of the employee's contract being one of them. If the school has terminated the OP's contract after 24 months in the circumstances he describes then he is perfectly entitled to seek redress rather than 'take the rough with the smooth'. In effect it is a 'fake' redundancy, and the school should not be allowed to get away with it.

And so it starts again...sigh

^ Yes, hopefully his Thai 'dream' has ended this time. But somehow you just know he'll be back.

Yes, it's not unusual at all to be in this position. The wife still isn't sure exactly when her mum was born.

Can't you get it updated from the internet, from the Garmin site? Probably have to pay though.

Because he is still ,living the dream , sorry living in a dream

If he's still in a dream, you can't do anything for him. He had a passport organised for him previously and did nothing about it. Why would it change this time?

No way this scenario will get you a visa to the west and do not let any visa agent tell you otherwise. MAYBE some really wealthy guy posting a bond, working through lawyers not agents might pull it off. Used to be possible for the French and Scandinavians (Sweden is pretty liberal with visas for Thais).

Meeting a woman online

Chatting with her

Spending a few weeks with her

Chatting more with her

-----------------------------------

Will not equal a visa. No way, no how.

*Sigh*

This was the initial sequence of events for the missus and me a few years ago. She wasn't wealthy and nor was (am) I. But, she successfully obtained 2 visitor visas, indefinite leave and has been a British Citizen for 2 years now. But then what do I know..

Red-shirt leader Suphon Attawong, alias Isan Rambo, has urged all 'colors' to live in harmony and abandon political polarization for the sake of the country. [/Quote]

He's already trousered his considerable payoff then..

Thaksin was upbeat that he could convince the red shirts to go along with the Pheu Thai-sponsored reconciliation.

Of course he was 'upbeat'. I wonder why

In the real world of visa applications myself & Tony have to deal daily with the UK/BA and at this moment in time I am not impressed.

Example a client gets refused a visit visa so we return & address the issues the processing ECO then adds some more issues and refuses it again .

Moving the goal posts at their leisure not in the spirit of the visa.

Totally unfair in my opinion.

Completely agree. That is unethical and poor practice.

The respondent was at the hearing however got up and walked out once the client advised the judge with VAT1.5 Frequency and duration of visits is guidance only.

Sure - but the point is he wasn't there to clarify points for the judge, as the judge made it clear in the judgment. Poor practice to walk out like that, although very useful for the success of the appeal.

Good result, Paul. Hopefully, it will make the ECOs actually think about the application before making a (poor) decision based on what they might call " historical guidance". What it actually is, is that they don't think outside the box and don't treat each application on its merits. They look only at the time between return from UK to time of application.

A little harsh - to play devil's advocate for a moment, it was surely understandable for an ECO to be highly suspicious of an applicant who "spent 12 months out of a total of 15 months in the UK" and yet claimed not to be residing in the UK on a visit visa.

With all due respect to TVE's sterling efforts, I suspect that this was the clincher in the successful appeal:

"The respondent was not represented at the hearing to clarify the situation". That was, frankly, disgraceful but a situation that happens all too often.

Corruption is another problem that we will solve," Yingluck told a press conference.[/Quote]

You couldn't make it up

If the new Government do what they said before the election and put the people first before her older brother, maybe Thailand can find peace

Well, yes. ozzie, if. But unlikely that she'll forget she's a Shinawatra first and foremost.

Bangkok has a very efficient and clean subway system, not to mention CHEAP. Try London and Paris and then tell me that you guys are not purely complaining for the sake of it.

You're not really comparing like with like though, are you? Hardly a comprehensive metro 'system' in Bangkok, is it. Any old fool can run a couple of underground lines built within the last few years.

she can make a change of circumstance request to HO

Yes. Arguably she should do this before the second child is born, so that she is not seen to have deliberately delayed the process. The contact order can be used as evidence that she should be allowed to stay in the country to exercise it and see the other child every other weekend. She has a job and so can support herself in the UK, I'm sure accommodation will be sorted in due course. What she needs is a decent immigration solicitor to put the application in the best light.

Cheers, VP.

The slippery slope was first entered upon when Blair and Brown decided to make visa and leave to remain fees finance all the operating costs of the UKBA (or IND as it then was). A move vociferously opposed by both the Tories and LibDems at the time; but since they came to power we have seen yet another above inflation increase!

Precisely, 7by7. This latest fee has been coming for some time. Naturally it is also a way for (at least the Conservative part of) the coalition government to be seen to address the 'issue' of non-EU immigration levels into the UK without falling foul of the Human Rights Act. Unfortunately it will affect everyone whose visa application is not correctly handled.

There should, of course, be a way for applicants to continue to request that the ECM reviews a refused application without commencing a formal (and now costly) appeal. But I wouldn't put my hat on it.

We also made it clear in the consultation document that we would aim to increase fees over time beyond 25% of cost.[/Quote]

Expect 100% (at least). And soon..

Where on the visit visa application does it ask if the applicant has an NI number?

Question 6.8?

6.8 Do you have a UK National Insurance number?[/Quote]

If you answer 'yes', you then have to complete the box entitled

Reason for getting a National Insurance number[/Quote]

Dear Sir,

I shall choose not to be drawn by your slightly unpleasant barbed final comments. The indignity that I refer to is having to be held captive in the UK for the best part of 2 years. That to me is an affront to my dignity.

If you've woken up on the wrong side of bed this morning that is a shame.

Don't take it so personally, the man was trying to help. There isn't a 'come-and-go-exactly-as-you-please' visa just for your other half so 7by7 was trying to set out your options in the absence of this. There are always hoops to jump through for all visas.

Beautiful, intelligent and elegant Yingluck Shinawatra

Arrogant, rich and corrupt - but suay, na.