Minimum wage could be increased by more than Bt15 a day

[snoop1130]

Minimum wage could be increased by more than Bt15 a day

By The Nation

 

 

The Labour Ministry’s permanent secretary, Jarin Chakkaphark, said on Thursday that the Tripartite Wage Committee would pass a resolution on an increase to the minimum wage by January 15.

 

“It’s possible that the increase may be well over Bt15 because the wage has been fixed at Bt300 a day since 2014,” he said. 

 

Labour Minister Pol General Adul Saengsingkaew said the wage hike was in response to Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha’s wish to raise the wage as a New Year gift for workers. 

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/breakingnews/30335395

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2018-1-4

[Bluespunk]

1 minute ago, snoop1130 said:

“It’s possible that the increase may be well over Bt15 because the wage has been fixed at Bt300 a day since 2014,” he said. 

Whoopi ******* doo

[PatOngo]

Cool, there's the new Toyota pickup and iPhone 8!

[hansnl]

Should have kept this decision secret.

In the normal fashion now prices will go up already.

And then go up again when the minimum wage goes up.

That is exactly what happened last time.

And even now 300 baht is not always paid.

[Black arab]

A new years gift from the pm wow thats nice of him

[Damrongsak]

15 hours ago, PatOngo said:

Cool, there's the new Toyota pickup and iPhone 8!

No, it means they could then afford to put noodles in the broth, or put broth on the noodles, at lunch time.  A quicker picker-upper. 

[worgeordie]

All the workers can buy an extra 1/2 a meal a day,or can Pepsi.if they get it.

regards worgeordie

 

[Srikcir]

Then workers can buy that extra stick of gum.

Whahoo!

 

 

 

[Smiley Man]

Whahoo!  Gift from the prime minister? How about us the farangs?

 Any gift for us to buy gum gum? 

[Ricardo]

B15 would be too little, and this increase is overdue, IMO.

[Happyman58]

Extra Extra announcement  The wages for low paid workers will go up 15 baht per day Generals who attend meetings there wages will go up from 100,000 baht per meeting to 150,000 baht per meeting

[ZeVonderBearz]

Can barely buy a bag of crisps for that 

[khunPer]

300 baht to 315 baht is a 5% increase, the consumer price Index was just about 100 in 2014, raising to 101.5, the falling back again, and end of 2017, December, 101.37; core consumer price Index is 102 i.e. about 2% increase.

 

So a 15 baht minimum wage increase seem fair enough compared with overall figure. Those who think 15 baht is too little, are they the same that are complaining, when prices are going up due to increase of salaries..?

 

I.e. if we Westerners wish to see minimum wages rocking "sky high" in Third World countries, where our cheap stuff comes from, we shall be prepared to pay (a lot) more, for the products we buy; and of course without complaining about rising prices...

[Samui Bodoh]

I can't argue with the comments above regarding the generals who are grossly overpaid for doing very little. Nor can I argue with the comments regarding general P; it isn't his money and it is not "his" gift to workers at the New Year.

 

However, a 5% rise in the minimum wage is a good thing; I am at a bit of a loss as to why many members think this is so bad. True, 15 baht a day for me, and I suspect most members, doesn't amount to much, but it isn't for us. I know several Thais and/or Burmese for whom a 15 baht a day raise will help with their lives. One member (above) noted that it was half a meal; it is half a meal a day or about 12 meals a month. When you are living in great poverty, perhaps with a wife and perhaps a child, perhaps in a shack with a corrugated iron roof and a dirt floor, an extra 12 meals a month is a BIG thing.

 

This is a good thing.

 

And I wish it were a bit more, and paid to all...

[Srikcir]

23 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

the Tripartite Wage Committee would pass a resolution on an increase to the minimum wage by January 15.

Meanwhile about 50 military officers who are also NLA parliament ministers get full "compensation" even though they have been permanently excused from attending any NLA meetings.

No wonder the junta has been concerned about income inequality. It's not great enough!

[Happyman58]

1 hour ago, khunPer said:

300 baht to 315 baht is a 5% increase, the consumer price Index was just about 100 in 2014, raising to 101.5, the falling back again, and end of 2017, December, 101.37; core consumer price Index is 102 i.e. about 2% increase.

 

So a 15 baht minimum wage increase seem fair enough compared with overall figure. Those who think 15 baht is too little, are they the same that are complaining, when prices are going up due to increase of salaries..?

 

I.e. if we Westerners wish to see minimum wages rocking "sky high" in Third World countries, where our cheap stuff comes from, we shall be prepared to pay (a lot) more, for the products we buy; and of course without complaining about rising prices...

i would say you are on more than 300 baht per day or are a business owner

[Happyman58]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

I can't argue with the comments above regarding the generals who are grossly overpaid for doing very little. Nor can I argue with the comments regarding general P; it isn't his money and it is not "his" gift to workers at the New Year.

 

However, a 5% rise in the minimum wage is a good thing; I am at a bit of a loss as to why many members think this is so bad. True, 15 baht a day for me, and I suspect most members, doesn't amount to much, but it isn't for us. I know several Thais and/or Burmese for whom a 15 baht a day raise will help with their lives. One member (above) noted that it was half a meal; it is half a meal a day or about 12 meals a month. When you are living in great poverty, perhaps with a wife and perhaps a child, perhaps in a shack with a corrugated iron roof and a dirt floor, an extra 12 meals a month is a BIG thing.

 

This is a good thing.

 

And I wish it were a bit more, and paid to all...

Question fro you sir? Do you earn more than 300 baht per day now

[watcharacters]

 

 

 

I don't interact with Thais on such ridiculous figures.    This is a simple instance of the "haves" wanting to keep the "have nots" in their place.   Keep them poor and uneducated and ignorant..

[khunPer]

4 hours ago, Happyman58 said:

6 hours ago, khunPer said:

300 baht to 315 baht is a 5% increase, the consumer price Index was just about 100 in 2014, raising to 101.5, the falling back again, and end of 2017, December, 101.37; core consumer price Index is 102 i.e. about 2% increase.

 

So a 15 baht minimum wage increase seem fair enough compared with overall figure. Those who think 15 baht is too little, are they the same that are complaining, when prices are going up due to increase of salaries..?

 

I.e. if we Westerners wish to see minimum wages rocking "sky high" in Third World countries, where our cheap stuff comes from, we shall be prepared to pay (a lot) more, for the products we buy; and of course without complaining about rising prices...

i would say you are on more than 300 baht per day or are a business owner

I'm not sure I understand your intention with your kind comment; however it's not a question of what I earn or have of money, but a question of Thai minimum salaries, and the percentage of rise in salary, compared with average increase in living costs.

 

But as you ask, I don't mind to reply that I'm an alien in Thailand, so-called "expat", living of a small government retirement pensin – which is 40% below my country's official poverty income level – however supplemented with my private savings from 40 years of hard work, more than 8-hours a day and 40-hours a week, and high taxation. And yes, converted to Thai baht both my retirement pension, and what I can withdraw from my savings, are more than 300 baht a day; that's one of the reasons that I stay here...

 

We cannot compare local income with exchange to another country's currency. When comparing we shall use something comparable and locally produced. We can for example ask: How many (big) eggs at supermarket price can you buy for your daily, or monthly, minimum income after tax in your country; and how many eggs can a Thai buy for an untaxed minimum wage..?

 

Typically a Thai minimum salary is between 8,000 baht and 9,000 baht a month, let's say 8,500, which equals between 2,800 and 3,000 eggs. 

My home country's official "poverty level" equals around 4,300 eggs – so not that big difference, especially when we also have to convert some eggs to heating during winter season in my cold home country...

 

And me – with presumable more than 300 baht a day or a business owner – I'm that lucky, that I can buy more than the approximately 2600 eggs a month at home for my 40% below poverty level income, because I'm living in Thailand, instead of staying home; and as I furthermore save expenses for heating, I can also use some of my savings to buy additional eggs (believe I now wish to skip my two otherwise affordable eggs for breakfast tomorrow morning)...

Mr. Happyman58, how many eggs can you afford to you buy..?

[Happyman58]

6 hours ago, khunPer said:

I'm not sure I understand your intention with your kind comment; however it's not a question of what I earn or have of money, but a question of Thai minimum salaries, and the percentage of rise in salary, compared with average increase in living costs.

 

But as you ask, I don't mind to reply that I'm an alien in Thailand, so-called "expat", living of a small government retirement pensin – which is 40% below my country's official poverty income level – however supplemented with my private savings from 40 years of hard work, more than 8-hours a day and 40-hours a week, and high taxation. And yes, converted to Thai baht both my retirement pension, and what I can withdraw from my savings, are more than 300 baht a day; that's one of the reasons that I stay here...

 

We cannot compare local income with exchange to another country's currency. When comparing we shall use something comparable and locally produced. We can for example ask: How many (big) eggs at supermarket price can you buy for your daily, or monthly, minimum income after tax in your country; and how many eggs can a Thai buy for an untaxed minimum wage..?

 

Typically a Thai minimum salary is between 8,000 baht and 9,000 baht a month, let's say 8,500, which equals between 2,800 and 3,000 eggs. 

My home country's official "poverty level" equals around 4,300 eggs – so not that big difference, especially when we also have to convert some eggs to heating during winter season in my cold home country...

 

And me – with presumable more than 300 baht a day or a business owner – I'm that lucky, that I can buy more than the approximately 2600 eggs a month at home for my 40% below poverty level income, because I'm living in Thailand, instead of staying home; and as I furthermore save expenses for heating, I can also use some of my savings to buy additional eggs (believe I now wish to skip my two otherwise affordable eggs for breakfast tomorrow morning)...

Mr. Happyman58, how many eggs can you afford to you buy..?

Ok since you were honest with me i will answer you  I worked for 20 years as a coal miner I made a lot eggs as u call them Taxation is very high where i come from In fact i was paying 50% of my wages in tax I am not on a pension an live off my savings  I came to Thailand because i lived by myself from where i come from so i thought why not Lost my job due to serious accident and yes i did work hard also  12 hours a day 7 days per week  But i was lucky i met a Thai lady who has her own business and does very well So we came to an agreement I pay off her house and car and she  will more or less take care of living expenses  I am not a big drinker or smoker or party  boy As she said to me in a average month i would cost her 4000 baht  per month Which is how many eggs? Where i come from there is also  lots of poverty but the gov tends to hide that image Its called household debt where ordinary people own homes but  are so much in  debt they cannot afford to live  So they skip meals going out even putting on the air con when it is very hot because power is so expensive I am now 60 and i have to wait till i am 67 before i can get a pension if i live that long

[starky]

13 hours ago, khunPer said:

300 baht to 315 baht is a 5% increase, the consumer price Index was just about 100 in 2014, raising to 101.5, the falling back again, and end of 2017, December, 101.37; core consumer price Index is 102 i.e. about 2% increase.

 

So a 15 baht minimum wage increase seem fair enough compared with overall figure. Those who think 15 baht is too little, are they the same that are complaining, when prices are going up due to increase of salaries..?

 

I.e. if we Westerners wish to see minimum wages rocking "sky high" in Third World countries, where our cheap stuff comes from, we shall be prepared to pay (a lot) more, for the products we buy; and of course without complaining about rising prices...

No if there was parity in wages In developing nations then multinationals may have to rethink there abusive strategies and start going back to manufacturing and producing in their home countries, also a fairer distribution of wealth especially in Thailand is also on my utopian agenda. 

[metisdead]

Some troll posts have been removed. 

[Samui Bodoh]

17 hours ago, Happyman58 said:

Question fro you sir? Do you earn more than 300 baht per day now

Respectfully Sir, I do not discuss my finances on a public forum. However, I will note that I am not an active participant in the Thai economy, I merely spend money here.

 

I would like to see a rise in the minimum wage as an element of social justice. In my native country, the minimum wage was considered a starting wage, especially for teenagers in school having a part-time job and as an entry-level wage for people beginning the climb to their future earnings; there was always a clear expectation that the wage would rise after a certain, relatively short, amount of time. I am not sure if that is still the case, but that is another thread.

 

In Thailand, it seems the minimum wage is considered the official "what's the least that I can get away with, at least officially" wage and there are too many people trying to eke out a living on it. Now, let me be clear that I am very much a believer in a market economy for the simple reason that it works, and generally works very well for the creation of wealth. However, there are a few injustices built into the idea of the market economy that need to be addressed and the concept of a 'living wage' is one of them. It especially needs to be addressed in Thailand as it has one of the worst wealth inequalities in the world.

 

I do not have all the answers, nor do I think that I even know most of the right questions, but there needs to be some mechanism in a country that allows people, low-skilled workers especially, to receive a wage where they can have a basic living without simply being hand-to-mouth on a daily basis. What kind of policy would achieve that? I have recently read about the idea of a "minimum amount of money per citizen" policy (don't know the official or 'common' name) whereby each citizen receives a minimum amount of money every year, regardless of their work, or even when they are not working. I am light on the details, but I do know some serious people/countries are looking at the idea.

 

Wealth inequality is a fascinating subject; it has been with us for a very long time and I suspect that it'll be with us for a long time to come. However, the difference now is that it is getting out of hand and some kind of measures need to be taken to mitigate the effects.

 

Any ideas?

 

[dick dasterdly]

1 hour ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Respectfully Sir, I do not discuss my finances on a public forum. However, I will note that I am not an active participant in the Thai economy, I merely spend money here.

 

I would like to see a rise in the minimum wage as an element of social justice. In my native country, the minimum wage was considered a starting wage, especially for teenagers in school having a part-time job and as an entry-level wage for people beginning the climb to their future earnings; there was always a clear expectation that the wage would rise after a certain, relatively short, amount of time. I am not sure if that is still the case, but that is another thread.

 

In Thailand, it seems the minimum wage is considered the official "what's the least that I can get away with, at least officially" wage and there are too many people trying to eke out a living on it. Now, let me be clear that I am very much a believer in a market economy for the simple reason that it works, and generally works very well for the creation of wealth. However, there are a few injustices built into the idea of the market economy that need to be addressed and the concept of a 'living wage' is one of them. It especially needs to be addressed in Thailand as it has one of the worst wealth inequalities in the world.

 

I do not have all the answers, nor do I think that I even know most of the right questions, but there needs to be some mechanism in a country that allows people, low-skilled workers especially, to receive a wage where they can have a basic living without simply being hand-to-mouth on a daily basis. What kind of policy would achieve that? I have recently read about the idea of a "minimum amount of money per citizen" policy (don't know the official or 'common' name) whereby each citizen receives a minimum amount of money every year, regardless of their work, or even when they are not working. I am light on the details, but I do know some serious people/countries are looking at the idea.

 

Wealth inequality is a fascinating subject; it has been with us for a very long time and I suspect that it'll be with us for a long time to come. However, the difference now is that it is getting out of hand and some kind of measures need to be taken to mitigate the effects.

 

Any ideas?

 

Personally, I take the only available measures - pay my part-time cleaner well/'give the petrol pump attendants the loose change (unless they can't be bothered to put the cap back on the petrol tank....) and tipping car park employees offering to help with shopping trolley and load shopping into taxi/scooter box.

 

Have to thank a friend for pointing out that waving-off staff trying to take over shopping trolleys was only 'robbing' poorly paid staff of a 'tip', rather than 'taking advantage' of poorly paid staff.... 

[Samui Bodoh]

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

Respectfully Sir, I do not discuss my finances on a public forum. However, I will note that I am not an active participant in the Thai economy, I merely spend money here.

 

I would like to see a rise in the minimum wage as an element of social justice. In my native country, the minimum wage was considered a starting wage, especially for teenagers in school having a part-time job and as an entry-level wage for people beginning the climb to their future earnings; there was always a clear expectation that the wage would rise after a certain, relatively short, amount of time. I am not sure if that is still the case, but that is another thread.

 

In Thailand, it seems the minimum wage is considered the official "what's the least that I can get away with, at least officially" wage and there are too many people trying to eke out a living on it. Now, let me be clear that I am very much a believer in a market economy for the simple reason that it works, and generally works very well for the creation of wealth. However, there are a few injustices built into the idea of the market economy that need to be addressed and the concept of a 'living wage' is one of them. It especially needs to be addressed in Thailand as it has one of the worst wealth inequalities in the world.

 

I do not have all the answers, nor do I think that I even know most of the right questions, but there needs to be some mechanism in a country that allows people, low-skilled workers especially, to receive a wage where they can have a basic living without simply being hand-to-mouth on a daily basis. What kind of policy would achieve that? I have recently read about the idea of a "minimum amount of money per citizen" policy (don't know the official or 'common' name) whereby each citizen receives a minimum amount of money every year, regardless of their work, or even when they are not working. I am light on the details, but I do know some serious people/countries are looking at the idea.

 

Wealth inequality is a fascinating subject; it has been with us for a very long time and I suspect that it'll be with us for a long time to come. However, the difference now is that it is getting out of hand and some kind of measures need to be taken to mitigate the effects.

 

Any ideas?

 

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guaranteed_minimum_income

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/08/why-arent-reformicons-pushing-a-guaranteed-basic-income/375600/

 

http://freakonomics.com/podcast/mincome/

 

If anyone is interested...

 

[Coconutman]

Now thais can invest in retirement 

[khunPer]

9 hours ago, starky said:

No if there was parity in wages In developing nations then multinationals may have to rethink there abusive strategies and start going back to manufacturing and producing in their home countries, also a fairer distribution of wealth especially in Thailand is also on my utopian agenda. 

Thanks for your comment.

 

I was not talking about wealth distribution, or lack of same, but just comparing wage increase with whatever is available of comparative inflation figurs. I think we shall be little careful in always blaming the multinational companies and their business strategies – they look at things from a business point of view and bottom lines – because it's us, the consumers and customers, that makes their business strategies possible by buying their products.

 

Our relative Western World wealth is partly because of we can buy cheap manufactured products, instead of locally produced at high wages. In older time the wealthy countries would use slaves as cheap labor, even in the dream of Utopia the wealth was based on slaves, but they were hidden away on the mainland, so everything looked perfect...

 

Furthermore, buying products that are produced in low income areas, may even be good, as the people living in that areas otherwise may have no income at all – in my horizon there's a huge difference from 0 baht a day from not having a job, to 315 baht, or just 300 baht, a day from a job. The risk is that if the lower level wages goes up too high, and too fast, the production moves out – that's what begin to happen with some items produced in China – and converting the nice higher than the 315 baht a day income to unemployed 0 baht.

 

It's a (difficult) question af balance...

[khunPer]

3 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

...I have recently read about the idea of a "minimum amount of money per citizen" policy (don't know the official or 'common' name) whereby each citizen receives a minimum amount of money every year, regardless of their work, or even when they are not working. I am light on the details, but I do know some serious people/countries are looking at the idea.

 

Wealth inequality is a fascinating subject; it has been with us for a very long time and I suspect that it'll be with us for a long time to come. However, the difference now is that it is getting out of hand and some kind of measures need to be taken to mitigate the effects.

 

Any ideas?

In my Scandinavia home country some financial gurus talks about the coming robot-era, where manual work will be widely disregarded and replaced by multiple variations of robots, and the government in the (near) future will give all citizens a basic salary, one can live comfortable from, for not working. Is it a realistic Utopian dream, where the slaves has been changed with robots?

 

I'm still considering, as I havn't forgot the futuristic novels "Brave New World" and "Rendezvous With Rama", and the possibilities of organic robots. The difference between the Epsilon-people in Brave New World, and Clark's organic robot-creatures inside Rama begins to be fade; perhaps that kind of spices are our future human welfare's slaves that are not thinking (too much), and therefore never makes any rebellion or revolution, or demanding higher minimum salaries..?

[473geo]

Well if the recently introduced 300 baht a month for poor people in place pays 15 baht a day for 20 days a month, perhaps only right those that work see an increase

Good work by the government looking after the lower paid and poor. However for the current government to receive genuine plaudits for bringing "happiness to the people" I would suggest more substantial cash injection into the economy maybe required for the population to notice improvement.

[Samui Bodoh]

15 minutes ago, khunPer said:

In my Scandinavia home country some financial gurus talks about the coming robot-era, where manual work will be widely disregarded and replaced by multiple variations of robots, and the government in the (near) future will give all citizens a basic salary, one can live comfortable from, for not working. Is it a realistic Utopian dream, where the slaves has been changed with robots?

 

I'm still considering, as I havn't forgot the futuristic novels "Brave New World" and "Rendezvous With Rama", and the possibilities of organic robots. The difference between the Epsilon-people in Brave New World, and Clark's organic robot-creatures inside Rama begins to be fade; perhaps that kind of spices are our future human welfare's slaves that are not thinking (too much), and therefore never makes any rebellion or revolution, or demanding higher minimum salaries..?

Hi Khun Per

 

If you are going to go the robot route with a side of Clarke and Huxley, you know that I'll be coming back with some Asimov and a full Roddenberry. 

 

A realistic robot Utopia can be a dangerous place when one considers making slaves out of robots for economic purposes. Forget not that Asimov's robots, even governed by the three laws of robotics, managed to override their programming. Fortunately, Giskard was a good-hearted sort (if I can use that expression) and decided that the zeroth law of robotics mandated that he protect humanity in general. Had he decided otherwise...

 

However, if you are going to speculate on the implications of robots and the labour force, I would offer a warning with the example of Norman from the original Star Trek series. His decision to offer his and his compatriots' service to humanity as a labour force in order to protect and guide us could have been disastrous! Their devious plan to control humanity may well have worked were it not for the brilliant application of illogic put forth by the crew of the Enterprise with the assistance of Harry Mudd.

 

To sum up, I think humanity needs to solve the issue of low-skilled labour and the concurrent issue of resource allocation to the same looooooong before we acquire the technology for the development of advanced robots.

 

The implications of developing viable robotics BEFORE we solve the issue of low wages doesn't bear thinking about.