Jump to content

Draft plan to allow foreigners to work in 11 ‘reserved’ occupations


webfact

Recommended Posts

"The Council of Engineers has criticised the plan. The civil-engineer occupation should remain reserved for Thais because it involves people’s safety, they said. "

 

This statement is ridiculous. It would seem to me that countries like the USA EU as well as others have safety standards well in excess of what they are in Thailand

Have you ever seen a building site ?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The Council of Engineers has criticised the plan. The civil-engineer occupation should remain reserved for Thais because it involves people’s safety, they said

what ! I see workers on large building sites with flips on safety my a***s

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, LazySlipper said:

I never saw in the "amity act" a provision that allowed for that. Have read it and tried to see if there was a possibility. If there is, it is not as clear cut as that.

 

Guessing you actually meant the The US-Thai Amity Treaty - but you are right, here is a little bit of the treaty;

 

"

The Thailand Treaty of Amity prohibits American investors from engaging in the following reserved activities:

Communications

Transportation;

Fiduciary functions

Banking involving depository functions;

Land Ownership, Exploitation of land or

Other natural resources; and

Domestic trade in indigenous agricultural products."

 

https://www.siam-legal.com/Business-in-Thailand/US-Thai Amity.php

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Damrongsak said:

Someone is looking out for the farangs.  If things go wrong, it's a whole lot harder to find a Thai engineer on the lam than a farang.

Let's put it this way, it's a wonderful opportunity to set in motion the long-standing plan, that if something goes wrong, like if a building collapses, you will always have a farang around to blame!

Edited by AlQaholic
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Why not be fair and just by allowing foreigners to own one plot of land on which they would like to live their retirement ?

They don't want foreign money raising the price of land. Is 30 year lease not long enough?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, webfact said:

The Council of Engineers has criticised the plan. The civil-engineer occupation should remain reserved for Thais because it involves people’s safety, they said.

Are there any employees of ItalThai in the Council? If so, please Fwd this important update  to them as a gentle reminder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, NetJunkie said:

 

Guessing you actually meant the The US-Thai Amity Treaty - but you are right, here is a little bit of the treaty;

 

"

The Thailand Treaty of Amity prohibits American investors from engaging in the following reserved activities:

Communications

Transportation;

Fiduciary functions

Banking involving depository functions;

Land Ownership, Exploitation of land or

Other natural resources; and

Domestic trade in indigenous agricultural products."

 

https://www.siam-legal.com/Business-in-Thailand/US-Thai Amity.php

Somewhat of a moot point as the treaty was not renewed after 2005.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, imjmn said:

Allowing foreigners to work in those positions 'reserved' for Thai citizens would bring more knowledge and different practices into the Thai industry and make them more competitive on the world stage. MHO.

 

MJ

I agree.. I do think that as should be the case with all nations - that labour rules should give first “opportunity” to any national/citizen of that country over a non-citizen — but if after such chance is given to all qualified nationals, IF there is still a shortage of required talent, then I think opening it up to non-citizens is beneficial and I agree that by doing so, you also tend to get the benefits of a wider range of work styles and product.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, LennyW said:

Somewhat of a moot point as the treaty was not renewed after 2005.

OK, I stand corrected. It was almost twenty years ago regarding the instance I  mentioned earlier.

I wonder if the US might eventually take some retaliatory measures?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, LennyW said:

Somewhat of a moot point as the treaty was not renewed after 2005.

The treaty elapsed in 2005 and there is no formal extension because that would be in conflict with most favored nation rules by the World Trade Organization (WTO). However, in case of policy changes, old structures are grandfathered.   As of today, it is still possible to utilize the Thai U.S. Treaty of Amity to set-up new “treaty companies”.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Withour well educated and trained and experianced foreigners in special fields in Thailand everything would colapse!!!!!!!! They close their eyes on the badly educated engineers and and and....

Houses can be only build by 3 to 3 meter poles.....otherwise no idea how a building can stand up in another way of constructing.....so even ever they needed foreigners to work for Thailand!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, LennyW said:

Somewhat of a moot point as the treaty was not renewed after 2005.

 

But the new bi-lateral free trade agreement protects the rights as were under the previous treaty, and therefore presumably the prohibited items too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

If you're on a retirement visa, you have finished working. You are retired.

Don't think they will be opening up jobs for retired expats ?

True. My personal interest to have a little more walking around money aside. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, observer90210 said:

Why not be fair and just by allowing foreigners to own one plot of land on which they would like to live their retirement ?

It's not half or one rai of land in samui  or Pattaya, it's the agricultural  land they are worried about.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Allowing foreigners to practice massage in Thailand, big mistake.

 

In most of the western countries massage parlours are just fronts for brothels. It wouldn`t be long before criminal western organisations start opening brothels under the guise of massage parlours and massage services, which to a degree the Thais are doing now, but not on the scale as operated presently in western countries.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.










×
×
  • Create New...