"lazy" Thais...

[Jet Gorgon]

Funny. I thought Thais were lazy too, at first. Always sleeping in the afts, walking slowly, taking time. But, when I started going to the morning market, and heard that people got up at 3am to make curries, or slaughter animals, or prepare their produce for sale, I realised what was what. Smarter anyway; why work in the heat of the day? Some workers are go-getters, others are not. Same in any country.

In Japan, I was forced to work way longer hours because it was against custom to go home before the manager or boss. So, people spread out their work. Initially, I would finish in an hour and be antsy for something to do. Then, you learn to fit in; if you do too much, you belittle coworkers. Weird.

Still, I think Soundman and other employers here have a point. It must be a struggle to get things done.

[highdiver]

Work is translated in the Thai language as ngan. The word is associated with a lot of activities; ngan boon (merit), ngan pee mai (new year celebration), ngan sob (funeral), ngan kathin (a kind of group merit-making), ngan tang ngan (marriage) etc. Most of ngan would be associated with fun. You will see Thais work very hard but also laugh and smile at the same time. However, many foreigners take the view that Thais are not serious or concentrated and were careless about their work.

The thais are doing what most forigenrs have forgoten. they work to live and not live to work as so many people in weastern countries.

Thats the biggest load of twaddle I've read in a long time. Thais' are exactly the same as the rest of the world when it comes to wanting money, things etc etc. In fact in some ways they are worse.

What also contradicts your post is that back in europe most people work 9-6...occassionally some extra overtime. Here they do a minimum 10 hours a day, even when they don't have to.

Probably differant out in the sticks, but in BKK what you state just doesn't hold true.

please reads again.

i never said thais are not like others by working hard. they want things the same as every one.

I did say that in the Thai mentality work is associated even by the verbal term as something that they enjoy doing and they do so while smiling However, many foreigners take the view that Thais are not serious or concentrated and were careless about their work or presumed lazy.

Yes because its true and if you ask then about it they'll tell you the same! Its nothing to do with the word thats used to describe work

I beg to differ on your conclusions.

words area a reflection of mentality and a mirror of cultural behavior. and obviously Thais think and relate to things diferently then forigners.

learning thai not only enables you to speak directly but it allows you to understand how the thais feel and think. you may not agree with it but it will be make our life in LOS more easy.

the fact that you choose to ignore this can be because you dont understand the Thais or (and i hope not) because you are an arrogant farrnag that thinks that your culture, mentality and behaviour is superior. in whice case the Thais emplyees will just smile and do as little as possible as they dont respect you.

I belive that if you are doing business in thailand and use thai labour you should make an effort to understand the metality. its will be very beneficial.

if you are intrested PM and i will give you a contact of Thai coach that has done wonders for many forigners.

[ColPyat]

if you are intrested PM and i will give you a contact of Thai coach that has done wonders for many forigners.

I hope you are not trying to tell us, based on a amateurish linguistic analyzes and a Thai coach you know, that Thais have found the secret to enjoy mind numbing and back breaking work such as murderous shift work in the factories for little money any more than westerners do, because, well, because they are Thai, and that makes them different from the rest of humanity?

Because, that was what the thread is all about - comparatively bad working conditions, long hours and lack of labor laws in Thailand, which counter the assumption of many foreigners that Thais would be somewhat "lazy".

[peter991]

Interesting thread. During a trip to Issan, I considered the productivity of my extended Thai family. I asked why they only produced one crop of rice a year from their land.

The answer was you need a bore to bring up water to flood the rice paddies. I factored in the price of a bore, which would allow at least 2 rice crops a year and would quickly pay for itself.

My offer was flatly rejected. Their reason: We make enough money to live on with ONE crop a year - why work twice as hard?

Peter

[soundman]

Interesting thread. During a trip to Issan, I considered the productivity of my extended Thai family. I asked why they only produced one crop of rice a year from their land.

The answer was you need a bore to bring up water to flood the rice paddies. I factored in the price of a bore, which would allow at least 2 rice crops a year and would quickly pay for itself.

My offer was flatly rejected. Their reason: We make enough money to live on with ONE crop a year - why work twice as hard?

Peter

This is something that hasn't been brought up in this discussion yet.

I have been observing all the "rice farmers" where I live for five years now. When there is work to be done, they work from sun-up to sun-down & quite often beyond. Usually outside in stiffling heat & with only short water breaks.

However, once all is done, & the produce off to the markets - many (by no means all or even a majority) of these farmers fail to capatilise on the gains made & spend 2 - 4 months just hitting the piss & getting drunk from sun-up to sun-down.

So to balance it out - I'm not sure I'd call the "rice farmers" of Thailand the most consistent bunch of workers.

Cheers,

Soundman.

[ColPyat]

This is something that hasn't been brought up in this discussion yet.

I have been observing all the "rice farmers" where I live for five years now. When there is work to be done, they work from sun-up to sun-down & quite often beyond. Usually outside in stiffling heat & with only short water breaks.

However, once all is done, & the produce off to the markets - many (by no means all or even a majority) of these farmers fail to capatilise on the gains made & spend 2 - 4 months just hitting the piss & getting drunk from sun-up to sun-down.

So to balance it out - I'm not sure I'd call the "rice farmers" of Thailand the most consistent bunch of workers.

Cheers,

Soundman.

This depends on a lot of factors.

In areas that are under water management farmers work as much and long as government regulations allow them to plant their crops and draw water. In areas that only get monsoon water, there is only one planting period possible. Nature simply has its limitations. Outside the season people do occasional day labor jobs, if they are available. Which often they are not.

Another factor in the maybe 20% very poor Mu Bans in Thailand is that very few people there actually own land, and over the last decades very little government initiatives have reached these villages, so that a social collapse has started to set in a long time ago.

[soundman]

This depends on a lot of factors.

In areas that are under water management farmers work as much and long as government regulations allow them to plant their crops and draw water. In areas that only get monsoon water, there is only one planting period possible. Nature simply has its limitations. Outside the season people do occasional day labor jobs, if they are available. Which often they are not.

Another factor in the maybe 20% very poor Mu Bans in Thailand is that very few people there actually own land, and over the last decades very little government initiatives have reached these villages, so that a social collapse has started to set in a long time ago.

This is true. For my business the sales season co-incides with the off season for the local farmers. I employ many on 2 - 4 month contracts from October / November through March.

Works well actually, because these guys don't mind going away as part of a work gang for three to five day stints. (They still hit the lao kao pretty hard though)

Something else to consider for discussion with ref. to the poorer moo bahns is the squatters act, with people that have lived on land that doesn't belong to them in excess of ten consecutive years. Should these people be entitled to claim ownership?

Cheers,

Soundman.

[ColPyat]

Something else to consider for discussion with ref. to the poorer moo bahns is the squatters act, with people that have lived on land that doesn't belong to them in excess of ten consecutive years. Should these people be entitled to claim ownership?

Cheers,

Soundman.

There we have a hornet's nest.

The land right issues here are very under reported. Thailand desperately needs a proper land reform, and not just more bureaucracy that is sold as a land reform but in the end is as prone to corruption as it always was. Far too many people have no land, were cheated out of their land, were threatened int selling their land, were thrown out of their land by vested interests they cannot protest against, and yes, stupidly sold their land to cover gambling debts and similar.

Most new land opened is from so called degraded forests, but large land owner ship by business men, politicians, and the old sakdina families is never dealt with, even though often they illegally hold land reserved for the poor.

To answer your question, it depends. The land they own should not be given away without conditions. One condition would be that this land cannot be sold on the market for a certain period of time, and has to be worked on.

Very soon we will see increased land problems here, mainly in the South, when the refugees from the escalating conflict will need places to live.

[bina]

the farming/resting work style is common among almost all agricultural types from livestock, to crops to fishing... and in most countries except where technoagriculture has started. 20 years ago, when my (ex) husband was still working in the fields as everything from tractorist to weeds to bug control (an educated job) to managing the work crew, they worked 12-18 hours days every day . in the winter when our rains hit (november/december), they would work 5-8 hr days or not work at all, and sit around playing whist and visiting friends. it used to drive me beserk as i was working at the time in the factory and working 8 hr days all year round.

the tractors would be in shop; they would fix up the stations (kitchen/bathroom/rest areas); go to agri conventions, etc. but not really 'work'. nowadays, they have crops that rely on rain in winter and irrigation in summer so the work is all year round and mostly thai and arab workers doing the work. and the thai complain bitterly that they dont make the hours/wages in the winter as the work is still less.

we at the zoo also bust our butts in some seasons, maily tourist season and birthing season, and in the rainy season, sit around and fix things, go on vacations, do all our personal doctor dentist appointments, etc. cause no time in season. so there is something to be said about the cyclical way of working; also, making just enough to eat and live is not a new concept. not everyone thinks slaving away at whatever job it is (call it a career, a job, whatever u want, the point is to make enough money to be satisfied. some peoples' satisfaction level is just higher then others.)is worth the energy. and in some places that is culturally acceptable.

its true that being poor is not a very good thing... and having money for education and taking care of old people is. however, culturally speaking, being satisfied with what u have is the big western 'discovery' (the monk who sold his farari and all that) after dealing with career burnout. so the idea is good. be satisfied with twhat u ahve. in moderation. among the agricultural poor thai, they seem to have lost the impetus of trying for a bit more since, as colypat et al have said, they will never get near enough to it to make the extra work worth while, so enjoy what u've got at the 'here and now' moment. why bother to work harder. we have rice. we have veggies and a few chickens. everyone dies anyway.

when i point out the fact that if his family had more money, then A. with HIV could get better treatment, the answer was: everyone dies, theres nothing i can do about it, thats life, etcetc. and my husbands family are always busy doing something: when no work is to be found in fields, then i saw the father and mother making baskets and things; the daughter was sewing piece work. but they all did it when they felt like it. and i noticed that none of them work in an area with a boss. they are self employed and anon chafes at having a boss telling him to do different then he wants or thinks should be done.

which is like giving up before u've even tried cause it probably wont work anyway attitude.

as for land ownership: we bought the book (in thai) of land ownership laws so anon could figure out what his parents really have int he way of land (rice land vs. building a house land- two different things. and yes, there are squatters rights,and they are used. the problem is being beuracractically literate which most agric. thai are not.

(my husband will spend hours rewiring old washing machines and build his own parts; and will grind his own meat instead of buying a grinder and make his own hinges. thats not laziness. its a different defintion of what is important. and efficiency is not the key word).

just to point out to u all, that i live on kibbutz. i work long hard hours, and it drives anon bonkers that i dont get money for it, no overtime, no money. he doesnt understand my motivation is to do my job as well as i can, regardless of the monetary outcome. afterall, the kibbutz (we are fossils and still cooperative)pays for my kids' education, health, cultural activities. i pay for everything else, but have learned to live frugally. but as a collective, we have a swimming pool, tennis courts, riding lessons, three day field trips, etc. where most of us are failing is that most of the younger generation (argh!) want monetary rewards for their hard work. their motivation has caught up to the rest of the world as in: time = money and quality (maybe). and some of us older folks (well, the middle age group), who are now working in managieral positions with lots fo responsibility, want financial rewards as well, and dont want to work if there is no financial -as opposed to community recongnition- reward. and lots of people do the least amount possible since they dont get a financial reward. (the failure of the socialist system, as seen in the eastern block countries. how inefficient they can be!).

most of u are looking at work with the 'protestant work ethic' in mind. if u go by the way of my kibbutznik ex father in law WORK=LIFE. these same old geezers, when they finally stop working even in the gardens weeding, they threaten suicide. their own personal value is only based on work. how many old thai men threaten to kill themselves cause they are taken out of the work force cause they arent 'efficient' any more?

as for training the employees: as a dog/horse trainer, i can only say, u had better readjust your training methods (just ask nienke from the pet forum she can explain to u). cause if u were really training your employees, they would know how to do the work w/o having even wanted to learn. i just finished working with a man employed in my zoo who has 10% short term memory and other handicaps (special work program). he was able to learn most of the work (regular intelligence)albeit it took time, and wasnt the most efficient in the beginning as it was double work for me.

so i guess the definition of laziness and work have to be defined with cultural accents.

bina with yet another long winded post (waiting for the spaghetti sauce to cook while writing; dual tasking is just so efficient)

[soundman]

To answer your question, it depends. The land they own should not be given away without conditions. One condition would be that this land cannot be sold on the market for a certain period of time, and has to be worked on.

Very soon we will see increased land problems here, mainly in the South, when the refugees from the escalating conflict will need places to live.

I have no real understanding about the land ownership acts in Thailand, so therfore find it hard to put a constructive commentry together on the subject. And while I agree that people should have a place to live, I also think they should earn it.

I would like to highlight one situation that keeps cropping up for us.

My father in law is in the civil construction business - mainly roads & bridges. This requires large amounts of dirt for most projects. He buys large areas of land legitimately to be able to supply the dirt requirements of his business.

After he is finished with the land (if it hasn't turned into a gigantic swimming pool) its basically un-usable for agriculture. (could be used for building factories or housing though) He then forgets about it, the squatters arrive, & in ten years time he finds himself in court, trying to defend against losing his land to the squatter.

Would this be considered a genuine a case for the homeless aquiring land of their own or a case of lazy people trying to obtain land through a vague interpretation of a loop-hole in the law?

Cheers,

Soundman.

BTW - Informative post above by Bina. I had no idea what a kibbutz was.

[Mid]

Would this be considered a genuine a case for the homeless aquiring land of their own or a case of lazy people trying to obtain land through a vague interpretation of a loop-hole in the law?

I would consider this a problem that should not be occurring .

with proper regulations it wouldn't .

[ColPyat]

To answer your question, it depends. The land they own should not be given away without conditions. One condition would be that this land cannot be sold on the market for a certain period of time, and has to be worked on.

Very soon we will see increased land problems here, mainly in the South, when the refugees from the escalating conflict will need places to live.

I have no real understanding about the land ownership acts in Thailand, so therfore find it hard to put a constructive commentry together on the subject. And while I agree that people should have a place to live, I also think they should earn it.

I would like to highlight one situation that keeps cropping up for us.

My father in law is in the civil construction business - mainly roads & bridges. This requires large amounts of dirt for most projects. He buys large areas of land legitimately to be able to supply the dirt requirements of his business.

After he is finished with the land (if it hasn't turned into a gigantic swimming pool) its basically un-usable for agriculture. (could be used for building factories or housing though) He then forgets about it, the squatters arrive, & in ten years time he finds himself in court, trying to defend against losing his land to the squatter.

Would this be considered a genuine a case for the homeless aquiring land of their own or a case of lazy people trying to obtain land through a vague interpretation of a loop-hole in the law?

Cheers,

Soundman.

BTW - Informative post above by Bina. I had no idea what a kibbutz was.

There are many legitimate interests opposing each other - the one of the rich who have legally (and often not so) acquired land, and of the poor that have no chance of getting land. Laws have to regulate this, and they have to be enforced. Unfortunately laws here are insufficient, and mostly are not enforced anyhow.

I usually side with the poor, being the "socialist crusader" i am , naturally.

But personally, no disrespect to your father in law, there is tremendous ecological damage done here in Thailand, by especially the construction supply industry. I personally have difficulties to understand how agricultural viable land can be allowed to be destroyed.

My wife's family lost their last bit land when someone that cannot be protested against decided that the area they had their land is a forest reserve, and ordered the authorities to expulse them from their land without any compensation offered. What was conveniently forgotten was hat a nearby hill covered in prime forest, with numerous caves used since centuries as hermitages of monks, was allowed to be used as a quarry, and is now completely gone - flattened. Another hill is soon to be gone too.

[soundman]

But personally, no disrespect to your father in law, there is tremendous ecological damage done here in Thailand, by especially the construction supply industry. I personally have difficulties to understand how agricultural viable land can be allowed to be destroyed.

My wife's family lost their last bit land when someone that cannot be protested against decided that the area they had their land is a forest reserve, and ordered the authorities to expulse them from their land without any compensation offered. What was conveniently forgotten was hat a nearby hill covered in prime forest, with numerous caves used since centuries as hermitages of monks, was allowed to be used as a quarry, and is now completely gone - flattened. Another hill is soon to be gone too.

The bit about destroying agricultural viable land is easy to understand. (not that I condone it)

Buy it for 25K - 40K Baht per Rai. Make about 400B per year renting it out, or 2,500B - 5,000B per year working it yourself, or sell the dirt (considering a 3 - 5m deep excavation) for a profit of about 100K - 250K Baht. That's easy math.

What you have outlined above is terrible. It was one of the first things I noticed awry in Thailand when I first travelled through the countryside years ago. In some areas complete mountains had dissappeared (Saraburi). And in my whole time of travelling about Thailand I have yet to came accross any primary rain forest. I used to look forward to seeing a great mahogony tree. No chance. All secondary re-growth now.

Cheers,

Soundman.

[ColPyat]

The bit about destroying agricultural viable land is easy to understand. (not that I condone it)

Buy it for 25K - 40K Baht per Rai. Make about 400B per year renting it out, or 2,500B - 5,000B per year working it yourself, or sell the dirt (considering a 3 - 5m deep excavation) for a profit of about 100K - 250K Baht. That's easy math.

What you have outlined above is terrible. It was one of the first things I noticed awry in Thailand when I first travelled through the countryside years ago. In some areas complete mountains had dissappeared (Saraburi). And in my whole time of travelling about Thailand I have yet to came accross any primary rain forest. I used to look forward to seeing a great mahogony tree. No chance. All secondary re-growth now.

Cheers,

Soundman.

It is absolutely terrible, those and many similar things did contribute to the rise of Thaksin and the present mess, and will continue to haunt Thailand for the considerable future.

The difficulties are also in how many powerful factions are involved in this countrywide rape of people and nature, and that many involved factors cannot be talked about in public.

Edited June 11, 2007 by ColPyat