Dispute about sick leave and when a medical certificate is required

[Millian]

Hi,
 

I'm having a bit of a discussion with my employer who is saying I need to take unpaid leave for the sick leave I have taken this year.

 

As I understand by Thai labour Laws:

- There is a maximum of 30 days paid sick leave

- If you take 3 or more consecutive days off sick, you need a Doctor's note

 

However, my employer is saying it is a total of 3 days on any dates, not 3 days consecutively.  So, they are saying you're allowed 3 days off sick on any dates, then any other sick days after that you need a Doctor's note, even if it's a single day.

When I google the question I find several results that state it's 3 days consecutively, such as:

Quote

If the employee is out for 3 or more consecutive days, the employer has the right to request a medical certificate

https://www.globalization-partners.com/globalpedia/thailand-employer-of-record/



However, when I check the English Translation on the Thai Government website, it's a bit more ambiguous:
 

Quote

For sick leave of three days or more, the Employer may require the Employee to produce a certificate from a first class physician or an official medical establishment.

https://www.labour.go.th/attachments/article/47756/The Labour Protection Act B.E. 2541.pdf

Now, I'd say this isn't really ambiguous, it's clearly meant to mean consecutive days. However, the way it's written could mean someone could mistake it for 3 days in totality (or take it that way when trying to worm out of paying sick leave!)

 

Lots of other websites also use this ambiguous wording.   

Does anyone know of any other official documents or websites that make it clear it's 3 or more consecutive days?

Thank you

[Nonthaburi Boy]

It is quite clear that the act means 3 consecutive days. Also they are not allowed to request a medical certificate if you take 1-2 days’ leave - until you have reached the limit of 30 days in a year. Not allowed. A lot of management have trouble with this when sick leave is frequent but they need to suck it up and find other solutions.

 

Just show them this

https://www.thaigov.go.th/news/contents/details/41095

 

Note if you are a short-term employee or a contractor this may not apply - you might (theoretically only) have no right to sick leave and they kindly decided to give you some with weird restrictions, but that does not sound like it is the case.

 

 

 

[Bill97]

Win the sick leave argument and loose your nod.

[warrima]

Stop playing the system and go to work. A sore throat, hangover or a wee cold is no reason for a day off. You are making yourself unemployable. What business could cope with an employee taking 30 days sick leave plus annual leave. 

[Millian]

1 hour ago, warrima said:

Stop playing the system and go to work. A sore throat, hangover or a wee cold is no reason for a day off. You are making yourself unemployable. What business could cope with an employee taking 30 days sick leave plus annual leave. 

I am not playing the system, nor did I take 30 days off. I took 7 days throughout the year.

 

No did I take off any Mondays, which might suggest a hangover.

 

Also to note I work for a Health company who actively encourage their employers to look after themselves if they are sick, or stressed by taking time off work when needed.

 

Thanks for your constructive feedback nonetheless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Millian]

1 hour ago, Bill97 said:

Win the sick leave argument and loose your nod.

What is nod in the context? Google was no help here.

[Millian]

2 hours ago, Nonthaburi Boy said:

It is quite clear that the act means 3 consecutive days. Also they are not allowed to request a medical certificate if you take 1-2 days’ leave - until you have reached the limit of 30 days in a year. Not allowed. A lot of management have trouble with this when sick leave is frequent but they need to suck it up and find other solutions.

 

Just show them this

https://www.thaigov.go.th/news/contents/details/41095

 

Note if you are a short-term employee or a contractor this may not apply - you might (theoretically only) have no right to sick leave and they kindly decided to give you some with weird restrictions, but that does not sound like it is the case.

 

 

 

Thanks for link. Although the HR dept are in Vietnam so may struggle with that, although the translation is clear.

 

Yes, I'm a full time employee for 2 years.

[cleopatra2]

31 minutes ago, Millian said:

I am not playing the system, nor did I take 30 days off. I took 7 days throughout the year.

 

No did I take off any Mondays, which might suggest a hangover.

 

Also to note I work for a Health company who actively encourage their employers to look after themselves if they are sick, or stressed by taking time off work when needed.

 

Thanks for your constructive feedback nonetheless.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The office of council of state uses the same terminology.  It is unlikely you will find an official translation which will differ.

 

On a brief reading of the English translation it looks ambiguous.

"Leave" means a day upon which an employee takes sick leave, leave for
sterilization, leave to attend necessary personal business, leave for military service, leave for
training or developing his/her knowledge and ability, or maternity leave.

 

The issue here is that Leave is being counted as days , not periods of leave.

 

Section 57

An employer shall pay an employee his/her wage for a day of
sick leave referred to in Section 32 at a rate equal to the wage for a normal working day for
the entire period of time taken as sick leave but not exceeding thirty working days each
year.

 

Here we can see the term 'period ' in use.

 

section 32 (part)

An employee is entitled to sick leave on days that he/she is actually ill. For sick leave taken for three or more working days, the employer may require     that the employee show a medical certificate

 

Here it simply states 3 days or more

It is unclear what the drafters intended. It could be just a poorly drafted act or translation.

I would recommend trying to decipher the Thai language version, as that is the version in law.

[cleopatra2]

42 minutes ago, cleopatra2 said:

The office of council of state uses the same terminology.  It is unlikely you will find an official translation which will differ.

 

On a brief reading of the English translation it looks ambiguous.

"Leave" means a day upon which an employee takes sick leave, leave for
sterilization, leave to attend necessary personal business, leave for military service, leave for
training or developing his/her knowledge and ability, or maternity leave.

 

The issue here is that Leave is being counted as days , not periods of leave.

 

Section 57

An employer shall pay an employee his/her wage for a day of
sick leave referred to in Section 32 at a rate equal to the wage for a normal working day for
the entire period of time taken as sick leave but not exceeding thirty working days each
year.

 

Here we can see the term 'period ' in use.

 

section 32 (part)

An employee is entitled to sick leave on days that he/she is actually ill. For sick leave taken for three or more working days, the employer may require     that the employee show a medical certificate

 

Here it simply states 3 days or more

It is unclear what the drafters intended. It could be just a poorly drafted act or translation.

I would recommend trying to decipher the Thai language version, as that is the version in law.

from the thai text it means a period of 3 consecutive days

 

here is the relevant text

มําตรํา ๓๒ ให้ลูกจ้ํางมีสิทธิลําป่วยได้เท่ําที่ป่วยจริง กํารลําป่วยตั้งแต่สํามวันท ํางําน
ขึ้นไป นํายจ้ํางอําจให้ลูกจ้ํางแสดงใบรับรองของแพทย์แผนปัจจุบันชั้นหนึ่งหรือของสถํานพยําบําล
ของทํางรําชกําร ในกรณีที่ลูกจ้ํางไม่อําจแสดงใบรับรองของแพทย์แผนปัจจุบันชั้นหนึ่งหรือของ
สถํานพยําบําลของทํางรําชกํารได้ ให้ลูกจ้ํางชี้แจงให้นํายจ้ํางทรําบ

 

sorry this site will not let me link to the Krisdika site where the act is

 

 

[warrima]

1 hour ago, Millian said:

Also to note I work for a Health company who actively encourage their employers to look after themselves if they are sick, or stressed by taking time off work when needed.

Well that's a paradox then. This is the same company your complaining about calling you out on your sick leave ????

[Millian]

10 hours ago, cleopatra2 said:

from the thai text it means a period of 3 consecutive days

 

here is the relevant text

มําตรํา ๓๒ ให้ลูกจ้ํางมีสิทธิลําป่วยได้เท่ําที่ป่วยจริง กํารลําป่วยตั้งแต่สํามวันท ํางําน
ขึ้นไป นํายจ้ํางอําจให้ลูกจ้ํางแสดงใบรับรองของแพทย์แผนปัจจุบันชั้นหนึ่งหรือของสถํานพยําบําล
ของทํางรําชกําร ในกรณีที่ลูกจ้ํางไม่อําจแสดงใบรับรองของแพทย์แผนปัจจุบันชั้นหนึ่งหรือของ
สถํานพยําบําลของทํางรําชกํารได้ ให้ลูกจ้ํางชี้แจงให้นํายจ้ํางทรําบ

 

sorry this site will not let me link to the Krisdika site where the act is

 

 

Thanks for that.
 

[Millian]

10 hours ago, warrima said:

Well that's a paradox then. This is the same company your complaining about calling you out on your sick leave ????

Yeah it's a bit odd. Although the HR dept is in our HQ in Vietnam, where the labour laws differ.

 

I don't think its an issue of taking sick lave, simply the specifics of when a Dr's note is required, and their interpretation of the English wording.