Thai PM urged to seek extradition of Tak Bai Massacre suspect from Japan at ASEAN Summits

[sonnybkk]

Hi guys, as most of you are more experienced expats here, I'd like to pick your brains a bit on this issue.

I'm offered a job, but the contract states that I have to stay at the job for 3 years, and if I leave before then I have to pay 300,000baht.. is this common or legal? Can they really go after me if I leave the company? Please kindly advise.

[ExpatJ]

That's very unsual- i've never heard of it before. Any chance you could tell us the company or if not, the type of business?

[bkkjames]

Are there two sides to the contract meaning if they fire you before its up do they have to pay you 300,000K?

This isn't the English Premiere League where players can just stop playing because they want to change clubs.

[Mario2008]

For how long is the contract?

[sonnybkk]

Thanks for the response guys.

@ExpatJ - it's a marketing agency.

@bkkjames - Unfortunately there is not, that's why I was wondering if something like this is valid or something I should raise an issue about.

[bkkjames]

Thanks for the response guys.

@ExpatJ - it's a marketing agency.

@bkkjames - Unfortunately there is not, that's why I was wondering if something like this is valid or something I should raise an issue about.

hmm your OP indicates you are not comfortable with this. I tend to agree with you. Proceed cautiously - I wouldn't sign such a thing personally. Do a little web search on the company to see what's being said about them.

[kudroz]

Although phrased different than what you wrote in your post, I know of a few companies having this in their employment agreements as a way to not have to pay the compulsory severance payment if you are dismissed without cause as required by Section 118 of the Labor Protection Act.

[Soutpeel]

Although phrased different than what you wrote in your post, I know of a few companies having this in their employment agreements as a way to not have to pay the compulsory severance payment if you are dismissed without cause as required by Section 118 of the Labor Protection Act.

Interesting thought, but would say contractually un-enforceable from a legal stand point.

[thaihome]

Usually these types of clauses in employment contracts are there if the company has invested in training time or other expense they have incurred in hiring and they would want to re-coup it in case you take the training or whatever and quit.

TH

[PattayaParent]

It may depend on the law of the country in which the contract is valid or in which it was executed

If it states Thai Law then check the Thai Labour Laws, if UK check UK Law, Chinese, Russian etc. etc.

It's an unusual clause and if it is contary to the Labour Law of the country which you are working in, or which you were employed in, may be unenforceable.

[samran]

If a company has flown you and your family over (business class), paid for shipping (door to door), provided accomodation (at great serviced apartment when you arrive, and then at an appartment costing 80,000 - 100,000 baht or more per month) and a range of other benefits above and beyond a salary (visas, cars, driver etc), then there often is some sort of payback clause if you don't serve out your time without a reasonable reason.

Now, if they aren't providing all of the above, then I wouldn't sign.

[kudroz]

Although phrased different than what you wrote in your post, I know of a few companies having this in their employment agreements as a way to not have to pay the compulsory severance payment if you are dismissed without cause as required by Section 118 of the Labor Protection Act.

Interesting thought, but would say contractually un-enforceable from a legal stand point.

Can you share your thoughts on why it wouldn't be enforceable? My understanding is that the employee would have a debt to his employer equal to the severance due by same employer in the case of a dismissal without cause. I have not investigated this, but this particular clause would fall onto the provisions of Commercial and Civil code of Thailand so even though the Labor Court rules in favor of unfair dismissal, the employee still has a debt with his employer that would nullify the severance payment.

[ExpatJ]

If a company has flown you and your family over (business class), paid for shipping (door to door), provided accomodation (at great serviced apartment when you arrive, and then at an appartment costing 80,000 - 100,000 baht or more per month) and a range of other benefits above and beyond a salary (visas, cars, driver etc), then there often is some sort of payback clause if you don't serve out your time without a reasonable reason.

Now, if they aren't providing all of the above, then I wouldn't sign.

Actually there are almost never formal payback issues for the type of expat job you describe if there is good reason for you leaving- there is no real need as the type of people hired for those jobs are generally already proven to be reliable. I have been lucky enough to have such packages.

But i have heard that some of the dodgy finance companies in Bangkok that cold call expats around the city- they pay staff on commission and have a problem as they pay air tickets for staff to come from abroad and the staff soon leave since its a thankless job- i can imagine these types of companies doing it.

To Soonybkk- is your salary mostly commission based?

Edited August 5, 2010 by ExpatJ

[jayinoz]

I have found that a return on payment for training services needed to be included and deducted from a salary. Upon them having the 3 months training then taking off within a year, as many did. Yet you very unlikely to get the amount back. Plus lets face it many simply try to gain a job, as opposed to getting any real training then expect your company to train you for free. This happens in a lot of professons, namely law, real estate, marketing, teaching, etc. The clause is enforceable yet would you pay them 30000bt after they trained you and you found another job- no way. Will they chase you or sue you for the money- I would if I trained you, So will they. Yet it is extra hassle for the employer but would be more worth the effort in chasing a 100K or 200K bt than 30K.

Therefore it is far better to have a yearly bonus clause as apart of the contract or end of contract bonus. Far better than trying to chase them for money. However in the event they feel obiliged to stay simply to get the bonus and are not producing. You have a clause that states that after 2 written warning you can dismiss them without pay. Then dismiss them before pay day. Sometimes you simply cannot be used as an employer by those who wish to take advantage.

Do you intent to leave after they provide you all the market services training for this area of the world- you will say No. Yet do you not think they deserve compensation for your lack of production and you being paid in this training. Typical question asked by an employee who wishes to look at other opportunities.

If you state you do not want it in the contract the employer will know your motives. Then you will not have employment. As I suspect you will be on 60-100K bt pm thus 30K bt should not be a lot to pay back for their compensation. Look at it from an employers point of view and if you managed the company.