Teachers Don'T Need Work Permits.

[appropriate]

Sunbelt mearly states the rules, as given by the Thai government.

Yup. Perhaps Thaivisa need to contact the BoI.

Perhaps the OP forgets that being on mission (to teach) is not the same as performing a mission or duty.

Please explain how you feel 'occupying a profession which is performing any duty as a benefit to education' doesn't include being a teacher?

And btw, you need to read the point again, there is no mention of being 'on a mission' with this point. You're looking at the one above it.

Persons who enter the Kingdom for the performance of any duty or mission for the benefit of education, culture, arts, or sports

No mention of being on a mission there I'm afraid.

Edited April 9, 2011 by appropriate

[Mario2008]

Working (as a teacher) does not equals performing a mission or duty.

[WarpSpeed]

I think too many mods are in denial or defense mode. The OP isn't accusing anyone of false or inaccurate information as I see it, merely using the posted information to make his point..

As per usual though all Governments specifically write in ambiguity into their laws to give them wiggly room to worm out of their obligation should it become a legal question, these laws are written by wiggly lawyers after all..

[WarpSpeed]

Working (as a teacher) does not equals performing a mission or duty.

Teaching is not a duty?? Hmm I guess that's where most teachers are falling short these days then?? Too much a "job" and enough "duty" to go with it ..

Edited April 9, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[jdinasia]

Sunbelt mearly states the rules, as given by the Thai government.

Yup. Perhaps Thaivisa need to contact the BoI.

Perhaps the OP forgets that being on mission (to teach) is not the same as performing a mission or duty.

Please explain how you feel 'occupying a profession which is performing any duty as a benefit to education' doesn't include being a teacher?

And btw, you need to read the point again, there is no mention of being 'on a mission' with this point. You're looking at the one above it.

Persons who enter the Kingdom for the performance of any duty or mission for the benefit of education, culture, arts, or sports

No mention of being on a mission there I'm afraid.

The nice thing is, when you stop beating your head against the wall, the pain will stop

If your government brings you in to teach at a school on embassy grounds etc to teach, it will be your duty. When you apply for a job teaching it will be your privilege to work and your duty to have a WP

[Tywais]

I think too many mods are in denial or defense mode. The OP isn't accusing anyone of false or inaccurate information as I see it, merely using the posted information to make his point..

It's his interpretation and as far as I'm concerned it is an incorrect one based on experience and "letter of the law". What is a concern with this topic is if some feel they do not need a work permit to teach and get arrested for doing so because of what is posted here. Telling labor/immigration that they are wrong because it is on Thaivisa isn't going to cut it.

[appropriate]

Working (as a teacher) does not equals performing a mission or duty.

Teaching isn't a duty for the benefit of education?

How do you work that out?

What does a teacher perform then? other than a duty for the benefit of education, which apparently you say they don't.

Being a teacher isn't a duty (for the benefit of education), sorry mate, but that's a classic!

Edited April 9, 2011 by appropriate

[appropriate]

because it is on Thaivisa

nope, it's on the Thai government's BoI information page.

[jdinasia]

because it is on Thaivisa

nope, it's on the Thai government's BoI information page.

No .. your interpretation of what is on the BOI page is the issue,

Your assumption that teachers in normal schools where they apply for a job and work for pay in Thailand are covered by the BOI statement is flawed. It isn't your duty or mission to teach under those circumstances, it is your privilege/job to work in that profession and thus not covered under the intent.

However, if you feel so strongly that your case is valid, feel free to test it by becoming a test case for the law in question

edit to add, although TVF has a disclaimer about information on this page as part of the ToS, I think this thread belongs in the Pub and not the visa section

Edited April 9, 2011 by jdinasia

[Mario2008]

The OP can try out how a Thai judge thinks about his statements. The bad news is he can get up to 5 years in jail and a fine of up to 100,000 baht if his arguments fail (which they will).

[appropriate]

No .. your interpretation of what is on the BOI page is the issue,

Nope. It's right there in black and white.

Your assumption that teachers in normal schools where they apply for a job and work for pay in Thailand are covered by the BOI statement is flawed.

Their statement clearly states 'exemptions' and 'any duty for the benefit of education...'. Performing such duties therefore fall under such. It is also accredited to: 'The Alien Occupation Law', not a BoI law.

So sorry, your claim of it being only a BoI statement is flawed. The exemptions act was an updated version of the Alien Occupation Law, adopted in 1978..

It isn't your duty or mission to teach under those circumstances, it is your privilege/job to work in that profession and thus not covered under the intent.

Incorrect.

A contract will clearly state: Employee's Duties. The duties the employees are contracted to uphold. (Not employee's privileges). These are your legal duties under such a contract, and as teacher they will presumably include teaching.

So sorry, you're incorrect.

Edited April 9, 2011 by appropriate

[jdinasia]

Appropriate --- then feel free to work without a WP, get arrested, and fight YOUR interpretation of what they mean in court The consequences if you are wrong might be dire .. but as they say "up to you!"

[jdinasia]

The OP can try out how a Thai judge thinks about his statements. The bad news is he can get up to 5 years in jail and a fine of up to 100,000 baht if his arguments fail (which they will).

With the additional possibilities of being deported (at his expense -- and only to the country he entered Thailand on a passport from; and blacklisting ...

But if he feels so strongly that he is right and that the English interpretation of the Thai law will cover him .....

[appropriate]

Appropriate --- then feel free to work without a WP, get arrested, and fight YOUR interpretation of what they mean in court The consequences if you are wrong might be dire .. but as they say "up to you!"

Sorry, this and others are offhand comments that add nothing but the poster's inability to answer the questions, and reply sensibly to the topic.

I find no need for childish 'well do this then if that;s what you think' comments when asked to give information on your statements.

If you cannot reply reasonably to the questioning of your points, that screams rather loudly that your points aren't valid.

Thanks.

[jdinasia]

Appropriate --- then feel free to work without a WP, get arrested, and fight YOUR interpretation of what they mean in court The consequences if you are wrong might be dire .. but as they say "up to you!"

Sorry, this and others are offhand comments that add nothing but the poster's inability to answer the questions, and reply sensibly to the topic.

I find no need for childish 'well do this then if that;s what you think' comments when asked to give information on your statements.

If you cannot reply reasonably to the questioning of your points, that screams rather loudly that your points aren't valid.

Thanks.

No, it screams that I do not agree with your interpretation of a Thai Law translated into English or the actuality of how it will be enforced. Again, if you feel so strongly that your interpretation is correct, then test it.

To use your type of argument against you : If you do not believe in your argument enough to test it, you must not have any faith that your interpretation of the law is correct. (rather loudly)

[appropriate]

No, it screams that I do not agree with your interpretation of a Thai Law translated into English

You have highlighted your points which I have proven to be incorrect.

In return you have reverted to childlike 'well go and do it then' retorts.

To use your type of argument against you : If you do not believe in your argument enough to test it, you must not have any faith that your interpretation of the law is correct. (rather loudly)

Well, no.

1) becoming a teacher, umm, no thanks.

2) I don't believe many officials in Thailand actually know their own laws themselves. The legal system included.

Edited April 9, 2011 by appropriate

[jdinasia]

You haven't proven anything to be incorrect, appropriate, you have only made a point about your interpretation of what the Thai law translated into English means. If you would like to PROVE it, it would take a test case. I understand that you may not be committed enough to your opinion to volunteer yourself to be the test case, but that is something that should be considered as well! You wouldn't have to be a teacher long! A day or two would suffice probably. Just get someone to let you teach, even as a volunteer for a little while and have someone else report you to MoL and Immigration, You could even make the report yourself.

You are presenting a "theory" on your interpretation of the meaning of the Thai law written into English. Your theory could cause people to not only get in trouble, but potentially blacklisted from Thailand. The burden of proof is on you.

[appropriate]

You haven't proven anything to be incorrect, appropriate, you have only made a point about your interpretation of what the Thai law translated into English means. If you would like to PROVE it, it would take a test case. I understand that you may not be committed enough to your opinion to volunteer yourself to be the test case, but that is something that should be considered as well! You wouldn't have to be a teacher long! A day or two would suffice probably. Just get someone to let you teach, even as a volunteer for a little while and have someone else report you to MoL and Immigration, You could even make the report yourself.

Again with the immature and unrealistic retorts. Did you not read point 2 in my post above, or just ignoring it?

You are presenting a "theory" on your interpretation of the meaning of the Thai law written into English.

No, I am highlighting that the Thai government, by way of their English BoI website which lists the Alien Occupation Act 1973 declare that 'professionals performing any duty for the benefit of eduction is exempt from work permit requirements'.

Some posters have tried to say this doesn't include teachers, when I have shown that it does, they have ignored it and retorted with childish nonsense.

Your theory could cause people to not only get in trouble, but potentially blacklisted from Thailand

Just as much as washing the windows in your wife's house or driving her in her car.

And btw for this:

You haven't proven anything to be incorrect

You need to look at the responses in post 71.

Which you have ignored and since reverted to 5 yr old child-esque 'well go and do it then' which indicates that you can't reply to it sensibly.

Edited April 9, 2011 by appropriate

[jdinasia]

Again, you are interpreting an English translation of a Thai law and it is ONLY a theory on your part. A test case is required for it to be anything other than your theory, which I disagree with.

If you want to talk about childish, please feel free to look at how you ended your last post. You are making a statement of FACT that is truthfully just your opinion. Your statement of FACT could lead to people being blacklisted from Thailand, as has happened to teachers working without a WP.

[appropriate]

The reply to this was also a child like 'well go and do it then'. Can you answer the questions and back up your points or not?

Working (as a teacher) does not equals performing a mission or duty.

Teaching isn't a duty for the benefit of education?

How do you work that out?

What does a teacher perform then? other than a duty for the benefit of education, which apparently you say they don't.

Being a teacher isn't a duty (for the benefit of education), sorry mate, but that's a classic!

[appropriate]

Again, you are interpreting an English translation of a Thai law and it is ONLY a theory on your part.

Again, I'm not.

I've asked for what interpretations others seem to draw on it and all I get back when proving them to be incorrect is 'go and do it then'.

If you want to talk about childish, please feel free to look at how you ended your last post. You are making a statement of FACT that is truthfully just your opinion.

Nope. By legal definition that would constitute work, as WPs aren't available for those positions, and they aren't on the exemption list it is a sound comment.

Your statement of FACT could lead to people being blacklisted from Thailand, as has happened to teachers working without a WP.

I would appreciate a link to any teachers being blacklisted for working without a WP, where other charges (fake degrees etc.) aren't included. Thanks. The internet's a big place I'm sure they'd be on there. One at least... go on.

Edited April 9, 2011 by appropriate

[Tywais]

Enough of this round robin affair. As I consider it dangerous misinformation this topic is closed. It could possibly be re-opened if a formal Thai version of the law is supplied.

//Closed//