Thailand KFC Faces Employee Lawsuit For Unfair Practices

[Ulysses G.]

If the wages and benefits are fair by Thai standards why are the workers of other restaurant chains not making the same fuss?

If the KFC employees win, the other chains will be jumping on board in no time.

[cardholder]

Apologies again gentlemen. You have asked questions about thai KFC in comparison to oz to indicate that thai workers receive the same legal obligations and therefore are no worse off.

I note your posts requesting the information remain however I'm afraid it seems your questions must go unanswered as my response has been deleted.

I will just leave it to you to use your imagination as to whether thai workers are treated the same under the KFC global franchise.

I am not sure what it would achieve to have the information.

Conditions cannot be the same across the globe. Local laws and practices will dictate such conditions and they will be different in OZ, compared to Spain, UK and Thailand.

At least it is encouraging to note that a Thai employee is at liberty to move to Oz if they want to secure more favourable terms of employment.

Harder for the males, perhaps, but many Thai ladies have earned much increased wages by following their teeraks to Western countries.

[Wallaby]

I didn't ask the questions so you would have to ask Kuffki, he asked, and mentioned other things like meal allowances not provided. I posted linkes to show otherwise it seems that isn't allowed.

I don't want to put words in his mouth but I assume his point being that every country has their own laws regarding a KFC franchise and each of those franchises act according to those laws, Thailand does the same, acts according to Thai laws.

My post pointed out that in oz they don't get minimum wage, they get above that. Which indicates KFC treats the Thai workers less favourably. He also said that they wouldn't get a meal allowance in oz but I had a link to show that after 2 hours overtime a meal allowance is required by law.

You are correct that conditions are different but I think the points being made are that each country is on minimum wage, no travel, no meal allowances etc.

My post pointed out that this is not correct, that KFC pays above minimum wage and gives other benefits, therefore, KFC in Thailand is not treating it's workers as they do in other countries.

But for reasons unknown to me I am unable to post this information with links to substantiate.

Maybe the links weren't allowed. I have no idea.

I suppose my word won't be enough.

Edited May 11, 2011 by Wallaby

[kuffki]

I didn't ask the questions so you would have to ask Kuffki, he asked, and mentioned other things like meal allowances not provided. I posted linkes to show otherwise it seems that isn't allowed.

I don't want to put words in his mouth but I assume his point being that every country has their own laws regarding a KFC franchise and each of those franchises act according to those laws, Thailand does the same, acts according to Thai laws.

My post pointed out that in oz they don't get minimum wage, they get above that. Which indicates KFC treats the Thai workers less favourably. He also said that they wouldn't get a meal allowance in oz but I had a link to show that after 2 hours overtime a meal allowance is required by law.

You are correct that conditions are different but I think the points being made are that each country is on minimum wage, no travel, no meal allowances etc.

My post pointed out that this is not correct, that KFC pays above minimum wage and gives other benefits, therefore, KFC in Thailand is not treating it's workers as they do in other countries.

But for reasons unknown to me I am unable to post this information with links to substantiate.

Maybe the links weren't allowed. I have no idea.

I suppose my word won't be enough.

Thai KFC also pays above award wage. Minimum wage in Thailand is 200 baht, they get 216(based on 8 hour work day)

Oz wages can hardly be called above when its 0.26cent more then the minimum

Thai KFC Staff gets free meal, which as it so happens they do not like, yet every Thai during their lunch break runs out to buy noodles.

So there is no abuse or breaking any rules or laws.

you will also note they managed to get 250 signatures, yet none of those have come forward or started to protest.

Also important to note, that considering that every KFC store has something like 30-50 employees thats 5 stores out of hundreds country wide.

[Ulysses G.]

My post pointed out that this is not correct, that KFC pays above minimum wage and gives other benefits, therefore, KFC in Thailand is not treating it's workers as they do in other countries.

I think that in this case, "minimum wage" means the minimum that they can get away with.

Edited May 11, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Wallaby]

My post pointed out that this is not correct, that KFC pays above minimum wage and gives other benefits, therefore, KFC in Thailand is not treating it's workers as they do in other countries.

I think that in this case, "minimum wage" means the minimum that they can get away with.

Aint that the truth.

[jdinasia]

My post pointed out that this is not correct, that KFC pays above minimum wage and gives other benefits, therefore, KFC in Thailand is not treating it's workers as they do in other countries.

I think that in this case, "minimum wage" means the minimum that they can get away with.

from the OP

The complainants, who previously supervised 33 KFC branches with 900 workers in Bangkok, Samut Prakan and Pathum Thani, claimed that employees were given an unfair wage of merely Bt27 per hour or Bt5,200 a month.

5200/27= 192.5 hours a month or 45 hours a week

If the company is avoiding minimum wage (which contrary to what was stated by others as 200Baht/day -- actually varies per province) by calling the employees part/time -----

Plus the company is "setting up a social security fund" from NEXT January ---- etc ...

Yeah ......KFC's franchisee might lose BIG on this one.

Why aren't other chain store's people making a fuss? Wait .... they will.

[Wallaby]

Thai KFC also pays above award wage. Minimum wage in Thailand is 200 baht, they get 216(based on 8 hour work day)

Oz wages can hardly be called above when its 0.26cent more then the minimum

Thai KFC Staff gets free meal, which as it so happens they do not like, yet every Thai during their lunch break runs out to buy noodles.

So there is no abuse or breaking any rules or laws.

you will also note they managed to get 250 signatures, yet none of those have come forward or started to protest.

Also important to note, that considering that every KFC store has something like 30-50 employees thats 5 stores out of hundreds country wide.

I won't post the link as my other posts may have been deleted because of that, I don't know but if you look at KFC Staff Benefits on google you will note that they are offering rewards and bonus'. I see in the UK they have a bonus of up to 200 quid. They have put in many more benefits to get some staff loyalty as they believe it is beneficial to their business etc. All this is over and above their salary and not required by law.

I don't think KFC is doing the same in Thailand. Of course it would be silly to expect a bonus of that amount as we must look at the cost of living etc but I just wonder what, if any, KFC in Thailand are doing in the same vein.

By the way, 26 cents an hour above the wage is the minimum, some get about $4 an hour more and that is just for permanent work, casuals get about 20% more again. Take the 26 cents an hour away from them and see if they think it isn't much. Better in the emplyees pocket than out of it.

It seems to me that whilst KFC is a global franchise the Thai chapter is sadly lacking yet the cost of the 'food' is relative to the cost in western countries.

I am not cold hearted, I have a lot of empathy for those that work to scrape a living. That is my 27 baht worth anyway.

Edited May 11, 2011 by Wallaby

[kuffki]

Thai KFC also pays above award wage. Minimum wage in Thailand is 200 baht, they get 216(based on 8 hour work day)

Oz wages can hardly be called above when its 0.26cent more then the minimum

Thai KFC Staff gets free meal, which as it so happens they do not like, yet every Thai during their lunch break runs out to buy noodles.

So there is no abuse or breaking any rules or laws.

you will also note they managed to get 250 signatures, yet none of those have come forward or started to protest.

Also important to note, that considering that every KFC store has something like 30-50 employees thats 5 stores out of hundreds country wide.

I won't post the link as my other posts may have been deleted because of that, I don't know but if you look at KFC Staff Benefits on google you will note that they are offering rewards and bonus'. I see in the UK they have a bonus of up to 200 quid. They have put in many more benefits to get some staff loyalty as they believe it is beneficial to their business etc. All this is over and above their salary and not required by law.

I don't think KFC is doing the same in Thailand. Of course it would be silly to expect a bonus of that amount as we must look at the cost of living etc but I just wonder what, if any, KFC in Thailand are doing in the same vein.

By the way, 26 cents an hour above the wage is the minimum, some get about $4 an hour more and that is just for permanent work, casuals get about 20% more again. Take the 26 cents an hour away from them and see if they think it isn't much. Better in the emplyees pocket than out of it.

It seems to me that whilst KFC is a global franchise the Thai chapter is sadly lacking yet the cost of the 'food' is relative to the cost in western countries.

I am not cold hearted, I have a lot of empathy for those that work to scrape a living. That is my 27 baht worth anyway.

You forget that Thai way of "doing business" is little different to other countries

Ever heard of customer complaints department or customer retention department in Thailand? i have not. Even the real bad wolves like banks who make billion of dollars profit not baht do not have that and by the way tellers who must have a degree are only on 15 k per month salary.

so if Thai business do not even take care of the customer, why would they treat staff any better.

I am sure managers have a bonus system in place but i doubt everyone else has. How would one assess their performance? base it on the amount of burgers sold? or the least amount of sick days taken

Edited May 11, 2011 by kuffki

[cardholder]

you will also note they managed to get 250 signatures, yet none of those have come forward or started to protest.

Also important to note, that considering that every KFC store has something like 30-50 employees thats 5 stores out of hundreds country wide.

I wonder how many were 'put up to it'.

[cardholder]

Yeah ......KFC's franchisee might lose BIG on this one.

Why aren't other chain store's people making a fuss? Wait .... they will.

Highly unlikely.

There are many existing franchises in Thailand, operating on a similar basis, and none have suffered so far. KDC has been around for a while.

If staff want to walk away, from what they consider to be unsatisfactory terms of employment, there is a ready supply of Thais to willingly step into their shoes (for 27 Baht an hour).

At least KFC employees don't have to give a security deposit, like some businesses require.

[jdinasia]

Yeah ......KFC's franchisee might lose BIG on this one.

Why aren't other chain store's people making a fuss? Wait .... they will.

Highly unlikely.

There are many existing franchises in Thailand, operating on a similar basis, and none have suffered so far. KDC has been around for a while.

If staff want to walk away, from what they consider to be unsatisfactory terms of employment, there is a ready supply of Thais to willingly step into their shoes (for 27 Baht an hour).

At least KFC employees don't have to give a security deposit, like some businesses require.

Not unlikely at all IMHO. If it can be showed that they are working staff 45 hours a week at 27/baht an hour they will well and truly be screwed.

There is the standard Thai solution still available though .... a fine (not excessive) and major changes in the structure all around. If, as the OP suggests, they are avoiding some labor laws by labeling FT employees as PT .... they will take some major hits in Labor Court on top of what happens on a corporate level.

Then there is the risk to Yum ... if this gets enough negative press it would certainly activate some clauses in the franchise agreement about causing damage to the property name

[cardholder]

Not unlikely at all IMHO. If it can be showed that they are working staff 45 hours a week at 27/baht an hour they will well and truly be screwed.

Whoa! JD .

May 1st, Abhisit policy announcement:-

A 25-per-cent hike would mean the minimum wage in Bangkok would rise to more than Bt250 per day from the current Bt216.

8 x 27 = 216 Baht - where has the law been breached.

These employees were complaining about having to eat rice and noodles, and being "let go" because they got a 250 signature petition together.

[luckizuchinni]

Even when using "earnings" in no way do the top 400 make 50% of the nation's earnings. With the top 400 earning around $140 billion and the total national personal earnings being $5.8 trillion, that is still only at 2.5%. Huge for only 400 people, but nowhere near 50%.

What ever!!! The point being that a very small number of people have a huge amount of the wealth. And they really don't need it.

The Wealth Distribution

In the United States, wealth is highly concentrated in a relatively few hands. As of 2007, the top 1% of households (the upper class) owned 34.6% of all privately held wealth, and the next 19% (the managerial, professional, and small business stratum) had 50.5%, which means that just 20% of the people owned a remarkable 85%, leaving only 15% of the wealth for the bottom 80% (wage and salary workers). In terms of financial wealth (total net worth minus the value of one's home), the top 1% of households had an even greater share: 42.7%. Table 1 and Figure 1 present further details drawn from the careful work of economist Edward N. Wolff at New York University (2010).

Bill Gates is a poor example to use. He is a convicted Federal felon. His programs suck. I was there at the beginning. When his dos was the worst of 3 operating systems. Even IBM dos was better than his. And DR dos was waaaaay better. But his mother was on the board of directors or something high up in IBM. She got his foot in the door and they used his dos instead of upgrading their own. His programs are for the most part "crap". But, this is off topic.

Other less famous people have contributed way more to computers. But to get back on the topic. If the top guys shared more they would have more loyal staff. Some of them do that. Some companies have great profit sharing plans.

I worked for a company that did that in the 60's. I was gettng paid as much money in the 60's as I was making in 2006. Plus I got a cost of living allowance that I actually lived on all over the world. After 6 years with the company you got profit sharing. Guys who had 10-12 years with the company made more on profit sharing than on their salary. If KFC institued something like that they wouldn't have problems with their staff. When people know that their bonus at the end of the year depends on the company making profit they make sure that no one steals things etc.

It comes down to treating your employees with respect!!!! You set the rules that everyone abides by, you enforce the rules and you treat the people with respect.

I did a study for one company I worked with just before I retired. I checked with companies that had profit sharing plans. Everyone of those companies had long lines of people waiting to get in and no one wanting to get out. It works.

Zing! "Whatever!" What a great comeback!

You were shown by another poster that your posts were, shall we say, less than accurate, and you come back with that well thought out rejoinder!

You keep spouting off about treating your employees right. And yea, that is right out of Business 101. But you are ignoring some major facts here. First is that KFC is paying more than the minimum wage her in Thailand. If it is not enough, then the government should raise the minimum wage. Why should KFC take it upon themselves to be a charity instead of a business?

As long as there are workers who want to work, and as long as KFC obeys the law, then why should they do different? The company has a fiduciary responsibility to its stockholders, so you can say that by wasting money, they are actually going against what they are legally supposed to do.

As far as I can see, KFC does not have a problem with its employees. These are a few people out of how many thousands of employees? I don't seem to see any labor shortage when I go there.

I absolutely agree, from a business sense, if nothing else, that if you are running a business with skilled employees, then you should try to make those workers as happy as possible to keep them as long as possible. However, KFC works under a different business model. KFC uses unskilled workers, workers who do not plan on making KFC a career. The place hires youngsters who need a bit of baht or who need to get their feet wet in the working world. They work for a bit, then leave. So there is no real imperative for them to go overboard to keep their employees loyal. The employees will leave anyway to be replaced by new ones.

If the labor pool suddenly dries up, then maybe they need to look at things differently. But as ti is, and as long as they stay legal in wages and treatment of the workers, then nothing is really wrong.

I worked at KFC many years ago. I was happy to make a few bucks, and not once did it cross my mind to make KFC a career. I just needed money to buy a used car, and KFC gave me that.

[jdinasia]

Not unlikely at all IMHO. If it can be showed that they are working staff 45 hours a week at 27/baht an hour they will well and truly be screwed.

Whoa! JD .

May 1st, Abhisit policy announcement:-

A 25-per-cent hike would mean the minimum wage in Bangkok would rise to more than Bt250 per day from the current Bt216.

8 x 27 = 216 Baht - where has the law been breached.

These employees were complaining about having to eat rice and noodles, and being "let go" because they got a 250 signature petition together.

No .. the people in the OP appear to be multi-unit managers who got other people to sign the petition (260 people I think from the OP) --- out of 900 people under them --- a fair percentage considering how Thais tend not to make waves. I'd have to look at the Abhisit pay rise you are stating .. but the company is saying a 4% rise (again according to the OP)

The 1998 labor law seems to have been breached in the other area of the provident fund... that the company is stating they will start Jan NEXT year.

I'll see if I can get my grubby little paws on a KFC(Th) employee handbook tmw and look it over.

[kuffki]

Not unlikely at all IMHO. If it can be showed that they are working staff 45 hours a week at 27/baht an hour they will well and truly be screwed.

Whoa! JD .

May 1st, Abhisit policy announcement:-

A 25-per-cent hike would mean the minimum wage in Bangkok would rise to more than Bt250 per day from the current Bt216.

8 x 27 = 216 Baht - where has the law been breached.

These employees were complaining about having to eat rice and noodles, and being "let go" because they got a 250 signature petition together.

No .. the people in the OP appear to be multi-unit managers who got other people to sign the petition (260 people I think from the OP) --- out of 900 people under them --- a fair percentage considering how Thais tend not to make waves. I'd have to look at the Abhisit pay rise you are stating .. but the company is saying a 4% rise (again according to the OP)

The 1998 labor law seems to have been breached in the other area of the provident fund... that the company is stating they will start Jan NEXT year.

I'll see if I can get my grubby little paws on a KFC(Th) employee handbook tmw and look it over.

The only part where i do not really understand and possibly the law was broken is the social security fund.

Are they referring to the 5% medical"surcharge" or some other fund?

If it is the medical, then i can not really understand how they managed to do that for so long without being caught. This would be clear on any balance sheet

[jdinasia]

Go back and take a look at the T&G link I provided earlier It explains it.

[kuffki]

Go back and take a look at the T&G link I provided earlier It explains it.

explains what? the fund OP is referring to ? or how they managed to avoid paying it?

[tropo]

Zing! "Whatever!" What a great comeback!

You were shown by another poster that your posts were, shall we say, less than accurate, and you come back with that well thought out rejoinder!

You keep spouting off about treating your employees right. And yea, that is right out of Business 101. But you are ignoring some major facts here. First is that KFC is paying more than the minimum wage her in Thailand. If it is not enough, then the government should raise the minimum wage. Why should KFC take it upon themselves to be a charity instead of a business?

As long as there are workers who want to work, and as long as KFC obeys the law, then why should they do different? The company has a fiduciary responsibility to its stockholders, so you can say that by wasting money, they are actually going against what they are legally supposed to do.

As far as I can see, KFC does not have a problem with its employees. These are a few people out of how many thousands of employees? I don't seem to see any labor shortage when I go there.

I absolutely agree, from a business sense, if nothing else, that if you are running a business with skilled employees, then you should try to make those workers as happy as possible to keep them as long as possible. However, KFC works under a different business model. KFC uses unskilled workers, workers who do not plan on making KFC a career. The place hires youngsters who need a bit of baht or who need to get their feet wet in the working world. They work for a bit, then leave. So there is no real imperative for them to go overboard to keep their employees loyal. The employees will leave anyway to be replaced by new ones.

If the labor pool suddenly dries up, then maybe they need to look at things differently. But as ti is, and as long as they stay legal in wages and treatment of the workers, then nothing is really wrong.

I worked at KFC many years ago. I was happy to make a few bucks, and not once did it cross my mind to make KFC a career. I just needed money to buy a used car, and KFC gave me that.

Well put and exactly the way I see it.

[tropo]

I believe that the profit margins will be a good reflection of the fairness of their wages, because if they are exploiting Thai workers it would result in significantly higher profits than in other countries... indicating unfair practices.

Why would higher profit margins indicate "unfair practices". There are far more pressing concerns for a KFC franchise than staff wages. First and foremost they must lots of chicken. If they are in a bad location they won't make any money even if the help is free.

[Puccini]

I believe that the profit margins will be a good reflection of the fairness of their wages, because if they are exploiting Thai workers it would result in significantly higher profits than in other countries... indicating unfair practices. If the wages and benefits are fair by Thai standards why are the workers of other restaurant chains not making the same fuss?

I see it as overpricing, ie unfair to the consumers, but since the non-consumption of this particular type of food is not life-threatening there is no need for intervention by the government or the courts.

[Puccini]

No .. the people in the OP appear to be multi-unit managers who got other people to sign the petition (260 people I think from the OP) --- out of 900 people under them --- a fair percentage considering how Thais tend not to make waves...

According to the news article, these three managers got the employees to sign the petition by representing themselves as "members of the company's welfare committee even though they were not"

[Puccini]

...The 1998 labor law seems to have been breached in the other area of the provident fund... that the company is stating they will start Jan NEXT year...

I see no indication in the news article that the company failed to pay contributions into the government-operated social security fund. I understand the provident fund to be an additional, voluntary pension fund operated by the company for its employees.

[cardholder]

I believe that the profit margins will be a good reflection of the fairness of their wages, because if they are exploiting Thai workers it would result in significantly higher profits than in other countries... indicating unfair practices. If the wages and benefits are fair by Thai standards why are the workers of other restaurant chains not making the same fuss?

I see it as overpricing, ie unfair to the consumers, but since the non-consumption of this particular type of food is not life-threatening there is no need for intervention by the government or the courts.

I agree, and I repeat - market forces will rule. If the consumer chooses/continues to buy at those inflated prices then you have market acceptance. If they don't, the price will surely drop.

In the meantime (and in every case where a business over-charges) it leaves the door of opportunity open to competition. Competition will also join a market that has high margins.

Then we might see a price war.

[tropo]

I see it as overpricing, ie unfair to the consumers,

This is a ridiculous concept - unfair to customers? Like someone is holding a gun to their heads forcing them to buy. Using that logic I can think of many restaurants in Pattaya which are being unfair to me.

If they could improve their profits by offering it at lower prices then they are pricing themselves out of business. That could be deemed as unfair to investors.

[ClaudeFeller]

We should not forget that 27 THB is the MINIMUM wage. It just means that 26 THB is criminal, it doesnt mean that 27 THB is a fair wage.

A profitable company is allowed to pay more.

[kuffki]

We should not forget that 27 THB is the MINIMUM wage. It just means that 26 THB is criminal, it doesnt mean that 27 THB is a fair wage.

A profitable company is allowed to pay more.

So 26.99 would be criminal also?

Better make it 27.01 than.

Ps. Minimum wage for bkk is 200 per day, amount of hours not specified, but assuming 8, 27 makes it above minimum wage.

But since so many humanitarians here , I suppose all will be boycotting shopping malls, local restaurants and 7-11's since half if them do not even pay that .

Wage for restaurant thai owned is lucky to be 5000 per month for 12 hour days or for hotel maids in many hotels is 4500.

Do not forget builders, they actually do real physical work in the sun and rain for 200 per day and get to sleep and live in a shed with no hot water or even toilet.

[Ulysses G.]

Do not forget builders, they actually do real physical work in the sun and rain for 200 per day and get to sleep and live in a shed with no hot water or even toilet.

Most of the time, they do not even get minimum wage. They certainly have something to complain about.

[tropo]

Do not forget builders, they actually do real physical work in the sun and rain for 200 per day and get to sleep and live in a shed with no hot water or even toilet.

Most of the time, they do not even get minimum wage. They certainly have something to complain about.

...and how much do Thai farmers get for a day in the hot sun? Poor KFC staff, having to eat noodles and fried chicken - brings tears to my eyes. :(

[jackr]

As much as I think KFC should be closed down anyway, what with all the MSG, free glutamates and other crap being added to their foods, employees whining about not being paid enough against what profits are being made are being totally illogical, should simply move on to another job, or get themselves an education so as to increase one's worth. No-one's forcing them to work there.

As for you lot commenting on Thais at the lower end not getting paid enough, sad as it is, be careful what you wish for, when you suddenly find the cost of living here go through the roof, if and when it does happen, no doubt you'll be eating those words!