Contract Law Help?

[platypusgirl]

I have a hypothetical question that I'm hoping someone on here can help me get answered. Here's the scenario: a Thai-owned franchise of a US company hires an American to come work for the company in Bangkok. The company brings the person to Thailand, sets him or her up in an apartment, and requests that the person starts working. This person does not have a work permit, or even a non-immigrant B visa- just a tourist visa. The company declines to remedy this, saying that it's not a big deal and that they'll take care of it later. Before coming, this individual signs a one-year contract with said company, both in English and in Thai. The contract specifies the duration of employment and a guaranteed salary.

Once this person has been working for two months, the company decides to terminate employment for questionable reasons. They wish to do so without further compensation, even though the Thai contract says that if employment is terminated, the company will still pay the employee. However, the individual never had a work permit, so it may be hard to argue this legally without that coming up.

So here's the question: would this person have any shot at getting compensation? Would it be wise to go to the US embassy, or would the working illegaly part get them into trouble, even though it was done unwillingly? Is there an automatic probation period for a new employee that doesn't need to be mentioned in a contract? Any advice given would be useful. Thanks!

[meom]

Get a lawyer to see if the US company can be held accountable.

[rishi]

I don't think, there's much a lawyer can do in this scenario. Except maybe help the Thai franchise employer as well as the employee to stay out of jail, in case things should be brought to the attention of the authorities.

Both partees broke the law from the very first minute the employee started working. Regardless whatever the employer might have told, the employee is as guilty as the employer. Can't the employee read? - it is quite clearly written on the visa in his passport that working is not allowed, right?

Edited March 14, 2006 by rishi

[steveromagnino]

I don't think, there's much a lawyer can do in this scenario. Except maybe help the Thai franchise employer as well as the employee to stay out of jail, in case things should be brought to the attention of the authorities.

Both partees broke the law from the very first minute the employee started working. Regardless whatever the employer might have told, the employee is as guilty as the employer. Can't the employee read? - it is quite clearly written on the visa in his passport that working is not allowed, right?

Please give this advice to the hypothetical person.....

You cannot have a contract based on an illegality, so any compensation for work performed is highly unlikely. You (meaning the hypothetical person) broke the law by working, and that is going to put the hypothetical person over a barrel; if you admit you work and you go to jail for working illegally. You don't admit you work, and then you have no claim for work performed.

You did NOT work unwilllingly, you worked totally willingly; you knew that you were breaking the law; it is YOUR responsibility to not break the law as much as the company's; they can easily claim that they thought you were doing the paperwork...unless.....

Does the contract specifically state that the Thai company would provide a work permit and VISA? My guess is not, they are not able to guarantee this, they might however state that they would carry out the steps to try to obtain one for you. If they did not, then you might have a shot at compensation.

My guess is that IF you contract specifically states that they would do this for you, you MIGHT be able to claim that their failure to do so has resulted in your incurring living expenses and travel expenses of XYZ for which you require compensation.

I am very interested to know how this turns out for the hypothetical person; they are playing with fire by getting the embassy involved; it will take a well sympathetic ear I suspect to get any help from them.

I'd guess the best you can do (since they covered the accom) is living expenses and travel. but if the issue of working comes up, you are in trouble.

Persuing the USA firm for false representation would be another option, but as I understand it they are not party to the contract; the contract you hold is only with the Thai franchisee is that right? I suppose you could try to appeal to their better nature, but I think that is a real push.

Incidentally, this isn't a media company with newspaper etc is it??

[Dragonman]

I don't think, there's much a lawyer can do in this scenario. Except maybe help the Thai franchise employer as well as the employee to stay out of jail, in case things should be brought to the attention of the authorities.

Both partees broke the law from the very first minute the employee started working. Regardless whatever the employer might have told, the employee is as guilty as the employer. Can't the employee read? - it is quite clearly written on the visa in his passport that working is not allowed, right?

Persuing the USA firm for false representation would be another option, but as I understand it they are not party to the contract; the contract you hold is only with the Thai franchisee is that right? I suppose you could try to appeal to their better nature, but I think that is a real push.

The person could always attempt to "persuade" the franchisee to negotiate a settlement by saying that he/she would be contacting the American Company in order to investigate the "franchise agreement" so that no poor innocent would be duped again.

[platypusgirl]

In case anyone is curious- the hypothetical person involved convinced the company owners that if bad word of mouth was a primary concern of theirs, as they claimed, sending an employee off with nothing but a broken contract might not be wise. In the end they paid three months severance- not great but a hel_l of a lot better than nothing. The US company was morally supportive throughout but not a lot of help. Thanks for the advice, everyone who replied. It always helps to have some idea of the prevailing sentiment.

[BKK90210]

This is my takes

In this case, the injured party is this American guy.

It does not matter if he has the work permit or not. The fact is that he didn’t come to Thailand on his own initially, according to your statement this thai-owned francise company invited him over with lucrative contract and he signed the contract before coming, so the company should be responsible for obtaining the work permit for him as promised. So it’s the fault of the company, and they could get fine by the thai government for hiring an alien without the working permit.

I’m in the favor of the American guy.

And I don’t think he can go after the US parent company for any compensations because the francise companies normally operate independently in hiring or firing any employee. Therefore he will only be entitled for a damage compensation and back pays in thai civil suit against the thai company, that is after the immigration has done with him first of course.

If I were him, I would take my case to the thai immigration bureau headquater and explain the situation. The sooner is the better.

The most likely outcome is, he will get deported and at the same time the company will get fined for hiring an alien without the proper working permit.

If the company smarts that is, it should certainly be willing to work on the settlement with him before the case goes to the immigration bureau.

His main argument will be:

“The fact is: he signed the contract before coming, with the company promised of obtaining work permit for him. – that if he also has this in writing, it will make his case stronger!”

Edited April 2, 2006 by BKK90210