Have read frequently about officials being investigated or caught out and being sent to an inactive post.

Have any TV members had discussion with Thai family or friends as to what an inactive post actually entails?

Is it the equivalent to being suspended on full pay or is it more literal - resulting in an official continuing to being paid but not actually performing any work related tasks?

Where do these individuals go after breakfast? Are there floors within government buildings for the inactive postees?

The concept of moving an individual suspected or proved of wrongdoing to an inactive post as opposed to dismissal or prosecution seems a very different approach to how a similar situation may be dealt with in many TV members country of origin. Are Thais (a question for any Thai members or members who have had this discussion with Thai family and friends) happy with this system?

Purpose of the post is not to criticise or ridicule the Thai approach - just interested in the reasons why this system seems prevalent in Thaland, and what it actually means to be sent to an inactive post.

Have asked Thai family and friends - they do not seem to know (maybe it is a sensitive topic - not sure).

There was an article a while back in one of the papers, showed one guy who'd been transferred to an inactive post.

Desk, no phone, no computer, no work, but he had to attend every day to get paid.

I'd be bored witless.

There was an article a while back in one of the papers, showed one guy who'd been transferred to an inactive post.

Desk, no phone, no computer, no work, but he had to attend every day to get paid.

I'd be bored witless.

That is the whole idea. Then the person reigns. They have used similar transfers in Australia and people have been paid their full salaries to sit at a desk as it is too hard or too expensive to sack them. I understand people have taken it to the high court but have been told it is a completely legal practice.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

There was an article a while back in one of the papers, showed one guy who'd been transferred to an inactive post.

Desk, no phone, no computer, no work, but he had to attend every day to get paid.

I'd be bored witless.

That is the whole idea. Then the person reigns. They have used similar transfers in Australia and people have been paid their full salaries to sit at a desk as it is too hard or too expensive to sack them. I understand people have taken it to the high court but have been told it is a completely legal practice.

I couldn't think of anything worse than going into the office knowing that you have nothing meaningful to do for the day - the clock would be your enemy I imagine. Maybe as you say, that is the idea, and the system has some merit. Would, I imagine, be a loss of face for the individual. Am surprised if the average tax payer would be happy for these individuals to still be paid a salary.

It's so difficult to fire anyone but this basically ruins their career.

So many have been made inactive over the years there is probably a Department of Inactivity by now.

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

There was an article a while back in one of the papers, showed one guy who'd been transferred to an inactive post.

Desk, no phone, no computer, no work, but he had to attend every day to get paid.

I'd be bored witless.

That is the whole idea. Then the person reigns. They have used similar transfers in Australia and people have been paid their full salaries to sit at a desk as it is too hard or too expensive to sack them. I understand people have taken it to the high court but have been told it is a completely legal practice.

I couldn't think of anything worse than going into the office knowing that you have nothing meaningful to do for the day - the clock would be your enemy I imagine. Maybe as you say, that is the idea, and the system has some merit. Would, I imagine, be a loss of face for the individual. Am surprised if the average tax payer would be happy for these individuals to still be paid a salary.

That may apply in Australia but remember without "perks" the salary of a very senior official is only about 50000 a month. And they cannot get perks sitting in a blank office. Not much incentive to stay here.

ATF, you could patent this turn of phrase. Am not sure there are many government departments that should not be called Department of Inactivity - love it!

Years ago, my wife and I were doing our wait at the land office, given me plenty of time to observe how things operate. The office was very busy. But toward the back of the office was an official sitting at a desk totally devoid of papers. None of the staff stopped by his desk to talk, and he didn't go around the office to talk with others. Every 15 minutes or so, he'd step outside and have a cigarette, then return to sitting at his desk. I can't imagine what life would be like to do that for 8 hours a day....day after day.

I can only assume he was sitting in an inactive post.

ATF, you could patent this turn of phrase. Am not sure there are many government departments that should not be called Department of Inactivity - love it!

Thank you, remember you heard it here first.

However your 50k pm salary is very generous.

A General will just about get 50k. I don't know how exactly inactivity impacts salary but it certainly keeps ones fingers far, far away from the till.

It is the civil service equivalence of Siberia. It is either gross incompetence or being aligned to the wrong faction which gets you an inactive post.

The smart ones use the time to lobby for a new role when the gods once again shine down on them. Which happens.

Am not sure what I expected the answer to the post to be, suppose I thought it was actually code for "have a breather, come back in a month, all will be forgiven and forgotten". But from what has been posted, it actually seems like a pretty useful way to clean house.

Made me think about being in high school. When we played up in class, we were placed in a room called the withdrawal room (nothing to do with narcotics or other substances). Room had a chair, desk, bare painted walls, but no windows. You felt very removed from general population and there was absolutely nothing to do to kill the time. Was actually a pretty effective punishment.

Edited July 9, 201411 yr by devolad

Its stadard practice to force someone out. They stopped that practice in the uk as its seen as constructive dismissal. Personally i think its a fair enough , especially lazy , incompetent staff

Sent from my GT-I9500 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

In some nations, this is the definition of an inactive post. It tends to function as a deterrent.

I believe it is called Gardening Leave in the UK.

Years ago, my wife and I were doing our wait at the land office, given me plenty of time to observe how things operate. The office was very busy. But toward the back of the office was an official sitting at a desk totally devoid of papers. None of the staff stopped by his desk to talk, and he didn't go around the office to talk with others. Every 15 minutes or so, he'd step outside and have a cigarette, then return to sitting at his desk. I can't imagine what life would be like to do that for 8 hours a day....day after day.

I can only assume he was sitting in an inactive post.

The should ban smoking in that area....than he is complete finished off.....

back to bed with a bottle of suds