Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2025, published 114th ILC session (2026)

Thailand

Equal Remuneration Convention, 1951 (No. 100) (Ratification: 1999)
Discrimination (Employment and Occupation) Convention, 1958 (No. 111) (Ratification: 2017)

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on equality, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 100 (Equal Remuneration) and 111 (Discrimination in Employment and Occupation) together.

Convention No. 111 – National policy to promote equality of opportunity and treatment in respect of employment and occupation  

Articles 1(1)(a), 2 and 3(b) of the Convention. Prohibited grounds of discrimination and scope of application. Legislation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in its report, that: (1) the practical application of article 27 of the Constitution is reflected in two court rulings (Constitutional Court Decision Nos 9/2564, 2021 and 15/2565, 2022), while the relevant provisions of the Labour Protection Act (LPA) (B.E. 2541 (1998) and subsequent amendments) are reflected in one ruling (Court of Appeal for Specialized Cases No. 4711/2561); (2) between 2021–24, the Ministerial Regulation on Labour Protection in Sea Fishing Work, B.E. 2565 (2022), was adopted under section 22 of the LPA while no ministerial regulations were adopted under the Gender Equality Act, B.E. 2558 (2015) (GEA); and (3) there is one relevant ruling regarding the enforcement of the principles of the Convention in the public sector. Finally, with respect to the special emergency law regimes, the Government indicates that if workers in provinces where these laws are in force encounter discrimination in employment and occupation on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin, and wish to file complaints and seek compensation, the Welfare and Labour Protection Office in each southern border province applies the principles and regulations set out in the LPA. By way of example, the Government refers to a case in 2020 in Narathiwat Province, where a pregnant employee was dismissed after taking maternity leave. She filed a complaint with the labour inspector, who confirmed the occurrence of discrimination, and she was subsequently awarded special compensation. The Committee observes, however, that the four court rulings submitted by the Government concerning the practical application of the Constitution and the LPA in the public sector do not relate to any of the prohibited grounds of discrimination set out in Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention, namely race, colour, sex, religion, political opinion, national extraction or social origin. It recalls that constitutional provisions providing for equality of opportunity and treatment, although important, have generally not proven to be sufficient to address specific cases of discrimination in employment and occupation. A more detailed legislative framework is also required (see 2012 General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, para. 851). The Committee asks the Government to amend its legislation (notably the LPA) in order to expressly define and prohibit discrimination in employment and occupation on, at least, all the grounds mentioned in Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. It also requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of: (i) article 27 of the Constitution and the relevant provisions of the LPA; (ii) the principles of the Convention to workers in the public sector; and (iii) the Ministerial Regulations issued under section 22 of the LPA, and the GEA.

Sex. Sexual harassment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that there is no example of the direct enforcement of section 16 of the LPA concerning sexual harassment (either quid pro quo (blackmail) or hostile work environment). It also notes the examples mentioned by the Government of the enforcement of section 397 of the Criminal Code for cases of sexual harassment at work, such as Supreme Court case No. 12983/2015. The Government adds: (1) that the Department of Women’s Affairs and Family Development was designated as the Coordinating Centre for the Prevention and Resolution of Sexual Harassment or Sexual Abuse in the Workplace (CCHPF), with the mandate to raise awareness among government bodies, state agencies and the private sector, and to ensure the correct and comprehensive implementation of the relevant measures: and (2) that between 2020–23, the CCHPF reported that a total of 5,857 public agencies and state enterprises had adopted operational guidelines, and 85 institutions identified cases of harassment. The Committee recalls that without a clear definition and prohibition of both quid pro quo (blackmail) and hostile work environment sexual harassment, it remains doubtful whether the legislation effectively addresses all forms of sexual harassment (2012 General Survey, para. 791). The Committee requests the Government to amend the legislation so as to cover explicitly both forms of sexual harassment in the world of work and to ensure that protection extends to cases committed not only by employers or supervisors, but also by co-workers, clients or other persons encountered in connection with the performance of work duties. It requests the Government to provide information on the measures taken with a view to raising awareness of these concepts among employers and workers, their organizations, enforcement authorities (labour inspectors and judges) and the public in general.

Convention No. 100 – Principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value 

Articles 1 and 2. Legislation. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that, since the entry into force of section 53 of the Labour Protection Act (No. 7), B.E. 2562 (2019), no complaints have been filed, no violations have been detected by inspectors, and no court decisions have been issued. It further notes that section 16 of the Homeworkers Protection Act, B.E. 2553 (2010), has not yet been amended to explicitly reflect the principle of work of “equal value”. The Committee also notes the awareness-raising initiatives reported by the Government, including the recognition of outstanding women workers, monitoring of compliance with employment conditions, and the promotion of Good Labour Practices (GLP) through Memorandums of Understanding signed with private sector actors, covering over 120,000 workers. The Committee recalls that where no cases or complaints, or very few, are being lodged, this is likely to indicate a lack of an appropriate legal framework, lack of awareness of rights, lack of confidence in or absence of practical access to procedures, or fear of reprisals (see 2012 General Survey, para. 870). The Committee once again requests the Government to amend section 16 of the Homeworkers Protection Act,B.E. 2553 (2010) so that it explicitly reflects the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value. It also requests the Government to provide information on: (i) the application in practice of section 53 of the Labour Protection Act (No. 7), B.E. 2562 (2019), including any cases dealt with by labour inspectors or the courts, the sanctions imposed and the remedies granted; and (ii) the activities undertaken in cooperation with workers’ and employers’ organizations to promote and give effect to the principle of the Convention in the public and private sectors, including information on their impact in practice.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request directly addressed to the Government.