After a month-long labour protest, a determined Thai union and a group of unfairly dismissed gas truck drivers finally got what they were fighting for. They just shouldn't have had to fight in the first place, writes SUPARA JANCHITFAH
 |
 |
| These workers might be seen as troublesome to Bangkokians, but Thai Industrial Gases Labour Union (TIGLU) members learned that they need to muster their power with other labour unions. They marched from the Victory Monument to the Ministry of Labour recently.— PHOTOS: SUPARA JANCHITFAH |
Few people can forget the day in September 1990 when a gas truck exploded on Petchaburi Road in Bangkok. The accident killed 88 people and injured 36. Dozens of homes, cars and motorcycles were charred.
While there has not been an incident of such large and destructive scale since, there have been a number of accidents involving gas-transporting vehicles that have crashed or skidded off the road. The incidents never fail to scare the public or the rescue crews that respond to them.
So what about the men and women behind the wheel, whose work it is to drive and deliver this hazardous freight?
What are the conditions of their work and employment, and what are they paid? At the end of the day, how do they live? Do they have any incentive to do this dangerous work at all?
A recent saga involving workers with Thailand's largest gas company seems to indicate that many of these workers are not treated with the same care that they are entrusted with to deliver their company's commodities.
In fact, many of them are not even considered regular employees.
 |
| Leaders from Government Pharmaceutical Organisation Labour Union and Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand Labour Union visit TIG workers at a union rally in Tha Lan, Saraburi province. |
This fact became the basis of a contentious, but little-reported labour debate between Thai Industrial Gases Public Company Limited (TIG) and the Thai Industrial Gases Labour Union (TIGLU).
The dispute reached its pitch two months ago, when TIGLU organised a month-long protest "to call attention to the fact that TIG's management had terminated its employees who refused to sign a temporary work contract without entering into dialogue with the union," said TIGLU secretary-general, Chatchai Paiyasen.
Established in 1970, Thai Industrial Gases Public Company Limited (TIG) has now become a member of The Linde Group, Germany, which is the world's leading industrial gases business. TIG is the biggest gas company in Thailand, and it supplies gases to most of the government hospitals, state enterprises and big companies like Coca Cola.
After a month-long struggle, TIG reinstated its terminated workers. While the company's decision is certainly a victory for the union and its members, it did not come without lessons and a fair bit of stress for them.
Many of the terminated temporary workers had once worked directly as full-time employees of TIG. One of them, Yom (not his real name), explained that he was one of 19 workers who, after one year of direct employment with TIG, was transferred in February 2007 to a temporary employment contract with Adecco labour agency. Adecco is an international human resources company that specialises in contracting temporary workers.
While the workers had been surprised by their transfers, many quietly accepted the news, feeling powerless to do otherwise and relieved to still have their jobs.
Yet, without warning, the workers were again abruptly terminated at the end of February 2008. This time, they were forced to sign new contracts which transferred them from the Adecco contract to employment with a new company, Esteemed Corp, which is said to be a temporary work agency. (see related story on Page 8)
This time, the news of transfer was slightly more alarming. While the workers had all previously heard of Adecco, an international company, none were familiar with Esteemed.
Most of the workers felt they had no choice in whether to sign the new contracts, and the nine workers who refused to do so were dismissed on March 1.
Puzzling practice
The termination of the nine gas truck drivers who had questioned the company's outsourcing practice made other TIG employees furious, and many of them were moved to join TIGLU's campaign to reinstate them.
"Our friends didn't do anything wrong, and they are good workers. We don't understand why the company has to use a labour agency company - they are working for TIG but the company says the workers are not their employees," says Wan, a regular employee of TIG.
His puzzlement does not end there. He comments, "The company even has to pay additional money to the labour agency companies. If TIG employs all workers directly without using a labour agency, this would reduce the operating cost."
According to TIG workers, the transfer of employees to labour agencies was arranged by the TIG human resource manager and distribution manager who pressured the workers to sign the new contracts or transfer documents. The manager also fired the nine employees that refused to sign the transfer documents, the day after they had done so.
Prior to their dismissal, this group of workers worked in the company's distribution department, driving TIG gas trucks.
"We were trained and received work orders from TIG staff. We were under supervision and followed the work rules of TIG. We wore TIG work uniforms. Although wages and benefits were comparable with those given TIG's regular workers, we felt very insecure about the contract arrangement," said one of the workers.
Yet, while TIG may have treated the contract workers more or less as regular employees, their temporary employment status had consequences on life outside the company.
One worker, for example, tried to secure a bank loan to buy a small house for his family, but was denied. "The bank refused to grant the loan saying that I have no secure job. I pity my daughter who is growing up and we still have to live in a rental house," he said.
Meanwhile, a number of the TIG workers who were employed through a contract agency- many of them namelessly quoted in this article- were allegedly threatened with dismissal if they involved themselves with union activities.
TIG management also did their best to keep the union away from the company's contract workers. Following the dismissal of the workers, TIG tried to orchestrate individual meetings with them, and excluded labour union representatives from group talks with them.
Accordingly this case became more than a battle for fair treatment of TIG's contract workers; but also an important and unprecedented struggle involving contract workers and their rights to unionise.
TIGLU was formed near the end 2004, with many difficulties.
"When we set up our labour union in 2004, many of the union's committee members were dismissed and charged by the company for stealing about 200 pieces of paper. After a number of court trials, the court ordered the TIG to reinstate the committee members, but the company was still reluctant," explains Yok (not his real name), a union committee member.
Only with the intervention and assistance of the London-based Transport and General Workers' Union (TGWU) and a prolonged and bitter struggle did two of the committee members manage to get reinstated in 2006 and earn two years of income back.
Dismissed union leaders were also reinstated in the same year.
"We are lucky that the TGWU in London has rescued us," said the Yok, adding that the TIGLU would have to muster a similar fight for protection of contract workers.
TGWU was founded in 1922, and with 900,000 members, it is one of the largest general trade unions in the United Kingdom and the world.
Perhaps as a result of this short, but tumultuous history, the spirit of the TIGLU union members is very strong. Their determination to wage battle for the protection of contract workers may be the best evidence of this.
But TIGLU's battle involved more than the 19 workers who were forcibly transferred to Esteemed Company earlier this year. A number of TIG's long-time employees, some with up to 19 years at the company, still work under a temporary contract system.
"We cannot ignore the plight of our friends who work with us but get different welfare. They are human beings, like us," said TIGLU president Noppadol Sanom.
"We began accepting contract workers as union members in July last year." said Noppadol, adding that, as TIGLU sees it, Article 5 (3) of B.E 2541 Labour Protection Act clearly entitles contract workers to union membership and participation.
He also cites the verdict from an October 2007 labour case involving the CUEL company in Chon Buri, which ruled that, as the principal employer of its contract workers, CUEL was responsible for their welfare, just as if they were regular employees.
"For us, the verdict confirmed contract workers have the same rights as other workers, and so they can join our labour union as well," said Noppadol.
Using union power
TIGLU has been assisting both regular workers and contract workers in other ways as well. For example, they called the attention of a labour inspector to the work conditions for TIG gas truck drivers, who had been asked to work longer hours - 12 hours on average - that exceeded the 7 hours limit stipulated in a decree of the B.E 2541 (1998) Labour Protection Act, which regulates work which may be harmful to the safety and health of an employee.
This classification covers occupations that involve underground or underwater work, radioactivity, metal welding, and the production or transport of hazardous substances.
In 2007, the labour inspector also found TIG had violated the basic rights of four contract workers at TIG's Tha Lan branch in Saraburi province.
Workers received only 1.5 overtime pay (instead of the mandated 2 times OT pay) when they worked during holidays and were not given holiday leave. There was also no payment for sick leave and the safety equipment provided to contract workers was found to be inadequate.
After the labour inspector's audit, the contracting agency (different from the one used in Rayong) paid the workers. However, when the workers' contracts expired, they were given only a three-month contract extension. Since that time, their contract has been renewed every three months.
"Is this fair treatment for workers who fight for their rights?" asked Noppadol.
"Among the four, are some who have been working for seven to 19 years, but they are still a temporary staff."
Noppadol says the union tried to discuss the issues with TIG's management before bringing them to the labour inspector, but alleges those requests were repeatedly denied.
Having identified labour law violations, the inspector issued an order to the company in June 2006. TIG responded by filing charge against the two labour inspectors at Labour Court Region One.
In April 2007, the court agreed with the findings and ruled in favour of the two inspectors. Even so, TIG protested the decision by petitioning a higher court, and the case is currently pending.
Padungsak Thephasadin na Ayuthaya, the director-general of the Department of Labour Protection and Welfare (LPW), says that, because everything rests on court procedures, there is nothing he can do to assist the workers in the meantime. "We have to wait until the higher court rules out," he said.
Contract concerns
TIGLU members are concerned about the increasing number of TIG workers who are employed through labour agency companies and given only temporary contracts.
They have started to address this, and they recently submitted a petition to the Saraburi labour registrar for amendment of labour union statutes to give contract and agency workers the right to labour union membership.
After 165 days, the provincial registrar sent a letter signed by LPW department head Padungsak, saying that the request could not be granted. The letter was dated February 25, 2008.
Two days later, TIG management told workers at the Rayong branch that their contracts expired on 1 March, and asked them to sign a new contract with Esteemed Corp labour agency company.
Union leaders made a number of requests for a dialogue with TIG to settle the contract worker conflict in a democratic manner. When they were ignored, TIGLU leaders decided again to call the attention of the Labour Ministry, and organised a march from the Victory Monument to the Labour Ministry on March 20.
On March 25, there was a tripartite meeting to resolve the conflict between TIGLU and company management over the reinstatement of the nine truck drivers.
Six government officials, TIG management, the labour union committee, and the dismissed workers took part in the dialogue, which was held at the Saraburi Provincial Labour Office.
The meeting led to several critical agreements and small victories for TIGLU including TIG's vow not to harass the nine union workers during their contract period with Esteemed Corp.
TIG also agreed to implement a proposal previously made on March 14 that the 19 workers work under Esteemed from March 2008 until June 2009. The workers are promised to become part of TIG's regular workforce no later than June 2011.
TIG's management also agreed to provide the 19 transferred contract workers the same working conditions as TIG's regular employees. (Many TIG regular employees praise the company for providing adequate safety.)
The nine dismissed workers were also allowed unpaid leave from March 1 until the date they returned to work so that their length of service was not disrupted.
It was also agreed that the union must be informed of any disciplinary action taken against the nine dismissed workers, and that they are allowed to have two union representatives observe the investigation process.
The company's management also agreed to reinstate the nine dismissed union workers to their same truck driving positions. They cannot be transferred from their Rayong station, except for temporary work with TIG.
Union members who participated in the campaign for reinstatement of the truck drivers also cannot be harassed.
The workers returned to their jobs on March 26.
Though he was not immediately responsive during TIGLU's protest, TIG's Managing Director David Shaw eventually commented on the contract worker controversy at his company.
In an emailed statement, he said, "I am pleased to confirm that with the help and support of the Saraburi Labour Protection Office this matter has now been amicably resolved, and we look forward to working jointly with the TIGLU to ensure that drivers' welfare and safety continue to be our priority."
This is the second in a three-part series on the labour situation in Thailand.
THE B.E 2551 (2008) LABOUR
PROTECTION ACT
Article 11/1
This law states that business operators are deemed the official employer of any employee who works in the production process or to do work that is essential to the business of the business operator, regardless of whether such a person is supervised or paid wages by another agency. Business operators must provide the same benefits and welfare to contract workers who perform the same work as regular employees.
UNFAIR CONTRACT TERM
Article 14/1
The Court has the authority to review any employment agreement, working regulation, rule or order of the employer and deem it effective only if it is fair and appropriate to the employee.
Prev
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Next
