Labour Affairs Q&A: Temporary closures and lockouts are different animals

Question What is the difference between a management order for a temporaryclosure and one for a lockout?

Answer

Though both temporary closure and a lockout are meant to temporarily suspend work, they have different causes and different consequences.

A temporary closure of operation in part or whole may be necessitated by circumstances such as machine breakdown, interruption of deliveries of supplies, sudden cancellation of purchase orders and the like. Section 75 of the Labour Protection Act BE 2541 stipulates that not less than 75 per cent of the regular wage must be paid to employees who are told to stay away during the temporary closure. It should be assumed that in the case of extreme circumstances such as an earthquake, tsunami or fire causing a temporary closure, employers are left with the discretion of not paying anything at all.

If the closure is initiated by an employer to lock out some or all employees, we have to consider two scenarios.

1 If the lockout is unlawful - not complying with the collective-bargaining procedure set out in Labour Relations Act BE 2518 (bypassing negotiation and conciliation, without giving advance notice) - the employer is at fault, so has to maintain wage payment.

Employers in some places forbid union leaders from coming in, or keep members of the employee committee out while waiting for the approval of the Labour Court to terminate them. Though this may appear lawful under the Act, it is an obviously unfair labour practice - an anti-union activity.

2 In the case of a lawful lockout - following all steps of the collective-bargaining procedure, and exhausting the negotiation and conciliation stages - there is no wage payment. An employer locks out workers to force the union to reduce its demands and accept the employer's counter-demands.

Under the pretext of business difficulties and redundancies, some shrewd employers have been locking out their union leaders simply to isolate them from the rank-and-file members.

The labour inspector recently ruled that such a lockout is not within the intention of section 75 of the Labour Protection Act BE 2541, and ordered full wages (rather than 75 per cent) to be paid. The employer went to the Labour Court to revoke the order. The union, meanwhile, could lodge a complaint with the Labour Relations Commission that the employer intends to obstruct the union's work.