A COMPARARTIVE STUDY OF LABOR LAWS ON DIAPUTE MEDIATION BETWEEN THAILAND AND FOREIGN COUNTRIES

Abstract

This research article aimed: 1. To examine the concepts and theories related to dispute mediation under the principles of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR); 2. To study pre-litigation dispute settlement procedures under Thai labor law and the labor laws of the United States, New Zealand, and Japan; 3. To analyze and compare pre-litigation dispute resolution processes between Thailand and those countries; and 4. To propose recommendations for improving Thai labor law by incorporating ADR mechanisms, conducted by the qualitative research employing a documentary research method. The research focused on the collection, analysis, and synthesis of information from various sources, including laws, regulations, court judgments, textbooks, academic journals, research reports, and other relevant documents. The research instrument used was a Document Analysis Form, which was utilized to gather data from legal documents, rules and regulations, court decisions, books, journals, research articles, and online publications in both Thai and foreign languages related to labor dispute resolution. The collected data were analyzed to propose recommendations for improving and revising Thai labor laws to be consistent with the principles of alternative dispute resolution (ADR).

Findings were as follows: 1. Labor dispute mediation in Thailand emphasized a competitive negotiation theory, which was inconsistent with the principles of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) that focused on cooperation and mutual understanding; 2. Thai law setted a five-day timeframe for mediation and assigned government officers as mediators, whereas the laws of the United States, New Zealand, and Japan did not specify a fixed mediation period and required mediators to possess specialized knowledge and expertise; 3. The Thai labor law system lacked flexibility; the appointment of government officers as mediators results in limited neutrality and professional competence, differing from other countries where labor relations specialists perform this role; and 4. It was recommended that Thai labor law be revised to establish an appropriate framework for mediation and to define mediator qualifications based on knowledge, competency, and professional impartiality in accordance with international standards.