Home / News / Urgent Appeals / THAILAND: Dismissal of a union leader wearing a protest shirt
 

THAILAND: Dismissal of a union leader wearing a protest shirt

August 18, 2008

ASIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION – URGENT APPEALS PROGRAMME

Urgent Appeal Case: AHRC-UAC-187-2008

19 August 2008
------------------------------------------------------
THAILAND: Dismissal of a union leader wearing a protest shirt

ISSUES: Freedom of expression; freedom of association & assembly; workers; trade union; fair trial; administration of justice
------------------------------------------------------

Dear friends,

The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has received information that a union leader was dismissed allegedly for wearing a protest T-shirt while outside of work on July 30, 2008. While a protest regarding her dismissal has continued, tens of colleagues who held a protest were threatened with dismissal and suspension.

CASE DETAILS:

Body Fashion (Thailand) Company Limited located at the Muang Mai Bang Phli Industrial Estate in Samut Prakan province, produces women's underwear, swimsuits, sportswear and leisurewear under the Triumph trademark, with sub-brands Sloggi, Bee Dees, and Triumph Sport, an international clothing retailer. Ms. Jitra Kolchadej was a leading member of the Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union.

On 24 April 2008, Ms. Jitra Kolchadej, an employee at Body Fashion (Thailand) Company Limited had a television interview wearing a protest T-shirt with the words "No stand, No criminal. Different thinking, Not crime".

According to information received, following her television interview, the company claimed that her appearance on the television has damaged the reputation of the company because of the protest T-shirt. The company attempted to negotiate with Jitra to leave the company, which she refused to do.

On July 29, Jitra was told that she would be dismissed the next day as per the court judgment. The company initiated court proceedings against her without her knowledge. She claims that she never received the notice of summons, as it was sent to a very outdated address and she was never informed of the summons at work, despite her continuous presence there. The company had informed her of the judgment from the court on July 29 despite having known for 3 weeks of the judgment.

In solidarity, thousands of workers walked off the job demanding she be reinstated and deliberately inflaming relations between the union workers and management in their actions against Jitra. Around 3,000 workers started walking out at 7am on July 30, gathering in and around the site. The walk out meant that the union did not have to issue written notification to the employer, as they would during a strike.

According to Ms. Wanpen Wongsombat, a member of Triumph International (Thailand) Trade Union committee, it is clear that the T-shirt is a non-issue to the company. An executive, Kenneth Marshall, when summoning Jitra, told her that the company was not concerned about the T-shirt issue. However, in the negotiation on the working conditions presented by the union, the company raised this issue. Around 80 percent of the workers at the company are members of the trade union and there is a strong belief among them that Jitra would not have been dismissed had she not been a leading member of the union.

Following the walk out, union members entered into negotiations with company management. The management refused to reinstate Jitra and proceeded to seek court orders against 20 trade union committee members and suspend 25 leading workers for two weeks without pay, alleging they had blocked off entrances for other workers. 

ADDITIONAL COMMENT:

Jitra's right to freedom of expression, in wearing a protest T-shirt, is protected under Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), which Thailand is a party to and under Part VII of the Thai Constitution. Her participation in a trade union is also protected under Article 22 of the ICCPR and Part XI of the Thai Constitution.

Jitra was expressing a personal position on an issue and was not in any way attempting to represent the company during the interview. Individuals should be able to freely express their perspectives without fear of their employers taking action against them. Their right to express opinions should not be allowed to be used by employers looking to suppress the actions of lawful trade unions and intimidate employees.
As part of an international company Body Fashion (Thailand) Limited should hold itself to higher standards in its treatment of workers and trade unions.

SUGGESTED ACTION:
Please write letters to authorities listed below asking for the immediate intervention by the government to protect the freedom of expression and right to form trade unions of Jitra Kolchadej and other members of the Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union.

Please be informed that the AHRC has written separate letter to the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression.

To support this appeal, please click here:

SAMPLE LETTER:

Dear __________,

THAILAND: Dismissal of a union leader wearing a protest shirt

Details of victims:
1. Ms. Jitra Kolchadej; dismissed employee of Body Fashion (Thailand) Company Limited on July 30, 2008
2. 20 union leaders and 25 leading workers, all members of the Triumph International (Thailand) Labour Union; threatened by company to be dismissed
Date of incident: 30 July 2008

I am writing to voice my deep concern regarding the dismissal of Ms. Jitra Kolchadej, a trade union leader, and the threat to suspend 20 union leaders and 25 leading workers who opposed Ms. Jitra's dismissal.

According to the information I have received, Ms. Jitra was informed on July 29 that she would be dismissed the next day for wearing a protest T-shirt which had the words "No stand, No crime. Different thinking, Not crime" on it. Ms. Jitra did not receive the summons from the court regarding the company's desire to break her contract and was unable to defend herself. Despite her constant attendance at work, the company failed to inform her in person of the case against her. Furthermore, despite the company being informed of the court's decision on the 8th July they only deigned to inform Ms. Jitra a day before her dismissal, three weeks after they knew the outcome.

In response, Ms. Jitra's workers at Body Fashion (Thailand) Company Limited staged a walk out protest on July 30. The company has since launched applications to dismiss 20 union leaders and suspend 25 leading workers without pay who were involved in the walk out. I am aware that the union had recently presented a list of demands to the management and negotiations on these demands are being negotiated and settled. The union represents 80 percent of the workforce at Body Fashion (Thailand) Company Limited and it appears suspect that the company is citing an action as remote as wearing a T-shirt in order to dismiss a trade union leader and threaten other important members of the trade union.

Ms Jitra's right to freedom of expression, in wearing a protest T-shirt, her role within the trade union and the rights of workers to protest by peaceful assembly are protected in the Part VII and Part XI of the Thai Constitution. They are also protected under Articles 19 and 22 of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which Thailand is a state party.

I therefore ask you to intervene on behalf of Ms. Jitra and the other targeted workers who participated in the walk out protest to ensure they are returned to their positions and their rights to freedom of expression and protest are not further violated by this private actor.

I look forward to seeing your intervention on this matter.

Yours sincerely,


----------------

PLEASE SEND YOUR LETTERS TO:

1. Mr. Samak Sundaravej
Prime Minister
c/o Government House
Pitsanulok Road, Dusit District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Fax: +662 282 8631/ 280 1589/ 629 8213
Tel: +662 280 1404/ 3000
E-mail: spokesman@thaigov.go.th

2. Ms. Uraiwan Thienthong
Minister of Labour
Mitrmaitri Road
Dindaeng
Bangkok 10400
THAILAND
Fax: +662 643 4457, +662 247 5572
Tel: +662 232 1051, 662 232 1061
E-mail: sarawuts_45@hotmail.com

3. Mr. Tej Bunnag
Minister of Foreign Affair
Office of the Minister of Foreign Affair
443 Sri Ayudhya Road
Ratchathevee, Bangkok 10400
THAILAND
Fax: +662 643 5318
Tel: +662 643 5333
E-mail: minister@mfa.go.th

4. Prof. Saneh Chamarik
Chairperson
National Human Rights Commission of Thailand
422 Phya Thai Road
Pathum Wan District
Bangkok 10300
THAILAND
Fax: +662 219 2940
Tel: +662 219 2980
E-mail: commission@nhrc.or.th

Thank you.

Urgent Appeals Programme
Asian Human Rights Commission (ua@ahrchk.org)

Document Type :
Urgent Appeal Case
Document ID :
AHRC-UAC-187-2008
Countries :
Issues :
Document Actions
Share |
Subscribe to our Mailing List
Follow AHRC
Extended Introduction: Urgent Appeals, theory and practice

A need for dialogue

Many people across Asia are frustrated by the widespread lack of respect for human rights in their countries.  Some may be unhappy about the limitations on the freedom of expression or restrictions on privacy, while some are affected by police brutality and military killings.  Many others are frustrated with the absence of rights on labour issues, the environment, gender and the like. 

Yet the expression of this frustration tends to stay firmly in the private sphere.  People complain among friends and family and within their social circles, but often on a low profile basis. This kind of public discourse is not usually an effective measure of the situation in a country because it is so hard to monitor. 

Though the media may cover the issues in a broad manner they rarely broadcast the private fears and anxieties of the average person.  And along with censorship – a common blight in Asia – there is also often a conscious attempt in the media to reflect a positive or at least sober mood at home, where expressions of domestic malcontent are discouraged as unfashionably unpatriotic. Talking about issues like torture is rarely encouraged in the public realm.

There may also be unwritten, possibly unconscious social taboos that stop the public reflection of private grievances.  Where authoritarian control is tight, sophisticated strategies are put into play by equally sophisticated media practices to keep complaints out of the public space, sometimes very subtly.  In other places an inner consensus is influenced by the privileged section of a society, which can control social expression of those less fortunate.  Moral and ethical qualms can also be an obstacle.

In this way, causes for complaint go unaddressed, un-discussed and unresolved and oppression in its many forms, self perpetuates.  For any action to arise out of private frustration, people need ways to get these issues into the public sphere.

Changing society

In the past bridging this gap was a formidable task; it relied on channels of public expression that required money and were therefore controlled by investors.  Printing presses were expensive, which blocked the gate to expression to anyone without money.  Except in times of revolution the media in Asia has tended to serve the well-off and sideline or misrepresent the poor.

Still, thanks to the IT revolution it is now possible to communicate with large audiences at little cost.  In this situation there is a real avenue for taking issues from private to public, regardless of the class or caste of the individual.

Practical action

The AHRC Urgent Appeals system was created to give a voice to those affected by human rights violations, and by doing so, to create a network of support and open avenues for action.  If X’s freedom of expression is denied, if Y is tortured by someone in power or if Z finds his or her labour rights abused, the incident can be swiftly and effectively broadcast and dealt with. The resulting solidarity can lead to action, resolution and change. And as more people understand their rights and follow suit, as the human rights consciousness grows, change happens faster. The Internet has become one of the human rights community’s most powerful tools.   

At the core of the Urgent Appeals Program is the recording of human rights violations at a grass roots level with objectivity, sympathy and competence. Our information is firstly gathered on the ground, close to the victim of the violation, and is then broadcast by a team of advocates, who can apply decades of experience in the field and a working knowledge of the international human rights arena. The flow of information – due to domestic restrictions – often goes from the source and out to the international community via our program, which then builds a pressure for action that steadily makes its way back to the source through his or her own government.   However these cases in bulk create a narrative – and this is most important aspect of our program. As noted by Sri Lankan human rights lawyer and director of the Asian Human Rights Commission, Basil Fernando:

"The urgent appeal introduces narrative as the driving force for social change. This idea was well expressed in the film Amistad, regarding the issue of slavery. The old man in the film, former president and lawyer, states that to resolve this historical problem it is very essential to know the narrative of the people. It was on this basis that a court case is conducted later. The AHRC establishes the narrative of human rights violations through the urgent appeals. If the narrative is right, the organisation will be doing all right."

Patterns start to emerge as violations are documented across the continent, allowing us to take a more authoritative, systemic response, and to pinpoint the systems within each country that are breaking down. This way we are able to discover and explain why and how violations take place, and how they can most effectively be addressed. On this path, larger audiences have opened up to us and become involved: international NGOs and think tanks, national human rights commissions and United Nations bodies.  The program and its coordinators have become a well-used tool for the international media and for human rights education programs. All this helps pave the way for radical reforms to improve, protect and to promote human rights in the region.