A question related to shares and Work Permits

[smokie36]

My gf did some work for an Internet company which paid her and her colleagues by way of shares in said company.

Now I have only recently discovered she has not been paid the relevant amount for said shares since the Internet company was sold.

It got me wondering about the other people who were working there....is it legal to accept shares in lieu of work when you are a foreigner working inside Thailand?

Just curious.

[smokie36]

Just to be clear I know for a fact most if not all of them had no Work Permit with this company.

[elviajero]

The work would be illegal without a work permit regardless of how someone is paid.

There is no problem awarding someone shares in a company.

[smokie36]

The work would be illegal without a work permit regardless of how someone is paid.

There is no problem awarding someone shares in a company.

Yes I thought such work even if unpaid was illegal.

However when the share issue is clearly in lieu of work it might be interpreted in court as paid work might it not?

It's an interesting situation.

I'm still wondering why my Thai gf has not been paid however when all of the others seemingly received their share payments.

[anotheruser]

Unrelated question... Did you always have an avatar smokie or have I just noticed it now?

[smokie36]

Unrelated question... Did you always have an avatar smokie or have I just noticed it now?

You've just not been paying attention.

BTW I think we might be Petchaburi Rd neighbours.

[anotheruser]

Unrelated question... Did you always have an avatar smokie or have I just noticed it now?

You've just not been paying attention.

BTW I think we might be Petchaburi Rd neighbours.

Yes, I knew this already. Let's go have a beer at the new Korean place sometime. The beer is okay not sure if everything else would be up to your high standards, although we could piss in the corner and mark our territory. PM if you are interested. It is close to where ever you stay.

Edited June 30, 2016 by anotheruser

[Maestro]

A company is not sold; the shares of the company are sold.

As long as a shareholder does not sign a document confirming the sale of the shares, she continues to be a shareholder.

[smokie36]

A company is not sold; the shares of the company are sold.

As long as a shareholder does not sign a document confirming the sale of the shares, she continues to be a shareholder.

Well she has signed these documents....been to see the relevant lawyer....only the previous owner has simply overlooked paying her it would seem.

[Bunnychow]

The work would be illegal without a work permit regardless of how someone is paid.

There is no problem awarding someone shares in a company.

Agreed a Work permit would be required irrespective

[Bunnychow]

The work would be illegal without a work permit regardless of how someone is paid.

There is no problem awarding someone shares in a company.

Yes I thought such work even if unpaid was illegal.

However when the share issue is clearly in lieu of work it might be interpreted in court as paid work might it not?

It's an interesting situation.

I'm still wondering why my Thai gf has not been paid however when all of the others seemingly received their share payments.

As i am sure you are aware already the defintion of work has nothing to do with being paid or not, even volunteers need a WP and they dont get paid

The company were really dumb if they thought could circumnavigate WP rules going this route

If your GF hasnt been paid for the work she did or been paid for the shares a trip to the DOL might be worthwhile to see what options there are, or if you want to jump in the whole hog to start with, go to your local copshop and lay charges against the company officers who have not paid out as promised

In conclusion it appears your GF did some work for a real scumbag company by the looks of it ?...who runs the company ? Thais or farangs ?

Edited July 1, 2016 by Bunnychow

[Cockwomble]

Sounds like a really dodgy company. It's a shame that you are not able to name and shame here.

A few things seem to have come to light

a) People undertaking work on the promise of something

People having their "shares stolen" Wouldn't surprise me if the shares had been signed over and the signatures falsified. Have heard that happen here in the past.

c) Company illegally employing foreigners

I would understand that the company owners would be responsible for any of the transgresions. She is certainly best off out of that company by the sounds of it.

[shunter]

Fact of the matter is those shares were given as reward for services already given or as a reward in anticipation of services to be given. Therefore a work permit would be needed if the recipient of the shares was a non Thai.

In the event of the company being sold taken over etc those shares still are valid and in the name of the shareholder unless there was or is a power of attorney attached to them regarding the sale or exchange of said shares.

​If the shares were paid for in full at the time of the takeover and the shareholder has not been notified or received payment or new shares scrip in the holding company have not been issued to the original shareholder there is an issue of non payment.

Now if payment was received or a share exchange received by major shareholder(s) of the original company and there was, or is no notification of the scrip issue or the said scrip issue was not passed to the original shareholesder there is a case for pursuing the matter through the judicial system with regards to both fraud and theft.

If those shares were registered to a non Thai who was employed by the company at the time of the shares being given a copy of the work permit in force at that time would have to be submitted along with a current work permit (if the shareholder was still employed by the company) along with all the other paperwork relating to the ownership of the shares so as to actually allow the selling of or the transfer of those shares or the issue of a new scrip in the parent company

Certainly it would appear that there is collusion between the company owners and their legal advisers to defraud third parties.