The Thai aviation industry has been engulfed in discussions regarding a potential rule change that would permit foreign pilots to operate domestic flights, a surprising shift given that this role is currently protected for Thai nationals.
Thai Vietjet’s request to employ foreign pilots was presented as a temporary measure to address a shortage of aircraft during the peak travel season, but the Thai Pilots Association has strongly opposed the proposal.
WHAT PROMPTED THE AIRLINE’S REQUEST?
The post-pandemic aircraft shortage has emerged as a significant challenge for airlines globally, hindering their ability to expand fleets to meet surging travel demand.
In June, former Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin shared on his X account that he had met with stakeholders in the aviation industry, including representatives from Thai Airways and Thai Vietjet, urging them to increase seat capacity in anticipation of travel growth during the forthcoming high season.
In response, Thai Vietjet reportedly sought Mr. Srettha’s assistance in lifting the restriction on foreign pilots in exchange for addressing their aircraft shortage. He subsequently brought the matter to the Labour Ministry’s attention.
The airline aimed to secure additional aircraft through wet lease agreements, formally referred to as ACMI (aircraft, crew, maintenance, and insurance) leasing. Such arrangements would require the Labour Ministry to amend regulations regarding foreign employment, as these leases typically involve a full package of pilots and crew, not just aircraft, as is the case with standard dry leases.
On August 14, the same day Mr. Srettha was dismissed by the constitutional court, the Department of Employment engaged with the Civil Aviation Authority of Thailand (CAAT), the Thai Pilots Association, and Thai Vietjet to discuss potential solutions.
Teerawat Angkasakulkiat, president of the Thai Pilots Association, expressed that the government had tentatively agreed to the airline’s request, raising concerns among unemployed Thai pilots who felt this could diminish their job opportunities.
Following the cabinet’s dismissal, the discussion surrounding this issue was stalled for a month but resumed last week.
Labour Minister Phiphat Ratchakitprakarn, who retained his position from the previous administration, stated that the ministry does not oppose the request and would permit Thai Vietjet to operate with foreign pilots on domestic routes once a formal request is submitted.
However, he clarified that this adjustment would be exclusive to Thai Vietjet and not universally applied to all airlines. Other carriers would need to submit individual requests for similar arrangements.
WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS?
The Labour Minister maintained that granting permission to employ foreign pilots would not impact job prospects for Thai pilots, emphasizing that this temporary measure addresses specific instances where airlines need to obtain aircraft with foreign crews due to wet lease agreements.
Teerawat Angkasakulkiat raised concerns within the pilot community about the implications of such a deal, fearing it could set a precedent for other airlines. He also expressed apprehension about Thailand’s eligibility to permit this type of leasing arrangement, citing that the country is not a signatory to Article 83bis of the Chicago Convention, which allows for the transfer of supervisory responsibilities for aircraft.
“Permitting this could violate aviation laws and jeopardize the country’s aviation status,” he said. “In a worst-case scenario, Thailand risks a red flag, similar to the situation in 2015 when it failed the International Civil Aviation Organization’s safety audit, resulting in restrictions on Thai carriers’ international expansion.”
Teerawat further argued that there is no necessity for Thailand to adhere to Article 83bis of the Chicago Convention. From an operational perspective, he noted that if the government wants airlines to enhance capacity to capitalize on the booming tourism market, wet leasing may not necessarily benefit tourists, given that its costs are typically higher than those associated with dry leases.
Conversely, Sarun Benjanirat, deputy director-general of the CAAT, contended that wet leasing practices were introduced in Thailand back in 2008, albeit infrequently utilized since then. He asserted that such arrangements are valuable when airlines face unexpected challenges, such as bans on specific aircraft types.
He also stated that with only a limited number of aircraft requested by the airline under wet lease terms, there is no need for Thailand to engage with Article 83bis.
ARE OTHER AIRLINES LIKELY TO MAKE SIMILAR REQUESTS?
Wutthiphum Jurangkool, CEO of Nok Air, mentioned that his airline is also exploring wet lease options but intends to limit their use to international flights to comply with labor regulations.
He emphasized that while there are advantages to wet leasing—like quicker capacity increases for airlines with foreign parent companies wishing to capitalize on the robust tourism market—there are also drawbacks, particularly regarding Thai pilots whose licenses may have expired during the pandemic. These pilots could be adversely affected, as airlines might hesitate to invest in their retraining.
“Training costs for aviation positions are quite significant,” he said, pointing out that many pilots historically switched airlines after completing their training, leading to financial losses for the airlines that funded their training.
Aswin Yangkirativorn, CEO of Thai Lion Air, indicated that his