Rainbow Washing?
Thai companies frequently use language about "respecting diversity," but there is far less proof of what actually occurs with LGBTQ+ stakeholders.
Thailand is broadly seen as one of Asia’s most LGBTQ+-welcoming countries. However, fresh research from Associate Professor Nattavud Pimpa at Mahidol University’s College of Management indicates that societal acceptance does not always pass through the HR department door. After examining the official reports of ten major Thai listed firms, Dr. Pimpa uncovered a consistent trend: polished pledges to diversity, but considerably fewer signs of mechanisms that turn those pledges into real workplace support. We talked with him about rainbow washing, business and human rights, and what Thai companies must do moving forward.
Interviewer: Your study presents an intriguing picture—companies might fly the rainbow flag, but the frameworks behind it are sometimes limited. Is that accurate?
Dr. Pimpa: It is. I analyzed the ONE Reports of ten major Thai listed companies spanning banking, energy, telecommunications, retail, agriculture, construction, and other fields. Most contain well-crafted statements about honoring diversity. But when you dig beyond those statements and ask if there exists a policy, a monitoring system, an accountability process, or someone in charge of execution, the proof becomes far scarcer.
The problem isn’t whether companies say the right things. Many do. The real question is whether those pledges have been embedded into daily operations.
Interviewer: You applied the UN “Protect, Respect and Remedy” framework. How did the companies perform?
Dr. Pimpa: The most robust area was “Protect,” especially basic non-discrimination promises. Six of the ten companies scored reasonably well there. But under “Respect,” which involves human rights due diligence and recognizing possible impacts, only three explicitly identified LGBTQ+ individuals as a potentially at-risk group.
“Remedy” was also lacking. Three companies had relevant complaint channels, but none showed LGBTQ+-specific sensitivity through specialized training, monitoring, or complaint tracking.
So I wouldn’t claim companies are entirely failing. Instead, they are relatively strong at making broad pledges but weaker at converting those into working systems.
Interviewer: Were there any positive examples?
Dr. Pimpa: Definitely. One company genuinely stood out because it turned inclusion into concrete employee benefits. These included six days of marriage leave, a wedding allowance, bereavement leave, and financial support after a partner’s death, with these benefits explicitly offered to same-sex couples who could show a committed partnership.
That is a far cry from simply saying, “We value diversity.” Employees can actually use those benefits. The company has also been acknowledged by UNDP Thailand as one of the nation’s “Champions of Equality.” It proves that genuine inclusion is possible within the Thai context.
Interviewer: You talk about “rainbow washing.” What does that mean in real terms?
Dr. Pimpa: Rainbow washing happens when a company becomes highly visible in backing LGBTQ+ communities during Pride Month—maybe altering its logo, funding Pride events, or using rainbow imagery—but does little to change its internal structures for the rest of the year.
Pride then turns into a marketing exercise rather than a sustained organizational commitment. Employees can spot that inconsistency. Research indicates that when workers see corporate LGBTQ+ support as symbolic instead of real, it can lead to cynicism and disengagement.
So rainbow washing is not just an ethical issue. It can also become a management and reputation problem.
Interviewer: What should companies actually do?
Dr. Pimpa: I suggest five areas for action. First, perform SOGIESC-sensitive human rights due diligence. Companies should pinpoint actual risk points—for instance, restrooms, dress codes, employee paperwork, and systems affecting transgender and gender-diverse staff.
Second, deliberately build an inclusive culture through training, employee resource groups, and mentoring. Third, carry out structured human rights impact assessments instead of relying on broad commitments.
Fourth, strengthen prevention via diversity responsibilities, explicit anti-bullying procedures, and workplace climate surveys. Finally, companies should think about their broader public role—backing anti-discrimination efforts, scholarships, or partnerships with civil society.
Inclusion should shift from statements to systems.
Interviewer: Thailand legalized same-sex marriage in 2025. Doesn’t that solve many of these problems?
Dr. Pimpa: Marriage equality is a truly historic milestone, but national legal reform does not automatically rewrite organizational policies or HR systems.
Thailand also has the Gender Equality Act and Labour Protection Act, but implementation and enforcement remain significant hurdles. Similarly, Thailand’s National Action Plan on Business and Human Rights addresses diversity and equity, but LGBTQ+-specific protections could be more detailed.
Thailand thus offers an interesting contrast: socially and legally, it can seem highly advanced, while workplace practices stay inconsistent across organizations and sectors.
If a company claims to conduct human rights due diligence, then LGBTQ+ rights should simply be part of that process.
Interviewer: How does this research connect with teaching at CMMU?
Dr. Pimpa: This is especially important to me. At CMMU, gender diversity and human rights should not be treated as just an occasional guest lecture or isolated ethics topic. They can be woven into governance, sustainability, HR, and leadership education. Students need both the ethical reasoning and the operational skills. It is not enough for future managers to know the language of inclusion. They should understand how to craft an inclusive policy, design a SOGIESC-sensitive grievance mechanism, monitor progress, and justify investment to senior leadership.
Interviewer: Last one — if a Thai HR director is reading this interview right now feeling a little called out, what’s their homework?
Dr. Pimpa: (laughs) Fair —Here’s the homework: go pull your own company’s Report tonight. Search it for the words "LGBTQ" or "sexual orientation." If you find one sentence in a paragraph about "diversity," ask yourself honestly — is there a real person, a real budget, a real system behind that sentence, or is it decorative? If the honest answer is decorative — that’s not
His full paper can be accessed at: https://www.hos.pub/articles/hsustain5010007
Chantrapa Kuhaprema
CMMU
email us here
LGBTQ+ in Thai Workplaces
