The Social Security Office (SSO) is once again at the centre of an embarrassing controversy following a recent online public hearing on reform of the pension formula for insured workers under Sections 33 and 39 of the Social Security Act.
The public consultation, held through the government’s online platforms, was meant to gather opinions from contributors about how to ensure fairness and the long-term sustainability of the nation’s largest welfare fund.
Instead, it was marred by an apparent surge of automated “bot” responses over several days, raising suspicions that certain groups may have attempted to sway the outcome. Such interference is not merely a technical glitch; it is a disgrace.
The SSO’s pension reform is a matter of national significance, with profound consequences for the 24.6 million insured workers and the 2.65-trillion-baht funding that supports them. The reform aims to address structural weaknesses that, if left unchecked, could cause the pension system to collapse within the next three decades as Thailand’s ageing population expands and payout obligations outstrip contributions.
The proposed reform centres around adopting a new “CARE” formula to replace an outdated system that calculates pensions based on the salary in the final 60 months of work. Under the current structure, workers whose income declines before retirement, or those who shift from formal employment (covered under Section 33) to voluntary coverage (under Section 39), are unfairly penalised. The new system would instead use adjusted lifetime average earnings to calculate pensions more accurately, ensuring greater equity and alignment with real income levels.
While the CARE model may reduce benefits for a small group of contributors whose earnings rose sharply in their final working years, it will improve fairness across the system as a whole. This is a necessary step to preserve confidence in a fund that millions of Thais rely upon for their future.
Yet pension formula reform alone will not save the Social Security Fund. The root of the problem lies in governance and transparency. In recent months, questions have emerged over the SSO’s budget allocations, procurement practices and investment management. There are reports about outsiders being invited to board meetings on key investment strategies. Such issues have undermined trust among members who already hesitate to increase their contributions. The bot incident is therefore symbolic of a broader malaise: a system vulnerable to manipulation, both technical and institutional. It underscores why reforming the formula must go hand-in-hand with a root-and-branch overhaul of management within the SSO itself.
Thailand’s largest public fund cannot afford to be seen as opaque, complacent or compromised. Rebuilding public trust through genuine accountability and open governance must form the foundation of any meaningful reform. Only then can the SSO truly safeguard the financial security of workers, not just for the next 30 years but for generations to come.
The government should use this opportunity to review the broader social protection system. Pension reform must reflect a genuine social contract between the state and citizens. The SSO’s credibility will depend on its willingness to confront technical and ethical challenges transparently, showing that public welfare, not political interest, is its guiding principle.