Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Ari Pramuditya, Ady Thea
Minister of Employment Hanif Dhakiri. Photo by: RES
The issuance of Government Regulation No. 78 of 2015 on Wages (“Wage Regulation”), drew the immediate attention of the general public and various societal groups. Appreciation for the Wage Regulation was expressed by employers, who believe that it grants them security. However, many workers and labor groups have criticized the new wage formulation, which they consider to be unfair.
Beyond the directly affected employees and workers though, the Employment Study Group at the Indonesian Academy of Sciences (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia – “LIPI”) has conducted a review of the processes involved in the formation of the new Wage Regulation.
The results of this review assert that the formation of the new Wage Regulation did not involve enough public discussion, or incorporate the aspirations of workers and labor. Both parties, according to the review, are important stakeholders that should have been involved in the process.
During a discussion held at LIPI in Jakarta on Tuesday 3 November 2015, Lilis Mulyani, a researcher at LIPI, stated that the government tends to disregard any involvement in these matters from the National Tripartite Agency (Lembaga Tripartit Nasonal), a body which brings together government, organized labor and employers. In order to actualize a dynamic industrial-relations paradigm however, input from all of these parties is essential, according to Mrs. Mulyani.
Mrs. Mulyani reminded the government that Article 5 of Law No. 12 of 2011 on the Establishment of Laws and mandates that the government implements principles of openness (participatory, dialogic and transparent) as regards the formation of any regulations. She further stated that the Employment Study Group at LIPI had proposed that the government reassess the Wage Regulation in order to fully incorporate these principles of openness into the process.
Mrs. Mulyani emphasized that a process of dialogue should be implemented, as workers have rejected the government’s new formula and have come up with their own instead. No single stakeholder in the area of employment can formulate a Wage Regulation on their own. Rather, according to Mrs. Mulyani, each party should be proposing what variables they would like to see being included in the wage formulation through a process of discussion and dialogue.
Triyono, an Employment Researcher at LIPI’s Population and Research Center, stated at the discussion that the new Wage Regulation benefits regions with weak labor movements. In contrast, in areas that have strong labor movements, such as Jabodetabek (Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi), the Wage Regulation has been declared problematic, as it seems likely that it will weaken the role of labors unions during minimum-wage negotiations.
“The increase in the minimum wage, as set out in the Wage Regulation, clearly utilizes a formulation which only refers to inflation and national economic growth,” said Mr. Triyono.
Mr. Triyono argued that the formulation created by the government represented a middle ground, and that employment issues were not only the concern of workers and employers, but also of jobseekers as well. Even so, he stated, this did not mean that the Wage Regulation was perfect.
A number of improvements is proposed by Mr. Triyono to the new regulation, one of which related to the current five-yearly evaluation of what constitutes decent living standards (Kebutuhan Hidup Layak – “KHL”). According to Triyono, any evaluation of KHL should be shortened to three year periods, which will in turn lead to a more intense dialogue between the government, workers and employers.
“If the KHL evaluation takes place every three years, then any weaknesses relating to KHL will come under the microscope more often,” explained Triyono.
Triyono also highlighted the current lack of supervision in the area of employment, for which he believes regional autonomy is largely to blame. Triyono suggested that supervising rights be restored to central government.
Pratiwi Febry, a public lawyer from the Jakarta Legal Aid Foundation (Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Jakarta), stated at the discussion that she had recorded Minister of Employment, Hanif Dhakiri, giving an announcement talk to labor unions several days before the Wage Regulation was issued.
According to Mrs. Febry though, instead of simply offering such announcement sessions, the government should instead be carrying out discussions, engaging in dialogue and, ultimately, incorporating the input offered by organized labor into the Wage Regulation. Unfortunately however, no such dialogue was engaged in, with the result that workers ended up rejecting the Wage Regulation when it was issued.
“The government did not engage in any dialogue with labor before issuing the Wage Regulation, so it came as no surprise that loud protests emerged from labor," Mrs. Febry stated.
(sp)
Ari Pramuditya, Ady Thea
Minister of Employment Hanif Dhakiri. Photo by: RES
The issuance of Government Regulation No. 78 of 2015 on Wages (“Wage Regulation”), drew the immediate attention of the general public and various societal groups. Appreciation for the Wage Regulation was expressed by employers, who believe that it grants them security. However, many workers and labor groups have criticized the new wage formulation, which they consider to be unfair.
Beyond the directly affected employees and workers though, the Employment Study Group at the Indonesian Academy of Sciences (Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia – “LIPI”) has conducted a review of the processes involved in the formation of the new Wage Regulation.
The results of this review assert that the formation of the new Wage Regulation did not involve enough public discussion, or incorporate the aspirations of workers and labor. Both parties, according to the review, are important stakeholders that should have been involved in the process.
During a discussion held at LIPI in Jakarta on Tuesday 3 November 2015, Lilis Mulyani, a researcher at LIPI, stated that the government tends to disregard any involvement in these matters from the National Tripartite Agency (Lembaga Tripartit Nasonal), a body which brings together government, organized labor and employers. In order to actualize a dynamic industrial-relations paradigm however, input from all of these parties is essential, according to Mrs. Mulyani.
Mrs. Mulyani reminded the government that Article 5 of Law No. 12 of 2011 on the Establishment of Laws and mandates that the government implements principles of openness (participatory, dialogic and transparent) as regards the formation of any regulations. She further stated that the Employment Study Group at LIPI had proposed that the government reassess the Wage Regulation in order to fully incorporate these principles of openness into the process.
Mrs. Mulyani emphasized that a process of dialogue should be implemented, as workers have rejected the government’s new formula and have come up with their own instead. No single stakeholder in the area of employment can formulate a Wage Regulation on their own. Rather, according to Mrs. Mulyani, each party should be proposing what variables they would like to see being included in the wage formulation through a process of discussion and dialogue.
Triyono, an Employment Researcher at LIPI’s Population and Research Center, stated at the discussion that the new Wage Regulation benefits regions with weak labor movements. In contrast, in areas that have strong labor movements, such as Jabodetabek (Jakarta-Bogor-Depok-Tangerang-Bekasi), the Wage Regulation has been declared problematic, as it seems likely that it will weaken the role of labors unions during minimum-wage negotiations.
“The increase in the minimum wage, as set out in the Wage Regulation, clearly utilizes a formulation which only refers to inflation and national economic growth,” said Mr. Triyono.
Mr. Triyono argued that the formulation created by the government represented a middle ground, and that employment issues were not only the concern of workers and employers, but also of jobseekers as well. Even so, he stated, this did not mean that the Wage Regulation was perfect.
A number of improvements is proposed by Mr. Triyono to the new regulation, one of which related to the current five-yearly evaluation of what constitutes decent living standards (Kebutuhan Hidup Layak – “KHL”). According to Triyono, any evaluation of KHL should be shortened to three year periods, which will in turn lead to a more intense dialogue between the government, workers and employers.
“If the KHL evaluation takes place every three years, then any weaknesses relating to KHL will come under the microscope more often,” explained Triyono.
Triyono also highlighted the current lack of supervision in the area of employment, for which he believes regional autonomy is largely to blame. Triyono suggested that supervising rights be restored to central government.
Pratiwi Febry, a public lawyer from the Jakarta Legal Aid Foundation (Lembaga Bantuan Hukum Jakarta), stated at the discussion that she had recorded Minister of Employment, Hanif Dhakiri, giving an announcement talk to labor unions several days before the Wage Regulation was issued.
According to Mrs. Febry though, instead of simply offering such announcement sessions, the government should instead be carrying out discussions, engaging in dialogue and, ultimately, incorporating the input offered by organized labor into the Wage Regulation. Unfortunately however, no such dialogue was engaged in, with the result that workers ended up rejecting the Wage Regulation when it was issued.
“The government did not engage in any dialogue with labor before issuing the Wage Regulation, so it came as no surprise that loud protests emerged from labor," Mrs. Febry stated.
(sp)