As an effort to broaden support against the ratification of the Omnibus Law on Job Creation Bill, on Sunday (10/10/2020) an event called  NOBAR NOP #8 (Nongkrong Bareng Never Okay Project) was held with the theme “Emergency Meeting: Job Creation or Create Suffering?”

Moderated by Alvin Nicola, NOBAR NOP #8 invited 3 expert speakers, namely

• Nabiyla Risfa Izzati (Lecturer of Labor Law at UGM Faculty of Law)

• Andy Akbar (Program Deputy Director Trade Union Rights Centre)

• Vivi Widyawati (Mahardhika Women)

NOBAR NOP #8 discusses the Omnibus Law in the employment cluster, namely regarding the relationship between labor liberalization and human rights.

WHY SHOULD WE CARE?

“As long as we are not employers or entrepreneurs, we will all be affected,” was the opening statement from Nabiyla Risfa Izzati at NOBAR NOP #8. According to Law No. 13/2003 concerning employment, a worker is anyone who works for wages or compensation in any other form. Therefore, the ratification of this Job Creation Bill will impact not only workers but anyone who is not an employer. “We will be affected, we will be affected now, tomorrow, next month, or next year, just wait for the time. Therefore, it is very important for all groups to be aware of this because it will affect our lives,” stressed Nabiyla 

ISSUES IN THE EMPLOYMENT CLUSTER OF THE JOB CREATION BILL

According to Nabiyla, if viewed as a whole and conceptually, the Job Creation Bill is drawn up contrary to the nature of labor law. In essence, labor law should protect workers, where the state acts to balance the unequal relationship between workers and employers. If the state remains neutral, then indirectly, it is protecting the employers.

If we look at it article by article, there are at least 5 main issues in the employment cluster of the Job Creation Bill, namely regarding 

• PKWT (Fixed-Term Work Agreement)

The Job Creation Bill does not address the time limit for the appointment of workers with PKWT status, or what we often refer to as contract workers, to become permanent workers. This will result in contract workers being able to be extended repeatedly without a maximum limit. There is no provision requiring employers to change the status of temporary workers (PKWT) to permanent workers (PKWTT). Therefore, it is possible that until retirement, a worker will always remain a contract worker. 

Vivi explained that the contract system makes workers' positions weaker in front of employers. The contract system perpetuates oppression and exploitation of workers, especially women. Often, female workers whose contracts expire close to their delivery date will not have their contracts extended.  

• Minimum wage 

The minimum wage is not based on a decent living standard but rather on economic and labor conditions. When economic and labor conditions in Indonesia are declining, this article opens the possibility of a decrease in the minimum wage. 

Yet according to Andy, this provision harms not only workers but also the state. Where the decline in the minimum wage will then impact the decline in the purchasing power of society. Thus, this article does not encourage the creation of a prosperous Indonesian society.

Vivi added that low wages will have a greater impact on female workers. Even now, many female workers have to have side jobs to meet their needs. Thus, in one day, a female worker may work for 16 hours. This is because she has to work 8 hours at her main job and then 8 hours later for her side job. Break time for female workers also becomes very limited. 

Additionally, article 88B also states that wages are calculated based on time and results. If this is linked to women's reproductive systems, then women are greatly disadvantaged by this article. Vivi stated that, “If a woman is pregnant, then she will take maternity leave and give birth. Women have the right to take other reproductive leaves. If wages are calculated based on time and results, then when she takes leave, she will not receive the wage she should have.”

• Dismissal 

Dismissal under Law 13/2008 is viewed as something that should be attempted not to happen. However, in the Job Creation Bill, dismissal can occur as long as there is an agreement between the worker and employer. However, there are still issues related to the imbalance in the relationship between workers and employers that is not equal. Therefore, the state should be a third party that can protect workers, not a neutral party between workers and employers.

• Severance pay

Under Law 13/2003, a minimum amount of severance pay is stipulated, but in the Job Creation Bill, only the maximum amount of severance pay is stipulated. Thus, the Job Creation Bill fails to provide minimal protection to workers. The company is also free to provide severance pay in any minimal amount to the workers. 

• Outsourcing

The Job Creation Bill does not limit jobs that can and cannot use the outsourcingsystem, which again represents a regression from Law 13/2003.

• Workers in the informal sector are not protected

The Job Creation Bill only accommodates labor regulations in the formal sector. For workers in the informal sector such as household workers, shop workers, etc. are not regulated in the Job Creation Bill.  

SINCE ITS INCEPTION, THE JOB CREATION BILL HAS VIOLATED BASIC RIGHTS IN DEMOCRACY

According to Vivi, the process of forming the Job Creation Bill from the very beginning has violated basic rights in democracy, which is the right to express an opinion. The spaces for public aspiration that should be heard by the government have not been heard at all. Since the beginning of 2019, there have been many studies conducted by various parties criticizing the Job Creation Bill. However, not a single one was heard by the government, and the space for aspiration was closed. 

GOVERNMENT: “PLEASE FILE A JR IF YOU DISAGREE”

The lengthy debate over the Job Creation Bill has led the government to urge the public to conduct judicial reviews (JR). If the public disagrees with the contents of the Job Creation Bill, the government suggests that they submit a JR. 

Responding to this, Andy also urged the government, “From the start, we knew that this was of poor quality, why was it enacted? And why should it be forced to submit a JR? This is what should be noted by the government. Before it was ratified, the government should have absorbed aspirations and listened to opinions from various elements of society.” Andy likened this to a factory product that fails quality control but is still forced to be sold.

JR ON THE JOB CREATION BILL IS NOT THE END OF THE STRUGGLE

The Omnibus Law on the Job Creation Bill is not a regulation that stands alone. However, there will be about 40 implementing regulations to clarify its articles. If the Omnibus Law on the Job Creation Bill is successfully annulled through a judicial review, its implementing regulations will not automatically be annulled as well. The implementing regulations will continue to run even if the Job Creation Law is abolished. This means that there will be many episodes of judicial review that the people must fight for.      

WHAT SHOULD WE DO NEXT?

The three speakers believe that now is not the time to stop trying. Everyone in various lines can do something according to their respective roles, for example: 

1. Workers should not stop organizing

2. Academic circles should not stop studying and providing recommendations to the government:

3. Encouraging executive reviews and the issuance of presidential regulations to replace the law, or 

4. Can also help provide support for the movement against the omnibus law in various forms, whether in the form of manpower, funding, or simply understanding and providing support on social media, etc.