[{"_1":2,"_141":-5,"_142":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_27":28,"_29":30},"root",{"_5":6,"_7":-5,"_8":9},"locale","id","session","ENV",{"_10":11,"_12":13,"_14":15,"_16":17,"_18":17,"_19":20,"_21":22,"_23":24,"_25":26},"APP_ENV","development","APP_URL","https://eunomia.veritask.ai","GA_MEASUREMENT_ID","G-X1BV3QBZEM","META_PIXEL_ID","","TIKTOK_PIXEL_IDS","CLARITY_PROJECT_ID","wna53wookm","AMPLITUDE_API_KEY","7e63bba8e40e975f05a764d0760dae98","MIDTRANS_CLIENT_KEY","Mid-client-Utk0Sjf97WJDzPZp","MIDTRANS_SNAP_URL","https://app.sandbox.midtrans.com/snap/snap.js","routes/$locale",{"_5":6},"routes/$locale.search-engine.regulation.$regulationId",{"_31":32,"_33":34},"regulationId","75a14ec4-d860-4ad5-975f-76246ba6dc47","regulationData",{"_35":32,"_36":37,"_138":139,"_140":-5},"regulation_id","overview",{"_38":39,"_40":41,"_42":43,"_44":45,"_46":47,"_48":47,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_64":65,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":76,"_77":78,"_79":80,"_81":82,"_83":84,"_85":86,"_87":88,"_89":90,"_91":92,"_93":94,"_95":96,"_97":98,"_99":100,"_101":102,"_103":104,"_105":106,"_107":108,"_109":110,"_111":112,"_136":137},"title","Undang-undang (UU) Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan","short_title","Undang-undang (UU) Nomor 13 Tahun 2003","number","13","year","2003","published_date","2003-03-25","effective_date","status_id","3611a577-44a0-41ad-986d-7457e14f52ff","status",{"_6":50,"_53":54,"_55":56},"name","Berlaku","description","Peraturan yang masih berlaku dan memiliki kekuatan hukum yang mengikat","type_id","3757c91e-d547-4d86-9075-f0ab6d112a73","type",{"_6":58,"_53":61,"_62":63},"Undang-undang (UU)","short_name","UU","subjects",[66],{"_6":67,"_53":68,"_55":-5},"d109dd82-2088-4820-8eed-a31bab114acd","Hubungan Ketenagakerjaan","tags",[],"location","Pemerintah Pusat","place_of_enactment","Jakarta","theme","Ketenagakerjaan","subject_matter","Dalam UU ini diatur mengenai: landasan, asas, dan tujuan pembangunan ketenagakerjaan; kesempatan dan perlakuan yang sama dalam hal ketenagakerjaan; perencanaan tenaga kerja dan informasi ketenagakerjaan; pelatihan kerja; penempatan tenaga kerja; perluasan kesempatan kerja; penggunaan tenaga kerja asing; hubungan kerja; perlindungan, pengupahan, dan kesejahteraan; hubungan industrial; pembinaan; pengawasan; penyidikan; dan ketentuan pidana serta sanksi administratif di bidang ketenagakerjaan. Sanksi pidana menurut UU ini menyatakan bahwa sanksi pidana penjara, kurungan, dan/atau denda tidak menghilangkan kewajiban pengusaha membayar hak-hak dan/atau ganti kerugian kepada tenaga kerja atau pekerja/buruh.","abstract","\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n

Ketenagakerjaan
2003
Undang-undang (UU) NO. 13, LN.2003/NO.39, TLN NO.4279, LL SETNEG :79 HLM
Undang-undang (UU) TENTANG Ketenagakerjaan
ABSTRAK:	\n \n Dalam pelaksanaan pembangunan nasional, tenaga kerja mempunyai peranan dan kedudukan yang sangat penting sebagai pelaku dan tujuan pembangunan. Perlindungan terhadap tenaga kerja dimaksudkan untuk menjamin hak hak dasar pekerja/buruh dan menjamin kesamaan kesempatan serta perlakuan tanpa diskriminasi atas dasar apapun untuk mewujudkan kesejahteraan pekerja/buruh dan keluarganya dengan tetap memperhatikan perkembangan kemajuan dunia usaha. Bahwa beberapa undang-undang di bidang ketenagakerjaan dipandang sudah tidak sesuai lagi dengan kebutuhan dan tuntutan pembangunan ketenagakerjaan, oleh karena itu perlu dicabut dan/atau ditarik kembali. \n Dasar hukum UU ini adalah Pasal 5 ayat (1), Pasal 20 ayat (2), Pasal 27 ayat (2), Pasal 28, dan Pasal 33 ayat (1) Undang Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945. \n Dalam UU ini diatur mengenai: landasan, asas, dan tujuan pembangunan ketenagakerjaan; kesempatan dan perlakuan yang sama dalam hal ketenagakerjaan; perencanaan tenaga kerja dan informasi ketenagakerjaan; pelatihan kerja; penempatan tenaga kerja; perluasan kesempatan kerja; penggunaan tenaga kerja asing; hubungan kerja; perlindungan, pengupahan, dan kesejahteraan; hubungan industrial; pembinaan; pengawasan; penyidikan; dan ketentuan pidana serta sanksi administratif di bidang ketenagakerjaan. Sanksi pidana menurut UU ini menyatakan bahwa sanksi pidana penjara, kurungan, dan/atau denda tidak menghilangkan kewajiban pengusaha membayar hak-hak dan/atau ganti kerugian kepada tenaga kerja atau pekerja/buruh. \n \n
CATATAN:	\n \n Undang-undang (UU) ini mulai berlaku pada tanggal 25 Maret 2003. \n Pada saat mulai berlakunya Undang undang ini, peraturan perundang-undangan yang dicabut yaitu: Ordonansi tentang Pengerahan Orang Indonesia Untuk Melakukan Pekerjaan Di Luar Indonesia (Staatsblad Tahun 1887 Nomor 8); Ordonansi tanggal 17 Desember 1925 Peraturan tentang Pembatasan Kerja Anak Dan Kerja Malam Bagi Wanita (Staatsblad Tahun 1925 Nomor 647); Ordonansi Tahun 1926 Peraturan mengenai Kerja Anak anak Dan Orang Muda Di Atas Kapal (Staatsblad Tahun 1926 Nomor 87); Ordonansi tanggal 4 Mei 1936 tentang Ordonansi untuk Mengatur Kegiatan kegiatan Mencari Calon Pekerja (Staatsblad Tahun 1936 Nomor 208); Ordonansi tentang Pemulangan Buruh Yang Diterima Atau Dikerahkan Dari Luar Indonesia (Staatsblad Tahun 1939 Nomor 545); Ordonansi Nomor 9 Tahun 1949 tentang Pembatasan Kerja Anak anak (Staatsblad Tahun 1949 Nomor 8); UU Nomor 1 Tahun 1951 tentang Pernyataan Berlakunya\r\nUU Kerja Tahun 1948 Nomor 12 Dari Republik Indonesia Untuk Seluruh Indonesia; UU Nomor 21 Tahun 1954 tentang Perjanjian Perburuhan Antara Serikat Buruh Dan Majikan; UU Nomor 3 Tahun 1958 tentang Penempatan Tenaga Asing; UU Nomor 8 Tahun 1961 tentang Wajib Kerja Sarjana; UU Nomor 7 Pnps Tahun 1963 tentang Pencegahan Pemogokan dan/atau Penutupan (Lock Out) Di Perusahaan, Jawatan, dan Badan Yang Vital; UU Nomor 14 Tahun 1969 tentang Ketentuan ketentuan Pokok Mengenai Tenaga Kerja; UU Nomor 25 Tahun 1997 tentang Ketenagakerjaan; UU Nomor 11 Tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan Berlakunya UU Nomor 25 Tahun 1997 tentang Ketenagakerjaan; dan UU Nomor 28 Tahun 2000 tentang Penetapan Perpu Nomor 3 Tahun 2000 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-undang Nomor 11 Tahun 1998 tentang Perubahan Berlakunya Undang-undang Nomor 25 Tahun 1997 tentang Ketenagakerjaan Menjadi Undang-undang. \n Telah dilakukan uji materiil oleh MK dengan putusan nomor 27/PUU-IX/2011, nomor 37/PUU-IX/2011, dan nomor 58/PUU-IX/2011. \n Penjelasan : 49 hlm. \n \n

","regulatory_relationship","

Status Peraturan

Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 72/PUU-XIII/2015 ini mengubah sebagian ketentuan dalam Penjelasan Pasal 90 ayat (2) Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan. Putusan ini menyatakan bahwa frasa \"tetapi tidak wajib membayar pemenuhan ketentuan upah minimum yang berlaku pada waktu diberikan penangguhan\" dalam Penjelasan Pasal 90 ayat (2) UU Ketenagakerjaan bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat.

","scope_and_parties","

Ruang Lingkup

Pihak yang Diatur:

Pengusaha dan pemberi kerja
Pekerja/buruh
Serikat pekerja/serikat buruh
Pemerintah (Gubernur sebagai penentu upah minimum)
Dewan Pengupahan Provinsi dan Kabupaten/Kota

Objek yang Diatur:

Mekanisme penangguhan pembayaran upah minimum
Kewajiban pengusaha membayar upah minimum
Hak pekerja untuk mendapatkan upah layak
Prosedur permohonan penangguhan upah minimum

","policy_content","

Isi Kebijakan

Putusan MK ini menegaskan bahwa selisih upah minimum dengan pembayaran yang dilakukan pengusaha selama masa penangguhan merupakan hutang pengusaha yang harus dibayarkan kepada pekerja/buruh. Penjelasan Pasal 90 ayat (2) UU Ketenagakerjaan sepanjang frasa \"tetapi tidak wajib membayar pemenuhan ketentuan upah minimum yang berlaku pada waktu diberikan penangguhan\" dinyatakan bertentangan dengan UUD 1945.

Putusan ini memberikan kepastian hukum bahwa pengusaha tetap berkewajiban membayar kekurangan upah yang ditangguhkan, meskipun telah mendapatkan izin penangguhan dari Gubernur. Hal ini dimaksudkan untuk melindungi hak konstitusional pekerja untuk mendapatkan imbalan yang adil dan layak dalam hubungan kerja.

","transitional_provisions","

Ketentuan Peralihan

Tidak ada ketentuan peralihan yang diatur secara khusus dalam putusan ini. Putusan berlaku sejak diucapkan dalam sidang pleno Mahkamah Konstitusi pada tanggal 29 September 2016.

","sanctions","

Sanksi

Putusan ini tidak mengatur sanksi secara khusus, namun menguatkan ketentuan sanksi yang telah diatur dalam Pasal 185 ayat (1) UU Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan, yaitu pidana penjara paling singkat 1 tahun dan paling lama 4 tahun dan/atau denda paling sedikit Rp100.000.000 dan paling banyak Rp400.000.000 bagi pengusaha yang membayar upah lebih rendah dari upah minimum.

","revokes",[],"revoked_by",[],"partially_revokes",[],"partially_revoked_by",[],"amends",[],"amended_by",[],"partially_amends",[],"partially_amended_by",[],"establishes",[],"established_by",[],"constitutional_review",[113,120,124,128,132],{"_114":115,"_116":117,"_118":119},"nomor_putusan","13/PUU-XV/2017","link","https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/DownloadUjiMateri/1/13_PUU-XV_2017.pdf","teks","Frasa \"kecuali telah diatur dalam perjanjian kerja, peraturan perusahaan, atau perjanjian kerja bersama\" dalam Pasal 153 ayat (1) huruf f Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan bertentangan dengan UUD NRI Tahun 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat.",{"_114":121,"_116":122,"_118":123},"72/PUU-XIII/2015","https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/DownloadUjiMateri/54/72_PUU-XIII_2015.pdf","Penjelasan Pasal 90 ayat (2) sepanjang frasa \"tetapi tidak wajib membayar pemenuhan ketentuan upah minimum yang berlaku pada waktu diberikan penangguhan\" Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan bertentangan dengan UUD NRI Tahun 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat.",{"_114":125,"_116":126,"_118":127},"7/PUU-XII/2014","https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/DownloadUjiMateri/93/putusan_sidang_2235_20170608075000_7_PUU_2014-UU-Ketenagakerjaan-KABUL-telahucap-4Nov2015-qrcode-wmActionWiz.pdf","Frasa \"demi hukum\" dalam Pasal 59 ayat (7), Pasal 65 ayat (8) , dan Pasal 66 ayat (4) Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan bertentangan dengan UUD NRI Tahun 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat sepanjang tidak dimaknai \"Pekerja/buruh dapat meminta pengesahaan nota pemeriksaan pegawai pengawas ketenagakerjaan kepada Pengadilan Negeri setempat dengan syariat:\r\n1. Telah dilaksanakan perundingan bipartit namun perundingan bipartit tersebut tidak mencapai kesepakatan atau salah satu pihak menolak untuk berunding; dan\r\n2. Telah dilakukan pemeriksaan oleh pegawai pengawas ketenagakerjaan berdasarkan peraturan perundang-undangan.\"",{"_114":129,"_116":130,"_118":131},"100/PUU-X/2012","https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/DownloadUjiMateri/81/putusan_sidang_100%20PUU%202012%20-%20telah%20ucap%2019%20September%202013.pdf","Pasal 96 Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan \r\nIndonesia bertentangan dengan UUD NRI Tahun 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat.",{"_114":133,"_116":134,"_118":135},"012/PUU-I/2003","https://peraturan.bpk.go.id/DownloadUjiMateri/132/Putusan012PUUI2003.pdf","Undang-undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan:\r\n• Pasal 158;----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n• Pasal 159;----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n• Pasal 160 ayat (1) sepanjang mengenai anak kalimat “…. bukan atas pengaduan \r\npengusaha …”;--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\n• Pasal 170 sepanjang mengenai anak kalimat “.… kecuali Pasal 158 ayat (1), …”;-\r\n• Pasal 171 sepanjang menyangkut anak kalimat “…. Pasal 158 ayat (1)…”;----------\r\n• Pasal 186 sepanjang mengenai anak kalimat “…. Pasal 137 dan Pasal 138 ayat \r\n(1)…” -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------\r\nbertentangan dengan UUD NRI Tahun 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat.","is_verified",false,"english_excerpt","

DECISION

Number 72/PUU-XIII/2015

FOR JUSTICE BASED ON THE ONE GOD ALMIGHTY

CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA

\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n

\n The panel adjudicating the constitutional matter at first and final instance renders a decision in the case of Judicial Review of Law Number 13 Year 2003 concerning Manpower against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, filed by:

\n\n

Name: Sukarya
\n Position: General Chairperson of the Central Executive Board of the Federation of Independent Labor Unions (DPP GSBM)
\n Address: Jalan Pratama I Number 11 Jati, Pulogadung, East Jakarta;
\n as Petitioner I;
Name: Siti Nurrofiqoh
\n Position: General Chairperson of the Central Executive Board of the Rising Labor Union (DPP SBB)
\n Address: Perum Taman Adiyasa Block L 14 Number 21/22 Cikupa Village, Solear District, Tangerang Regency;
\n as Petitioner II;

\n\n
\n In this matter, based on a Special Power of Attorney dated 15 April 2015, authority was given to Pelikson Silitonga, S.H., Amor Tampubolon, S.H., Nikson Gans Lalu, S.H., M.H., Mesry Rumahorbo, S.H., Pardomuan Simanjuntak, S.H., Endang Rokhani, S.H., M.Si., Rohana Sirait, S.H., and Johny Nelson Simanjuntak, S.H., advocates and assistant advocates who choose their legal domicile at the office of the Secretariat of the Advocacy Team Against Wage Suspension located at Jalan Pratama I Number 11, RT 016 RW 004, Jati, Rawamangun, Pulogadung, East Jakarta, whether individually or jointly acting for and on behalf of the grantors of power.

\n\n Hereinafter referred to as the Petitioners;

\n\n Reading the petition of the Petitioners;
\n Hearing the testimony of the Petitioners;
\n Reading and hearing the testimony of the President;
\n Reading and hearing the expert testimony of the Petitioners;
\n Hearing the witnesses of the Petitioners;
\n Examining the evidence of the Petitioners;
\n Reading the conclusions of the Petitioners;\n

\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n\n \n \n \n \n \n

2. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

\n Considering that the Petitioners filed a petition dated 18 May 2015 which was received by the Registry of the Constitutional Court (hereinafter called the Court Registry) on 18 May 2015 based on the Receipt of Application File Deed Number 150/PAN.MK/2015 and was recorded in the Constitutional Case Registration Book with Number 72/PUU-XIII/2015 on 3 June 2015, which was amended by an amended petition dated 30 June 2015, which is in substance as follows:\n\n

\n I. THE AUTHORITY OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT\n\n
\n

That pursuant to the provisions of Article 24 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution which reads, \"Judicial power is exercised by a Supreme Court and judicial bodies under it within the general court environment, the religious court environment, the military court environment, the administrative court environment, and by a Constitutional Court\".
That the provision of Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution states, \"The Constitutional Court is authorized to adjudicate at first and final instance whose decisions are final to review laws against the Constitution, decide disputes over the authority of state institutions whose authority is given by the Constitution, decide on the dissolution of political parties, and decide disputes concerning election results\".
That the provision of Article 10 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court as amended by Law Number 8 Year 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 24 Year 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the Constitutional Court Law), which reads, \"The Constitutional Court is authorized to adjudicate at first and final instance whose decisions are final to:\n
1. Review laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia\".
\n
Furthermore Article 29 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 48 Year 2009 concerning Judicial Power states, \"The Constitutional Court is authorized to adjudicate at first and final instance whose decisions are final to:\n
1. Review laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia\".
\n
That because the object of this judicial review petition is the material content of the Manpower Law Number 13 Year 2003 against the 1945 Constitution, the Petitioners are of the opinion that the Constitutional Court is authorized to review Article 90 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 Year 2003 concerning Manpower and its Explanation against Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.

\n\n
\n II. LEGAL STANDING OF THE PETITIONERS\n\n
\n

That Article 51 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law states that Petitioners are parties who consider that their constitutional rights and/or authorities are harmed by the enactment of a Law, namely:\n
1. individual Indonesian citizens;
2. customary law community units as long as they are still alive and in accordance with the development of society and the principle of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia regulated in laws;
3. public or private legal entities; or
4. state institutions.
\n
That in the Explanation of Article 51 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law it is stated that what is meant by \"constitutional rights\" are the rights regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia;
That based on the Constitutional Court jurisprudence through decisions in Case Number 006/PUU-III/2005, dated 31 May 2005 and Case Decision Number 11/PUU-V/2007, dated 20 September 2007, that constitutional harm arising from the enactment of a Law under Article 51 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law must meet five (5) requirements, namely:\n
1. the existence of a constitutional right of the Petitioner granted by the 1945 Constitution;
2. that the Petitioner considers that such constitutional right has been harmed by the enactment of the Law being reviewed;
3. that the constitutional harm alleged by the Petitioner is specific (particular) and actual or at least potential which by reasonable reasoning can be ascertained will occur;
4. the existence of a causal relationship (causal verband) between the harm and the enactment of the Law requested to be reviewed;
5. the possibility that if the petition is granted the alleged constitutional harm will not or will no longer occur.
\n
That Petitioner I is an individual citizen of the Republic of Indonesia who is a worker and an officer of a labor union organization who has a high concern to fight for the interests of workers as the purpose of the establishment of the organization stipulated in the Articles of Association/Bylaws (see evidence P-1) which has been registered at the East Jakarta Administrative City Labor and Transmigration Sub-department with Number 48/IV/D/V/2001 dated 08 May 2001 (see evidence P-2);
That Petitioner II is an individual citizen of the Republic of Indonesia who was formerly a worker and an officer of a labor union organization who has a high concern to fight for the interests of workers as the purpose of the establishment of the organization stipulated in the Articles of Association/Bylaws (see evidence P-3) which has been registered at the Tangerang City Manpower Office with Number 568.4/3438-Disnaker/2005 dated 18 July 2005 (see evidence P-4);
That the Petitioners are leaders/chairpersons of labor/worker union organizations who have hitherto had concern and carried out activities to fight for the rights of workers in Indonesia in general and particularly in the organizations they lead for the fulfillment of protection and enforcement of social justice, law and human rights;
That the Petitioners also constitute parties who have constitutional rights granted by Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, namely the right to work and to receive fair and appropriate remuneration and treatment in employment relations (see evidence P-5);
That pursuant to the requirements as already constituted in the jurisprudence the Petitioners are parties who have constitutional rights granted by Article 28E paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, namely as a group of persons having the same interest within a labor union. The Petitioners also have a causal relationship between the alleged constitutional harm and the legal consequences of a declaration of non-enforceability of the provisions of the Law a quo requested to be reviewed (see evidence P-6);
That based on the above qualifications and requirements, the Petitioners as a group of Indonesian citizens having the same interest within a labor union organization to advocate for the welfare of members and their families, whose constitutional rights have been or at least potentially will be harmed due to the enactment of Article 90 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 Year 2003 concerning Manpower and its Explanation (see evidence P-6);
That accordingly, the Petitioners in their capacity as leaders of labor/worker unions and as a group of persons having the same interest, have legal standing to pursue the rights and interests of workers that are in accordance with and meet the prevailing provisions as Petitioners in the judicial review of the Law a quo against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.

\n\n
\n III. GROUNDS FOR THE PETITION FOR JUDICIAL REVIEW OF THE LAW\n\n
\n A. Article 90 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 Year 2003 and its Explanation conflict with Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.\n\n
\n

That Article 90 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 Year 2003 explicitly states, \"(2) For employers who are unable to pay the minimum wage as referred to in Article 89 a postponement may be carried out;
That the Explanation of Article 90 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 Year 2003 states: the postponement of the implementation of the minimum wage for companies that are unable is intended to relieve the concerned company from implementing the applicable minimum wage for a certain period. If the postponement ends, the concerned company is obliged to implement the minimum wage applicable at that time but is not obliged to pay the fulfillment of the minimum wage provisions applicable at the time the postponement was granted;

\n\n\n \n \n \n

\n\n\n \n \n \n \n \n \n

Considering:

That Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution mandates that every person has the right to work to meet their livelihood and receive compensation, fair and decent treatment in labor relations. Compensation is a form of reward for the contribution given by the worker/laborer to the company, which in the Manpower Law Number 13 of 2003 is referred to as wages. Every worker/laborer has the right to obtain fair and decent treatment in such labor relations. Fair treatment means the type or form of work performed by the worker/laborer and the wages received from the employer or person giving work not because of similarity or difference in status, ethnicity, or belief. Decent treatment means the basic rights of workers/laborers during the performance of work are protected and the wages received by workers/laborers at least meet the reasonable needs of life for food, clothing and housing.
That in order to provide protection for citizens who have worked or are called workers/laborers, the government has made various efforts to provide protection from exploitative actions by employers. One of these is by creating and enacting Law Number 13 of 2003 on Manpower.
That in providing protection to workers and to realize and improve the welfare of workers and their families as respect and fulfillment of workers' rights, the effort that must be realized as the government's obligation is to make wage policies that base them on efforts to fulfill decent wages nationally for workers and their family members.
That the provision of Article 88 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003 states, \"every worker/laborer has the right to obtain income that meets a decent living for humanity\". To fulfill or realize an income that meets a decent living for humanity, the government determines wage policies (see Article 88 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 of 2003) where one of the government's policies to realize income that meets the decent living needs of workers and their families is through the determination of minimum wages (see Article 88 paragraph (3) letter a of Law Number 13 of 2003). Thus the purpose of the minimum wage is to fulfill the minimum living needs of workers and their families and also to protect the purchasing power of workers and their families while the minimum wage policy also functions as a social safety net aimed at preventing workers' wage levels from falling to very low levels.
That because the minimum wage policy is directed at achieving a decent living for workers and their families, Article 90 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003 on Manpower prohibits employers from paying wages lower than the minimum wage. The provision of Article 90 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003 is a mandatory or normative provision. Because the provision of Article 90 paragraph (1) is mandatory or normative, employers who violate that provision will receive criminal sanctions as regulated in Article 185 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003.
That what is meant by Decent Living Needs or KHL in accordance with the provisions of the Minister of Manpower and Transmigration Regulation Number 17 of 2005 as amended by Minister of Manpower and Transmigration Regulation Number 13 of 2012 concerning Components and Implementation Stages for Achieving Decent Living Needs Article 1 paragraph (1) is that what is meant by Decent Living Needs hereinafter abbreviated as KHL is the standard of needs that must be met by a single worker/laborer to be able to live decently both physically, non-physically and socially, for the needs of 1 (one) month.
That the provision of Article 90 paragraph (1) is also one of the government's efforts to protect workers from exploitation by employers and at the same time as an effort to improve human livelihood as mandated by Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution which reads, \"Everyone has the right to work and to receive compensation and fair and decent treatment in relations of employment.\"
As explained above, one of the Government's policies to achieve income that meets a decent living for workers and their families is through the Determination of the Minimum Wage (see Article 88 paragraph (3) letter a of Law Number 13 of 2003) where that minimum wage is able to meet the decent living needs or KHL of workers/laborers by taking into account productivity and economic growth. The determination of the minimum wage is carried out by the Governor taking into account recommendations from the Provincial and/or Regency/City Wage Councils.\n\n The mechanism for Determining the Minimum Wage is as follows:\n\n
1. The Chair of the Provincial and/or Regency/City Wage Council forms a survey team whose members consist of tripartite elements: Representatives of Labor Unions, Employers, Government and a neutral party from academia;
2. Based on Ministerial Decree Number 17 of 2005 which regulates the KHL standard, the Wage Council survey team conducts price surveys to determine the KHL price value, the results of which will be submitted to the Regional Head (Governor and/or Regent/Mayor) respectively;
3. Surveys are conducted once a month from January to September, while for October to December predictions are made using the least square method. The results of each monthly survey are then averaged to obtain the KHL value;
4. This KHL value will be used as one of the considerations in setting the minimum wage applicable to workers/laborers with less than 1 (one) year of service. Wages for workers with 1 (one) year of service or more are negotiated bipartitely between the workers or labor union and the employer at the respective company;
5. Based on the survey price values, the Wage Council also considers other factors such as productivity, economic growth, the most unable enterprises, labor market conditions and advice/consideration from the Provincial/Regency/City Wage Council;
6. The Governor determines the amount of the Minimum Wage value. Determination of the Minimum Wage (UMP) is carried out 60 days before its effective date, namely every January 1.
\n\n
The elements or membership and composition of membership of the Provincial and/or Regency/City Wage Council are regulated in Presidential Decree Number 107 of 2004 concerning the Wage Council, namely:\n\n
1. The membership of the Provincial Wage Council consists of elements of Government, Employer Organizations, Workers/Labor Unions, Universities and Experts. Meanwhile the composition of its membership is 2:1:1;
2. The membership of the Regency/City Wage Council consists of elements of Government, Employer Organizations, Workers/Labor Unions, Universities and Experts. Meanwhile the composition of its membership is 2:1:1.
\n\n
In determining to set the minimum wage, the Governor discusses simultaneously and considers the factors as regulated in the Minister of Manpower Regulation Number 13 of 2012, namely the factors:\n\n
1. Value of Decent Living Needs (KHL), namely the KHL value obtained and determined from the survey results;
2. Macro productivity, namely the result of the comparison between the Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP) and the number of workers in the same period;
3. Economic Growth, namely economic growth which is the value of Gross Regional Domestic Product (GRDP);
4. Labor Market Conditions, namely the comparison between the number of job vacancies and the number of job seekers in a certain region in the same period;
5. Condition of the most unable (marginal) enterprises, namely indicated by the development of the number of marginal enterprises in a certain region in a certain period.
\n\n
That based on the Minimum Wage Determination mechanism carried out by the parties involved, and the factors that are considerations in determining the minimum wage, all employers should be able to pay the minimum wage determined by the government as mandated by Article 90 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003 which reads, \"Employers are prohibited from paying wages lower than the minimum wage as referred to in Article 89\".
That the provision of Article 90 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003 becomes non-mandatory or not normative with the existence of Article 90 paragraph (2) which reads, (2) For employers who are unable to pay the minimum wage as referred to in Article 89, a postponement may be granted.
What is meant by Postponement? According to the General Dictionary of the Indonesian Language: Balai Pustaka, 2nd edition, 1991: p. 1005, \"Postponement\" is a process, way, act of suspending.\n\n Based on that definition of postponement, wage postponement is the action of an employer delaying the payment of the minimum wage for a certain period. In other words, an employer who is unable to pay the minimum wage determined by the Governor delays the time of payment. Example: According to West Java Governor Decree Number 561/Kep.1636-Bangsos/2013 concerning Minimum Wages for Regencies/Cities in West Java 2014 that the Minimum Wage for Workers in Bogor Regency is IDR 2,242,240 per month. (see evidence P-7) With the issuance of West Java Governor Decree Number 561/Kep.1636-Bangsos/2013 many companies located in Bogor Regency have applied for postponement of the implementation of the minimum wage. Employers' efforts to apply for permission to postpone the implementation of the minimum wage are based on the provisions of Article 90 paragraph (2) of Law Number 13 of 2003.

\n\n","pdf_url","actionData","errors"]