You are on page 1of 3

LABOUR LAW ASSIGNMENT II WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 30th, 2011 1. WATCH THE MOVIE; 2. ANALYSE: a. What is the case?

The case is about a workers who didnt got a good policy from the company. Many event which showed that the workers didnt got a decent livelihood. The case also showed that many violation was done by the company and was not appropriate to Indonesian Regulation. b. Identify the problems facing by the workers!
-

The wages are not in accordance with the minimum wage standard The movie showed that the wages received by workers has been minimal, not according to what they produce. As we can see, one example is the branded products are expensive, but the salaries paid to its employees is very small, is certainly very contradictory to the size of the company demands that require them to work hard and produce a lot of stuff.

The working time is overtime In the movie showed some violations of working time. workers were forced to work more than 12 hours, there are up to 16 hours even 24 hours. This is really tragic because the employers did not pay attention to how health care workers. workers are required to meet the company's production for the achievement of big business.

Workers didnt got a decent livelihood Seen from the many demands of work, workers have to sacrifice personal interests for the sake of the company. They should receive a salary that is actually less feasible, exertion and sacrifice of time, just for the sake of survival. welfare of workers in this movie looks still very less attention. employers exploit them, but not in Balance with welfare for the workers themselves. So still a lot of suffering experienced by workers in their lives, one example is a slum dwelling.

Bad facilities was given by company to the workers In the movie we see some parts that show how bad the facilities provided by the company. Though the company is a modern enterprise which produces goods with famous brands. As seen in the movie, the workers were mostly women, their work in crowded conditions under fluorescent light with a temperature of 40C, the only air conditioned space only for the bosses.

c. Look for the provisions/articles in Act No.13/2003 and ILOs Decent Work that are related to the case! According to the Act No. 13 of 2003, the case had been violated the regulation in the Article 77 (2) Waktu kerja sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ayat (1) meliputi : a. 7 (tujuh) jam 1 (satu) hari dan 40 (empat puluh) jam 1 (satu) minggu untuk 6 (enam) hari kerja dalam 1 (satu) minggu; atau b. 8 (delapan) jam 1 (satu) hari dan 40 (empat puluh) jam 1 (satu) minggu untuk 5(lima) hari kerja dalam 1 (satu) minggu. From the article above related to the case, Article 88 (1) Setiap pekerja/buruh berhak memperoleh penghasilan yang memenuhi penghidupan yang layak bagi kemanusiaan. (3)Kebijakan pengupahan yang melindungi pekerja/buruh sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ayat (2) meliputi : a. upah minimum; (4) Pemerintah menetapkan upah minimum sebagaimana dimaksud dalam ayat (3) huruf a berdasarkan kebutuhan hidup layak dan dengan mem-perhatikan produktivitas dan pertumbuhan ekonomi. In this case the employer does not meet the minimum wage, as has been stipulated in the law. this can be seen from the standard wage provided by the company is not in accordance with the number of goods they produce.

d. What do you think of the solution/s?

3.

SUBMISSION: no later than Wednesday, December 14th, 2011, 01.00pm.

Yogyakarta, November 30th, 2011 Lecturer Mila Karmila Adi, SH., M.Hum.