RI journalists lack protection<\/p>\n
By Lukas Kuwarso<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Journalists face high risks in the workplace but
\nthere is insufficient legal basis for their protection.<\/p>\n
On Nov. 23, 1998, the Alliance of Independent Journalists
\n(known by its local acronym AJI), received a letter from
\nBritain's National Union of Journalists (NUJ), reporting its
\nrecent loss in its lawsuit against the Financial Times (FT)
\ndaily.<\/p>\n
The suit was filed on behalf of four NUJ members who suffered
\noccupational accidents while working as FT reporters. FT's
\nmanagement was accused of having neglected to provide proper
\nworking facilities, resulting in the employees suffering
\nrepetitive strain injury.<\/p>\n
According to the letter signed by NUJ president Mark Turnbull
\nand an executive of the International Federation of Journalists
\n(IFJ), NUJ must now pay 700,000 in compensation to FT.<\/p>\n
Similar letters have also been sent to journalists'
\nassociations throughout the world in a call for international
\nsolidarity to help NUJ pay the compensation.<\/p>\n
The letter said NUJ had proven itself to be at the vanguard in
\nseeking justice for its members and had set a legal precedent
\nwhich may serve as a lesson for other workers' unions. The story
\nillustrates part of the job of a journalists' association in
\nBritain, a developed country with a strong tradition of press
\nfreedom and journalistic independence.<\/p>\n
In developing Indonesia, where the press is still in a
\ndisadvantaged situation, the same story is unimaginable.<\/p>\n
It would be considered absurd in Indonesia because the case
\nseems \"trivial\" and no precedent exists of a journalists'
\norganization filing a lawsuit on a compensation claim for its
\nmembers.<\/p>\n
For five decades, the country's sole journalistic organization
\nwas the Indonesian Journalists Association (PWI). Despite
\nprofessing itself to be a professional organization, it has thus
\nfar served the interests of the government over those of its
\nmembers.<\/p>\n
In other words, Indonesian journalists have never had an
\norganization which fights for their rights and aspirations,
\nprotects their occupational health and promotes their welfare.
\nThe problem may be typical of a developing country, where getting
\na job is regarded as a divine gift and talking about rights a
\nluxury.<\/p>\n
Indeed, this is where the confusion lies. In Indonesia, the
\njob of a journalist is considered more a profession than labor. A
\nlaborer -- euphemistically termed workers during the New Order
\nera -- is someone working for money. A laborer receives overtime pay
\nwhen he works past his set hour. A laborer is also protected by
\nthe manpower law and his pay must not be lower than the
\ngovernment-stipulated minimum wage.<\/p>\n
An Indonesian journalist tends to fall into the trap of
\npseudo-pride when he assumes himself to uphold the \"profession\"
\nof news reporting.<\/p>\n
Truth is revealed in the working conditions of journalists in
\nthe country. It is an open secret that journalists lack clarity
\nabout their working hours, earnings, welfare benefits and
\noccupational protection.<\/p>\n
When doing his job, a journalist is protected only by a
\ncollective labor agreement (KKB) determined by the company where
\nhe works. Unfortunately, not all press companies are in
\npossession of written agreements. A journalist must therefore
\ntake the agreement for granted, whether or not it sets out clear
\nand adequate details about his rights as an employee.<\/p>\n
In the New Order era, the government introduced a concept of a
\nPancasila-based industrial labor relations (HKIP) in industrial
\ncompanies. In press circles, this was accommodated by means of
\nallotting 20 percent of corporate shares to the firm's employees.
\nAlthough the provision of the shares is regulated in the law on
\nPress Principles of 1982 and maintained in the bill on the press
\nnow under deliberation, it is still unclear how this provision
\nshould be enforced.<\/p>\n
No press companies have actually complied. Some financially
\nsuccessful press companies have indeed tried to meet the
\nprovision but in the form of a profit-sharing scheme. This means
\nthat if the company can post a large profit, a portion goes to
\nthe employees in the form of dividends. The question is whether
\nemployees in this manner enjoy the portion of the corporate
\nshares to which they are supposedly entitled.<\/p>\n
Distribution of dividends seems more like \"bestowal of
\ngenerosity\" from the capitalists (company owners) to the
\nemployees. The employees, who should be entitled to 20 percent of
\nthe company's shares, cannot participate in making a decision on
\ndetermining the company's actual profit, including how big is the
\nprofit allocation to them.<\/p>\n
The significance of controlling the shares should actually lie
\nin the employees' right to participate in the process of making
\nthe company's strategic decisions. It means employees would have
\ntheir representatives on the board of commissioners and the
\nrepresentatives would take part in the decision-making process.
\nRepresentation of the employees on the company's board of
\ncommissioners could prevent firms from making investments in non-
\npress businesses such as prawn-breeding farms, a footwear
\nfactory, hotel construction and so forth. In fact, the profit
\nshould be returned to the employees for the improvement of their
\nwelfare and working conditions.<\/p>\n
Although the share ownership is an interesting concept, the
\nrealization is not simple, while the Pancasila-based industrial
\nstyle seeking to emphasize harmony is not usual in a real labor
\nrelationship.<\/p>\n
Industrial relations between capital owners and workers are
\nusually characterized by \"tensions\" because both have their
\nrespective vested interests. An owner, for instance, hopes to
\nmake the biggest profit out of the smallest capital, while a
\nworker wants to earn as much as possible by doing as little work
\nas possible. The tension may be overcome if the owner and the
\nworker have equal bargaining positions.<\/p>\n
A worker may have a stronger bargaining position if there is a
\nlabor union, which will improve worker conditions through
\ncollective bargaining. It can also create solidarity among
\nworkers when the company treats them unfairly, for example, in
\ncases of dismissals and wage cuts.<\/p>\n
A labor union can also organize the relationship between a
\ncapital owner and workers so there is an agreement for common
\nadherence. The establishment of this union is aimed particularly
\nat ensuring that a company will not ignore a worker's interest.
\nIn the absence of a labor union, a worker will always depend on a
\ncompany owner's \"mercy or good intention\".<\/p>\n
However, everything connected with the industrial relationship
\nbetween a capitalist and a worker may be properly established
\nonly if matters of significant substance have been thoroughly
\ndealt with. If the state, like the New Order regime, continues to
\ninterfere with everything, the first task of a workers' union
\nwill be to oppose all the constraints put up by the state. This
\nwas exactly what AJI sought to do from its inception.<\/p>\n
Now that political constraints have been reduced (through the
\nsimplification of licensing procedures and allowing journalists
\nto join any professional-related organizations) the next task
\nawaiting AJI is to turn itself into a professional labor union.
\nThis is indeed a difficult job and will take time to complete.<\/p>\n
Since the simplification of the press licensing procedures,
\nthe government has issued licenses to over 400 news media, of
\nwhich about 50 media publications have seen the light of day. If
\neach new media publication recruits 10 new journalists, the
\nnumber of Indonesian journalists has now increased by about 500
\npeople in the past six months.<\/p>\n
If the 300 new media publications start operating next year,
\nthe number of journalists will increase from about 7,000 at
\npresent to about 10,000. However, if the economic crisis
\ncontinues, few media publications can afford to survive. The
\ninevitable result will be a lot of layoffs.<\/p>\n
The writer is chairman of the Alliance of Independent
\nJournalists (AJI).<\/p>\n
Window A: Indonesian journalists have never had an
\norganization which fights for their rights and aspirations,
\nprotects their occupational health and promotes their welfare.<\/p>\n
Window B: It is an open secret that journalists lack clarity
\nabout their working hours, earnings, welfare benefits and
\noccupational protection.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/ri-journalists-lack-protection-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}