A new labor law
Despite persisting controversy, the labor law which the House of Representatives unanimously approved on Thursday after months of public debate, unquestionably contains some significant improvements over the draft as it was initially presented by the government. To mention a few examples, the new labor law recognizes the right for workers to go on strike, albeit with certain provisions. Also, workers are allowed to form labor unions in their respective factories or workplaces, and payment by employers of certain benefits, such as Lebaran bonuses, is made compulsory.
Although the principle of a balanced approach which recognizes both the rights of the worker and the interests of the employer is generally accepted, the earlier draft was felt by critics to be too heavily in favor of employers. The initial draft, for instance, allowed employers to withhold payment of wages to workers who went on strike. Further, the earlier draft stipulated that workers' unions could be formed in factories or workplaces only when they are supported by the majority of workers.
This new law's very recognition of the basic right to strike is a step in the right direction. It does, however, state that this right may only be exercised within the confines of the factory or workplace in which they have a dispute with the management. Similarly, the provision that workers can form trade unions only at their own places of work but not outside is seen as an improvement.
Seen in this light, the support that has been given to the new law by representatives of the government-sanctioned All-Indonesia Workers Union Federation (FSPSI), is understandable. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that, despite all the improvements, the new labor law as passed by the House of Representatives on Thursday, still heavily curtails the free exercise of workers' basic rights. Under its provisions, solidarity strikes by outsiders -- which are an important weapon for workers -- are as good as impossible to hold. Also, workers must notify both their employers and the government at least 72 hours in advance before they go on strike.
The new law also requires trade unions to register themselves and the names of all their members with the Ministry of Manpower. Furthermore, by confining strikes to one place only -- the factory or workplace where the dispute festers -- the new law makes it difficult, though presumably not impossible, for workers or labor activists to set up independent trade unions such as, for example, the unsanctioned Indonesian Prosperous Labor Union (SBSI). Hence the criticism voiced by activists that the new labor law, even in its revised and improved form as passed on Thursday, fails to guarantee workers' most basic rights.
Amid all this controversy, the government's intentions are clear enough. They realize as well as anybody else that -- humanitarian considerations aside -- tranquility on the labor front is vital for maintaining the stability that is necessary to ensure continual development. On the other hand, obviously, investors and employers need too to be assured that their businesses will not be constantly disrupted by labor strikes.
Hence, the new labor law may be viewed as a compromise between two related but often opposed interests. Obviously, under the circumstances few parties, if any, will be entirely satisfied with the product. As for the part which our House of Representatives has played in the process, the great transformation which the bill has undergone from first draft to final form is indication enough that our national legislature has, for once, done a pretty good job -- or at least the best possible job, under the circumstances.
No doubt, in time, further improvements may be made as developments dictate. Laws, after all, are not scriptures that man cannot change for the better.