Unionists' dismissal illegal: Lawyer

Unionists' dismissal illegal: Lawyer

JAKARTA (JP): The Ministry of Manpower's arbitration body
broke the law when it let HongkongBank fired 11 of its union
executives, a lawyer said yesterday.

Abdul Hakim Garuda Nusantara said that dismissing union
members for union activities violated Indonesian labor law.

The 1986 ministerial decision on dismissals states that staff
cannot be fired for joining unions or for conducting union
activities outside the work place.

"The decision also contradicts the body's earlier ruling to
reinstate the other employees of HongkongBank (involved in a
strike at the bank in April)," Hakim, the executive director of
the Institute for Policy Research and Advocacy said.

HongkongBank's management requested permission from the
arbitration body to dismiss 189 workers involved in the strike,
on the grounds that they were absent from work for five
consecutive days for reasons unclear.

While the body deliberated the case, 23 workers resigned or
were reinstated.

Management also requested permission to dismiss 11 union
executives, chaired by Ugianto.

The strike began after reports surfaced that the union
officials were to be dismissed while negotiating a labor
agreement.

Management, disappointed with the body's July ruling to
reinstate the 166 workers, has appealed to the Jakarta
Administrative Court.

The union then requested the South Jakarta District Court to
force the bank's management to reinstate the remaining workers.

Around 130 workers are waiting to be reinstated after they
agreed to the management's offer of a voluntary retirement
scheme.

On Sept. 30 the body ruled in favor of management regarding
the union executives. The union has said it would appeal to the
Jakarta Administrative Court.

The ruling stated "work relations between the employer and
employees are no longer in harmony, as both their attitudes and
opinions are no longer reconcilable."

The body, chaired by I Wayan Nedeng, said the union's
executives were responsible for the April strike, which did not
meet mandatory procedures because the employer had not received
written notice before the strike.

Abdul Hakim said that notifying the employer prior to a strike
"need not be in writing". (anr)