Organized: the best way to fight against the violence and harassment at the workplace

“One of our strength to fight against violence and harassment at the workplace is by organizing ourselves in the union. By joining the union, we can sit equally with and have more strength to push the company to agree on the regulation related to women protection in the CBA,” Izzah Inzamliyah in her opening remark. She was the trainer of Training for Trainers for women leaders and activists under the theme of “ILO Convention 190 on Elimination of Violence and Harassment at the Workplace” organized by The Public Services  International (PSI) held in 5G Resort Cijeruk, Bogor, 29-31 August 2022.

Izzah continued by saying that when the CBA contains women’s protection, it will minimize gender-based violence. In turn, it will change the mindset of workers and employers, that every person has the right of a world free of violence and harassment.

Talking about violence and harassment, women are the most vulnerable object of violence in under employement relation. Women are considered to be weak creature, abide to, and dependent upon superiors or men.

“Women’s fear and weakness are the cause of violence in the employment relation. Therefore it is just right for women workers to be active in the unions. By joining the union, workers have the strength to fight against the violence and harassment at the workplace,” Izzah asserted the importance of organized workers in front of 20 women workers , the participants of the ToT. The participants came from SP PLN, SP PPIP, SP PJB, SP EE, dan SPICON+.

Indah Budiarti, the PSI Communications and Project Coordinator, added that this training is also about introduction to use the ILO Convention 190 toolkit. The toolkit is translated into Bahasa Indonesia by IndustriAll Indonesi project office so that it would be easier for participants and unions to design their own activities.

“PSI together with trade unions globally promote the ratification of this convention,” asserted Indah.

She hoped that with this training will be beneficial and encourage the campaign on local and national level. She also hped that the action plan produced in the training wold stimulate the participants and their unions to take a step to push the campaign for Convention 190 ratification in Indonesia.

There are many people who do not understand the real definition of gender-based violence. Therefore, many tolerate the gender-basd violence. Gender-based violence is violence that is aimed at specific gender. It is happen due the social/cultural/religious belief that is embedded to certain gender that result in violence or disproportionate treatment.

There are at least four important features to understand gender-based violence. They are (a) threat; (b) physical, verbal, social, and economic acts that are harmful and detrimental or there is a possibility of harm; (c) beyond one’s will; and (d) based on the social construction on “women” and “men”.

“Silence is not consent. We have to see whether there is a power relation invloved between the perpetrator and the victim. If the perpetrator holds a power over the victim, the victim tends to be silent,” she added.

The problem of power relation is also the root of gender-based violence. The socio-cultural  patriarchal belief that presume that women are in the position of non-importance, where the power rests on men (power relation), women are not decision makers, only complementing. Women’s role are in the domestic realm and reproduction only. Whe women enter the public sphere/employment, their income is secondary, as a compliment for their husbands’.

The adoption of the ILO Convention No. 190 and Recommendation No. 206 on Violence and Harassment in the world of work brings a new hope for us. We can say that the adoption of both instruments is a victory for the trade union and labour movement. The adoption of these instruments is the culmination of years of campaigning and lobbying by trade unions, and in particular women trade unionists, built on the narratives and experiences of discrimination and violence from women workers global. The convention is an instrument to recognizes the right of everyone to have the a working life free from  violence and harassment. For the first time ever internationally agreed the definition of violence and harassment in the world of wok, including the gender-based violence that is understood as “unwanted behavior and practices that is directed to, or result in, or possible to result in physical, psychological, sexual, or economic harm.” The definition covers everyone in this world, including person in training (interns and apprentices), and individuals exercising the authority, duties, or responsibilities of an employer, and includes public and private sector, informal and formal economies, and urban and rural areas.

As trade unions, we have an important role to play in ensuring this Convention and Recommendation do not just remain on paper but are transformed into action on local. Trade unions are leading local and global campaigns, calling for the ratification and effective implementation of C190 and R206, so that these standards are integrated into national legislation.

Union Questions the Regional Representative Council of Indonesia’s (DPD RI) motive on initiating the amendment to Law no. 21 of 2000 on Trade Union/Workers Union

The General Secretary of Persatuan Pegawai Indonesia Power (PPIP), Andy Wijaya, questions the Regional Representative Council of Indonesia’s (hereafter, DPD RI) motive on initiating the amendment to Law no. 21 of 2000 on Trade Union/Workers Union. The DPD RI’s tasks as stated by the 1945 Constitution is to propose to the People’s Representative Council of Indonesia (hereafter, DPR RI) a bill related to regional autonomy, relation between national and regional government, formation, expansion, and unification of areas, natural resources management and other economic sources, and in relation to fiscal balance between central and regional governments. Andy Wijaya told this when he spoke in a Public Hearing with Commission III of DPD RI in relation to inventory on initiative bill drafting on amendment of Law No.21 of 2000, on Monday (20/6).

Further, Andy said, unions currently tend to focus on the Employment Creation Law that already amended some of the clauses in the Labor Law. The Constitutional Court found at least three constitutional violation and stated that the Employment Creation Law must be cancelled. In other words, the revision of Law No. 21 of 2000 is not an urgency.

Meanwhile, if the Law No. 21 of 2000 is to be revised, the unions thinks that it must be based on:

First, the number of trade union/workers union membership that tend to stagnate since the Reformation 1998 but on the other hand, the number of union, federation, and confederation increased.

“An information from satudata.kemnaker said that up to 2020 there are 3,256,025 unionized workers in 10,746 unions/16 Federations/6 Confederation. This number is not much different from the Reformation era and relatively very small compared to the number of formal workers in 2021 that is more than 50 million workers as showed by BPS’ data,” said Andy.

“Even in some cases, there are overlapped unions in terms of membership and sectors. Even there are some unions who have similar or exactly same logos and emblems or even same registration number,” he proceeded.

Andy also thought that in order to strengthen the function of unions, there needs to be acknowledgment that unions are legal entitites who can act on the name of the organizations legally as other legal entities.

Second, there are efforts to stop or prevent the formation or establishment of unions in a company. Unions are considered to be obstruction to the harmony between workers and the company.

Third, lack of support from the government to the development of unions function.

Another important point is that the rights to union must be initiated since the very first day of a worker works. Besides, the right to union must be aligned with the permit regime of company establishment. A company permit mus also include informing workers to union and facilitate union formation in addition to BPJS subscription for the workers. A company must also include human rights enforcement, such as freedom of association.

“There also needs to be a regulation on quality and exclusive CBA that will benefit the members of the union,” added Andy Wijaya.

Currently, CBA in a particular company is also applicable to non-union members. This can be seen as one of the reasons why union membership is decreasing as being members of unions are not a “privilege”. We should hold on to a contract principle, i.e. the agreement only applies on the parties who agrees. There have been several regulations on this matter i.e. Law No. 13 of 2003 on Labor and Minister of Labor Regulation No. 28 of 2014. However, the amendment of Law No. 21 of 2000 could assert that a function of union is to form a CBA that is only applicable to its members.

Unions also have interests in supporting company’s productivity and growth to create common welfare.

“Another thing is that we found many employers who refuse to help unions with union dues by using COS mechanism. Therefore, unions must collect dues mannually to each and every member. This should not have happened if companies/employers are obliged to facilitate the collection,” he added.

Meanwhile, in responding the proposal of amendment of some clauses of Law No. 21 of 2000, Andy highlighted article 4 that seems to be using conlict paradigm in the relation between unions and employers. Therefore, there needs to be the employers’ perspective added, not just the legal norms related to the function and objectives of union.

“The existing norms on implementation of union function should also be supported by sanction so that the law is enforced and more meaningful,” Andy asserted.

In relation to regulaiton on federation and confederation, Andy thought that there must be clear sector differentiation between one federation with the other. There are even unions whose membership is multi and cross business sectors.

“Therefore, we think that union federation needs to be returned to the sector where they function and their membership are. This will also impact the representation in the tripartite institution and other similar institutions. In terms of confederation, we think that there should only be a few, maybe 2 or 3. Confederation is the the top of hierarchy of unions,” he added.

We propose for a protection. The chapter is now on protection, development, and monitoring. There should be protection on implementation union function that are not carried out by their partners, i.e. the company.

There should be a regulation on labor offices so that those office would be more competent and capable in taking action needed to protect unions. For example, regulation on how labor office must respond to a complaint on alleged union function violation so that it would not be a conflict. And then labor office would take a decisive action and impose a sanction.

“In short, what we want to say is that the law must also regulate labor office so that they would be more competent and capable,” added Andy.

Another problem to be discussed further is related to intimidation and obstruction to union activities and how they can be measured. For example, the company is not willing to negotiated the CBA, refuse to cut workers’ wage for union dues using Check off system, and not willing to give dispensation for workers to participate in union activities.

According Andy, those real cases should be regulated in the article 28 that is added in the law and that has correlation to article 43 of Law No. 21 of 2000. In addition, the mechanism of implementation of article 43 must be clarified and emphasized. As well as the relation between labor office and the police.

“Even the Law could just order local police offices to create a special for labor issue so that any complaint or reports from workers on any criminal violation can be responded better,” Andy added.

Herewith position paper that presented by bro Andy Wijaya during the workshop, please click here (bahasa Indonesia)

PP IP Pertanyakan Motif DPD RI Inisiasi Revisi UU Serikat Pekerja/Serikat Buruh

Sekretaris Jenderal Persatuan Pegawai Indonesia Power (PP IP) Andy Wijaya mempertanyakan motif DPD RI berinisatif terhadap isu perubahan UU SP/SB? Apalagi tugas DPD seperti yang tertera pada UUD 1945 adalah dapat mengajukan kepada Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat rancangan undang-undang yang berkaitan dengan otonomi daerah, hubungan pusat dan daerah, pembentukan dan pemekaran serta penggabungan daerah, pengelolaan sumber daya alam dan sumber daya ekonomi lainnya, serta perimbangan keuangan pusat dan daerah, serta yang berkaitan dengan perimbangan keuangan pusat dan daerah. Hal ini disampaikan Andy Wijaya saat diundang sebagai Narasumber dalam Rapat Dengar Pendapat Umum Komite III DPD RI terkait dengan inventarisasi berkenaan dengan penyusunan RUU Inisiatif tentang Perubahan UU No 21 Tahun 2000, Senin (20/6).

Terlebih lagi, kata Andy, saat ini serikat pekerja lebih condong untuk mengawal agar UU Cipta Kerja yang mengubah sebagian UU Ketenagakerjaan. Di mana ditemukan adanya setidaknya 3 (tiga) pelanggaran konstitusi oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi agar dibatalkan. Dengan kata lain, revisi UU No 21 Tahun 2000 bukankah sesuatu yang mendesak untuk dilakukan.

Sementara itu, jika UU No 21 Tahun 2000 hendak direvisi, PP IP yang berafiliasi dengan Public Service International (PSI), dan beraliansi dengan Gerakan Kesejahteraan Nasional (GEKANAS), dan Global Union Federation (GUF) Indonesia, berpandangan harus didasari setidaknya hal-hal berikut:

Pertama, jumlah keanggotaan SP/SB yang cenderung tidak bertambah sejak reformasi 1998 namun jumlah SP/Federasi/Konfederasi yang semakin besar.

“Informasi dari satudata.kemenaker yang kami dapatkan, hingga tahun 2020 terdapat 3.256.025 pekerja yang tergabung berorganisasi SP yang masuk kedalam 10.746 SP/16 Federasi/6 Konfederasi. Jumlah ini cenderung tidak banyak berbeda sejak era reformasi dan jauh dari jumlah pekerja formil yang ada menurut Data BPS tahun 2021 yang mencapai lebih dari 50 juta pekerja,” kata Andy.

“Bahkan dalam beberapa hal, keberadaan SP selain ditemukan tumpang tindih sektoral keanggotaan satu dengan lainnya. beberapa SP/SB diduga terdapat logo dan lambang yang sama atau mungkin nomor bukti pencatatan yang sama,” lanjutnya.

Andy juga berpandangan, penguatan fungsi SP/SB juga perlu didukung dengan menyatakan dengan tetas SP/SB adalah badan hukum yang diakui dan dapat bertindak atas nama organisasi dalam berbagai hal yang menurut hukum juga dapat dilakukan oelh badan hukum pada umumnya.

Hal kedua yang harus diperhatikan adalah adanya anti pembentukan SP/SB di suatu perusahaan. Karena SP/SB dianggap akan menggangu harmonisasi antara pekerja dengan pengusaha.

Ketiga, kurangnya dorongan dari pemerintah terhadap perkembangan fungsi SP/SB.

Hal lain yang perlu diperhatikan, hak berserikat perlu diinisasi sejak awal pekerja bekerja. Selain itu, hak berserikat perlu diselaraskan dengan rezim perizinan pembentukan perusahaan. Bukan hanya kewajiban kepesertaan BPJS, kewajiban untuk memfasilitasi pembentukan SP atau menginfokan pekerja untuk ber SP atau tidak juga sejak awal secara regulatif masuk kedalam sistem perizinan perusahaan yang juga memasukan isu penegakan HAM seperti kebebasan berserikat.

“Perlu juga diatur, bahwa pembentukan PKB yang berkualitas dan ekslusif hanya bermanfaat bagi anggota serikat pekerja,” kata Andy Wijaya.

Hal ini, karena, PKB yang saat ini juga berlaku bagi non anggota SP disatu perusahaan tak dapat dibantah menajdi salah satu pemicu kian berkurangnya keanggotaan SP karena Ber SP menjadi “tidak istimewa’ Oleh Karena itu, sebagaimana asas perjanjian pada umumnya, haruslah hanya mengikat pada pihak yang membuatnya. Memang secara regulatif, ketentuan ini selama ini ada diatur dalam UU No 13 tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan dan Permenaker No 28 tahaun 2014, namun perubahan UU SP/SB dapat menegaskan salah satu fungsi SP/SB adalah membentuk PKB yang hanya berlaku bagi anggotanya.

Serikat Pekerja jyuga berkepentingan untuk mendukung upaya produktivitas kerja dan mampu meningkatakan pertumbuhan perusahaan guna mewujudkan peningkatan kesejahtaran bersama

“Hal lain yakni temuan banyak pemberi kerja yang enggan membantu iuran SP dengan menggunkana mechanism COS, sehingga SP harus satu persatu secara manual meminta iuran anggota. Hal ini seharusnya tidak terjadi manakala perusahaan diwajibkan untuk memfasilitasinya,” ujarnya.

Sementara itu, menanggapi usulan perubahan dalam beberapa pasal dalam UU SP/SB, Andy menyoroti perubahan pasal 4 yang mengesankan terjadinya paradigma konflik dalam relasi SP dengan pemberi kerja. Oleh karena itu, perlu kiranya dilihat dari perspektif pemberi kerja itu sendiri juga, bukan sekedar dari norma-norma hukum terkait fungsi dan tujuan SP.

“Norma-norma yang ada dalam pelaksanaan fungsi-fungsi SP hendaknya didukung dengan norma sanksi agar hukum lebih bermakna untuk dijalankan,” tegas Andy.

Sehubungan dengan pengaturan mengenai federasi dan konfederasi, Andy berpandangan harus ada perbedaan sektor yang jelas antara satu federasi dan federasi lainya. Bahkan terdapat SP yang keanggotaannya multi dan lintas sektor bisnis.

“Oleh karena itu, hemat kami federasi SP perlu dikembalikan terhadap sektor apa dia berfungsi dan melekat keanggotannya yang juga akan berdampak pada representasi pada lembaga kerjasama tripartite dan kelembagaan sejenisnya. Sedangkan keberadaan konfederasi menurut kami tidak perlu terlalu banyak, cukup 2 atau 3 maksimal konfederasi itu ada dan menjadi ujung dari hierarkisme perjenjangan serikat tertinggi dengan fungsi dan kerja-kerja nasional,” ujarnya.

Kami mengusulkan perlu dipastikan ada unsur perlindungan. Karena itu bab tersebut menjadi perlindungan, pembinaan, dan pengawasan. Unsur perlindungan yang ditambahkan mengenai perlindungan terhadap imolementasi fungsi-fungsi SP yang tidak mampu/mau dijalankan oleh mitranya yakni perusahaan.

Koreksi terhadap kerja dan tugas instansi ketenagakerjaan juga perlu diatur agar instansi ketenagakerjaan dapat lebih cakap dan cekatan bertindak terhadap berbagai penerapan perlindungan SP. Misalkan pengaturan bagaimana instansi ketenagakerjaan merespon pengaduan terhadpa dugaan pelanggaran fungsi SP yang tidak harus berujung pada perselisihan, melainkan cukup penindakan tegas dari pengawas ketenagakerjaan dengan sanksi yang ada.

“Hematnya, yang ingin kami katakan, atur juga agar instansi ketanagakerjaan gerak cepat dan cermat dalam bekerja,” tegas Andy.

Hal lain yang perlu dijawab adalah terkait dengan bagaimana bentuk tindakan intimidasi atau penghalangan kegiatan SP itu dapat mudah diukur. Misalkan yang perlu dicontohkan, perusahaan yang tidak mau merundingkan PKB, tidak mau memotong iuran anggota melalui Check Off System (COS), tidak memberikan dispensasi kegiatan SP yang dilakukan dengan wajar.

Menurut Andy, kasus-kasus nyata tersebutlah yang seharusnya diatur dalam norma tambahan pasal 28 yang berkorelasi dengan pasal 43 UU SP/SB. Selain itu, pelaksanaan Pasal 43 perlu dipertegas dan diperjelas mekanisme pelaksanaan pasal tersebut. bagaimana hubungan pengawas ketenagakerjaan dan instansi kepolisian.

“Bahkan UU dapat juga memerintahkan di setiap kantor kepolisian daerah khusus membuat direktorat khusus mengenai isu ketenagakerjaan ini sehingga laporan pekerja terhadap dugaan tindak pidana tersebut lebih terarah,” tegasnya.

Dalam pertemuan ini, Andy membawa kertas posisi sebagai naskah pandangan PP IP terkait Inisiasi DPD RI terkait Revisi UU No 21/2000 tentangf SP/SB. Bisa diunduh dibawah ini:

Membangun solidaritas serikat pekerja nasional dan global

Dalam pertemuan daring yang diselenggarakan oleh GUFs/TUSSO/ITUC-AP untuk Indonesia pada tanggal 4 Desember 2020, Bung Andy Wijaya, Sekretaris Jenderal PP Indonesia Power, menjadi salah satu pembicara. Pertemuan ini membahas situasi/kondisi terkini terkait dengan UU No 11/2020 tentang Cipta Kerja. Bung Andy memaparkan tentang rencana Gekanas, yang terdiri dari 18 federasi/serikat pekerja, untuk melakukan Judicial Review UU No 11/2020 tentang Cipta Kerja.

Permohonan Gekanas dalam JR itu ada formil dan materiil, yang meliputi pasal 42 (UU Ketenagalistrikan), pasal 81 (Ketenagakerjaan), pasal 82 (UU SJSN) dan pasal 82 (UU BPJS).Dalam presentasinya di pertemuan tersebut, Bung Andy menyorot gugatan JR khususnya tentang Sub-kluster Ketenagalistrikan, mengapa serikat pekerja menggugat pasal 81 tersebut dan apa implikasinya bila pasal tersebut dilaksanakan?