UNESAUNESA

Indonesian Journal of Labour Law and Industrial RelationsIndonesian Journal of Labour Law and Industrial Relations

The termination of employment relationship carried out by PT Synerga Tata Internasional to Muhammad Nasir on the grounds of efficiency in preventing losses resulted in a dispute between them until the issuance of the Supreme Court Decision Number: 179k/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2024. This layoff is carried out by injuring labor law due to the offer of layoff compensation that is not in accordance with applicable regulations. The difference between the decision of the panel of judges of the first instance stating that the lawsuit is inadmissible (niet ontcvankelijk verklaard) and the decision of the panel of judges of the cassation level stating that the Plaintiffs lawsuit was partially granted resulted in a significant difference in how the judge viewed, considered, and provided the basis for the decision on the settlement of the dispute that occurred. This study aims to examine the basis of legal considerations (ratio decidendi) used by the Panel of Judges in deciding disputes and understanding the appropriate case resolution in deciding disputes. The type of research used in this study is normative legal research or doctrinal hukm research which is carried out through literature review or secondary data. The results of this study show that the Plaintiffs lawsuit cannot be said to be formal and premature smallpox, so it cannot be declared that the lawsuit is inadmissible. Beside it,, based on Article 43 paragraph (2) of PP 35/2021, the Plaintiff is entitled to Severance Pay, Service Period Award Money, and Compensation Money as compensation received as a result of the layoffs experienced.

Based on the research discussion, it can be concluded that the consideration of the Panel of Judges at the Cassation Level in deciding the dispute in Supreme Court Decision Number.Sus-PHI/2024 was appropriate and legally justified in part.The granting of the Plaintiffs lawsuit gave rise to the Defendants obligation to fulfill the Plaintiffs rights after the termination of employment due to efficiency to prevent losses based on Article 43 paragraph (2) of PP 35/2021 in the form of severance pay, UPMK, and UPH.The existence of a recommendation for mediation without a mediation report does not make the lawsuit formally flawed, and efforts to merge the lawsuit in PHI are possible.Furthermore, the Plaintiff is entitled to UPH for annual leave that has not been taken and the costs or expenses of workers to return to the place where the worker was accepted to work.

Penelitian lebih lanjut perlu dilakukan untuk mengkaji efektivitas mekanisme mediasi dalam menyelesaikan sengketa perburuhan, khususnya terkait dengan pemenuhan hak-hak pekerja yang terkena PHI. Hal ini dapat dilakukan dengan menganalisis proses mediasi dari perspektif mediator, pekerja, dan pengusaha untuk mengidentifikasi hambatan dan peluang peningkatan. Selain itu, penelitian dapat difokuskan pada dampak implementasi Perpu Cipta Kerja terhadap hak-hak pekerja, terutama terkait dengan perhitungan pesangon dan uang penghargaan masa kerja, dengan mempertimbangkan putusan-putusan pengadilan yang relevan. Terakhir, studi komparatif dapat dilakukan dengan membandingkan regulasi dan praktik pemenuhan hak pekerja setelah PHI di Indonesia dengan negara-negara lain untuk mengidentifikasi praktik-praktik terbaik yang dapat diadopsi. Penelitian-penelitian ini diharapkan dapat memberikan kontribusi signifikan dalam pengembangan kebijakan dan praktik ketenagakerjaan yang lebih adil dan berpihak pada pekerja, sekaligus mendorong iklim investasi yang kondusif.

Read online
File size823.21 KB
Pages9
DMCAReport

Related /

ads-block-test