Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Tulisan ini membahas peraturan pemutusan hubungan kerja karena pelanggaran bersifat mendesak setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 012/PUU-I/2003 dan perbandingan pertimbangan hakim dalam pemutusan hubungan kerja akibat kesalahan berat dan pelanggaran bersifat mendesak pada dua putusan yang berbeda. Metode penelitian yang digunakan adalah penelitian doktrinal dengan pengumpulan data melalui penelusuran literatur. Peraturan pemutusan hubungan kerja karena pelanggaran bersifat mendesak diatur dalam Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 35 Tahun 2021, yang merupakan turunan dari Undang-Undang Cipta Kerja. Pasal 52 ayat (2) dan ayat (3) Peraturan Pemerintah Nomor 35 Tahun 2021 memungkinkan pengusaha dapat langsung melakukan pemutusan hubungan kerja kepada pekerja yang diduga melakukan pelanggaran bersifat mendesak. Mekanisme ini memiliki persamaan dengan pemutusan hubungan kerja akibat kesalahan berat pada Pasal 158 Undang-Undang Ketenagakerjaan, yang telah dibatalkan oleh Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 012/PUU-I/2003 karena melanggar ketentuan Pasal 27 Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 dan asas praduga tak bersalah. Pertimbangan Majelis Hakim pada Putusan Pengadilan Hubungan Industrial pada Pengadilan Negeri Bengkulu Nomor 16/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2019/PN.Bgl mengenai kesalahan berat dan Putusan Pengadilan Hubungan Industrial pada Pengadilan Negeri Pekanbaru Nomor 10/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2023/PN.Pbr mengenai pelanggaran bersifat mendesak juga menunjukkan persamaan dalam menyelesaikan perselisihan pemutusan hubungan kerja. Kedua putusan memperbolehkan pemutusan hubungan kerja yang dilakukan karena pekerja diduga melakukan tindak pidana yang dikategorikan sebagai kesalahan berat pelanggaran bersifat mendesak tanpa adanya putusan pengadilan pidana yang berkekuatan hukum tetap. Hal tersebut menandakan bahwa kesalahan berat yang telah dibatalkan oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi dilahirkan kembali dengan mekanisme yang sama, tetapi dalam istilah yang berbeda, yaitu pelanggaran bersifat mendesak.

---

This paper discuss the regulation of employment termination due to urgent violations following Constitutional Court Decision Number 012/PUU-I/2003 and compares the opinion of the court in related to grave wrongdoings and urgent violations in two different decisions. The study uses doctrinal research and data collection through literature reviews. Government Regulations Number 35 of 2021, a derivative of the Job Creation Law, addresses the termination of the employment relationship due to urgent violations. According to Article 52 paragraphs (2) and (3) of this regulation, employers can immediately terminate employees suspected of urgent violations without a notification letter. This mechanism is similar to the annulled Article 158 of the Labour Law, which allows termination for grave wrongdoings, nullified by the Constitutional Court for the violating Article 27 of the 1945 Constitution and the principle of presumption of innocence. The opinion of court in the Industrial Relations Court decisions at the Bengkulu District Court Number 16/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2019/PN.Bgl and the Pekanbaru District Court Number 10/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2023/PN.Pbr also show similarities in handling such disputes. Both decisions permit the termination based on suspected criminal offenses without permanent legal force decision. These similarities suggest that the annulled concept of grave wrongdoings has re-emerged under the different term urgent violations, using the same mechanism.

"

"Within the framework of the European Employment Strategy,the European Union has defined a set of indicators to monitor employment quality-the socalled Laeken indicators....."

"This book uses a substantively new research model and source base for studying the working lives of early modern men and women. With an innovative analytic method that is, in turn, yoked to a specially built database of source materials, the book revises many received opinions about the history of gender and work in Europe. The verb-oriented method finds the work verbs that appear incidentally in a wide variety of early modern sources and then analyzes the context in which they appear. By tying information technologies and computer-assisted analysis to the analytic powers, both quantitative and qualitative of professional historians, the method gets much closer to a participatory observation of the micro-patterns of early modern life than was once believed possible. The book confronts a number of broad problems often debated by historians of gender and early modern Europe. First, it discusses the problem of assessing more accurately the incidence, character, and division of work. Second, it analyzes the configurations of work and human difference. Third, it deals with the extent to which work practices created notions of difference, gender difference but also other forms of difference, and, conversely, to what extent work practices contributed to notions of sameness and gender convergence. Finally, it studies the impact of processes of change: state formation, growing commercialization, and social differentiation."