Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"ABSTRAKPenetapan Undang-undang Nomor 12 Tahun 2012 tentang Pendidikan Tinggi mengamanatkan Universitas Indonesia yang sebelumnya berstatus sebagai Badan Hukum Milik Negara menjadi Perguruan Tinggi Negeri Badan Hukum. Perubahan status perguruan tinggi berdampak pada status kepegawaian di Universitas Indonesia. Tidak terdapat ketentuan aturan hukum mengenai perlindungan hak dan kewajiban bagi pegawai tetap dan pegawai tidak tetap di lingkungan UI. Tumpang tindih antara Undang- Undang Ketenagakerjaan, Statuta Universitas Indonesia, dan Undang-Undang Aparatur Sipil Negara mengakibatkan ketidakjelasan status dan perlindungan hukum pegawai Universitas Indonesia. Masing-masing peraturan tersebut mengatur sistem rekrutmen, jenjang karier, serta hak dan kewajiban pegawai secara berbeda. Dengan demikian, untuk menyelesaikan permasalahan kepegawaian Universitas Indonesia dapat dilakukan dengan menetapkan aturan atau kebijakan Rektor terkait perlindungan hukum pegawai Universitas Indonesia. Perlindungan hukum dimaksud adalah aturan hukum memberikan jaminan atas perlindungan hak-hak pegawai Universitas Indonesia.

---

ABSTRACT

Application of Law No. 12 of 2012 on Higher Education, University of Indonesia mandates that previously existed as a State-owned Legal Entity (BHMN) into the Higher Education State of Legal Entity (PTN-BH). Status changes of higher education has an impact on employment status at the University of Indonesia. No provisions regarding the rule of law for the protection of the rights and obligations of permanent and temporary employees in UI causing staffing problems. Overlap between the Employment Act, Statute of the University of Indonesia, and the Law of State's Civil Officer lead status, position and legal protection for employees of the University of Indonesia as PTN BH becomes unclear. Each of these regulations regulate the system of recruitment, career path, and the rights and obligations of employees differently. Thus, the staffing problems of University of Indonesia can be resolved by setting up rules and policies related to legal protection of temporary employees of the University of Indonesia. This legal protection explains what Goverment Law guarantees about protection of the rights of permanent and temporary employees of the University of Indonesia."

"This volume provides a critical roadmap through the major historical sources of legal semiotics as we know them today. The history of legal semiotics, now at least a century old, has never been written (a non-event itself pregnant with semiotic possibility).  As a consequence, its sources are seldom clearly exposed and, as word, object and meaning change, are sometimes lost. They reach from an English translation of the 1916 inaugural lecture of the first Chair in Legal Significs at the Amsterdam University, via mid 20th century studies on “property” or “contract,” to equally fascinating essays on contemporary semiotic problems produced by former students of the Roberta Kevelson Semiotics Roundtable Seminar at Penn State University 2012 and 2013. Together, the materials in this book weave the fabric of semiotics and significs, two names for the unfolding of semiotics in law and legal discourse at least until the second half of the 20th century, and both of which covered a lawyer’s focus on sign and meaning in law.  The latter is embedded within the cultural imperatives of the civilization that gave these terms meaning and made them an effective tool for the dissection of law, its reconstitution as an instrument to be used by the lawyer to advance the interests of her clients, and for judges as a means to restructure language as a narrative of law whose power could bend behavior to its strictures. Legal semiotics has become an indispensible part of the elite lawyer’s toolkit and a fundamental approach to analysis of legal texts. Two previous volumes published in 2011 and 2012 explored the conceptual, methodological and epistemological progress in the field of legal semiotics, the modern forms of semiotics study, and the mechanics of meaning making processes by lawyers. Yet the great lessons of semiotics requires a focus on the origins of the concepts and frameworks that would become contemporary legal semiotics, its origins as an object of the consciousness of meaning making—one whose roots, as lessons for the oracular conversations of law, are expanded in this volume."