LABOUR RIGHTS

(1)

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

LABOUR RIGHTS

& EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT

IN INDONESIA

The challenge fo Ausfralia

\-. ______ ... _ . T_·'_·"_ .. ~ ^.. I

^K.I.T.LV LEIDEN

I

A dossier prepared for the consultation between

the Indonesia-Australia Program for Co-operation and AIDAB,

preparatory to the July 1994 meeting of the Consultative Group on Indonesia

(2)

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

(3)

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I I

I

(5)

I I

I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I I

I

lntroduction Pat Walsh

Secretary, Indonesia-Australia Program/or Co-operation

The coming meeting ofthe Consultative Group on Indonesia (CGI) to be held in Paris on

7-8 July, 1994 is an opportunity to raise the issue ofIndonesia's labour relations. Australia, as

a CGI member with a high level of expertise on Indonesia 's economic, sociaI and political development, is in a good position to do this.

The position of Indonesian labour was highlighted at the 22-24 April meeting ofthe International NGO Forum on Indonesian Development (INFID, previously INGI) in Paris in which the Australian Council for Overseas Aid took part. This meeting was held soon after the strikes, demonstrations, riots and arrests which shook Medan and other parts ofNorth

Sumatra in the middle of April.

At this meeting INFID adopted a statement on 'The Labour Situation in Indonesia"

which is the fust document in this Dossier. lts central contention is that "the desire of the Indonesian govemment to keep labour costs low in the interests of attracting foreign investment cannot justifY the violation of intemationally recognised worker rights."

INFID defines its objectives as "to strengthen democratization and people's participation in development, particularly in Indonesia, and to engage in advocacy directed at the international community on issues affecting the poor and disadvantaged in Indonesia".

The contents of this Dossier

This collection of documents shows why Indonesia's record in the labour area calls for international attention. "Indonesia in 1993: The labour year", by Tom Etty ofthe Netherlands Trade Union Confederation, makes it dear that labour unrest is on the rise. The paper quotes govemment figures on strikes which show a dramatic increase, from 20 in 1989 to 200 in

1992 and 185 in 1993.

These documents also point to the importance ofthe contest between the official SPSI (Serikat PekeIja Seluruh Indonesia, All-Indonesian Workers Union) and the small and unrec- ognized SBSI (Serikat Buruh Sejahtera Indonesia, Indonesian Workers Prosperity Union). The SPSI has a history going back to the early years of President Soeharto's New Order. It claims to have 1,900,000 members in 10,500 ofIndonesia's approximately 44,000 large and medium enterprises.

The SBSI, formed in 1992, claims 35,000 members in 75 branches. It was prevented from holding an inaugural congress in July 1993, but has managed to survive so far, despite a range oflegal obstacles and a high level of govemment and military harrassment.

The symbol of the murdered Marsinah

There is also much in this Dossier on two recent murders of Indonesian labour activists.

One oftbose murdered, tbe 23-year-old woman labour organizer MarsinaiJ, had been involved in a strike in a watch factory in SidoaIjo, East Java. She then tried to intervene on behalf of 13 ofher fellow strikers who had been forced to sign letters ofresignation. Her murder was followed by a highly controversial trial in which nine accused persons withdrew their pre-trial testimony, saying tbey had given that only after torture.

The Marsinah case has done more tban anything else to give workers a central place in Indonesia's hurnan rights debates. It has highlighted what tbe Amnesty International report reproduced in this Dossier calls "a broad and persistent pattern of military and police interven-

1

(6)

tion in labour disputes .... In the course of a labour dispute, particularly active and vocal workers are routinely summoned to the local or district military headquarters, where they are accused of communist sympathies and threatened with imprisonment or physical violence, including death, unless they agree to resign 'voluntarily' from their job".

Military intervention appears to be a more pervasive feature of industrial relations in Indonesia than in any ofthe other ASEAN states.

Workers' lives: Out of sight, out of mind

Outside Indonesia there continues to be relatively little interest in the Indonesian labour situation. Discussion in the overseas media has been focussed on the succession to President Soeharto, on economic debates between technocrats and their nationalistic critics, on new forms ofIslamic pressure on the government, on Indonesia's responses to overseas criticism of its record in East Timor, and on a range of democracy and human rights issues involving the middle class.

Outsiders have been impressed by the rapid expansion of Indonesia's middle class, the rising confidence of many of its leaders and their demands for more regularized forms of governance and economic management. They have paid far less attention to one other major consequence of the fast economic transformation of recent years, the rise of a large industrial working class.

In the final item in. this collection, the Australianindustrial health specialist Melody Kemp discusses an aspect ofthe life of Indonesian women workers, the basis ofher recent work as an industrial health consultant in Jakarta. (I)

She highlights the importance of noise, toxic materiaJs, machine-paced work and very poor quality company housing. She also describes the special health problems ofwomen who suffer from chronic, insidious disorders like occupational overuse injuries, noise-induced hearing loss and occupational cancer. Current Indonesian accident reporting regulations discriminate against those women, she notes, for reporting is required only in relation to accidents which require an employee to have three days or more offwork.

Chüd labour: Emerging from the shadows

Since the late 1980s the problem of child workers in Indonesia has attracted public atten-

tion. A 1990 labour force survey has estimated that 2,450,000 children, or 11% of children in

the 10-14 year age group are economically active - and this is thought to be a serious under- estimate.

Indonesian NGOs have emerged to confront the issue of child labour and the

ao

^has

played an important role through its International Prograrnme for the Elim.ination of Child Labour. As aresult the combination of domestic and international pressure, the Indonesian government now recognises the problem as a major one and has promised action on it in the current five-year plan period.

International protest and the threat of US trade sanctions

The International Labour Organization and International Confederation of Free Trade Unions have made representations for many years on the denia1 ofJabour rights in Indonesia.

In June 1992 Asia Watch and the International Labour Rights Education and Research Fund petitioned the US Trade Representative to review Indonesian labour rights practices. In June of the foUowing year the US government gave Indonesia untü February 1994 to show progress in relation to labour rights, threatening to cut off trade benefits under the Generalized System ofPreferences (GSP) program. Indonesia stood to lose an annual US$ 643 mi11ion in exports

2

I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

(7)

1 I

j

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

onto the

us

market. In January 1994 the US government extended the deadline to August.

In response to this threat the Indonesian government has raised minimum wage levels by approximately 30-40%. (The minima are set by province-Ievel councils). In Jakarta the minimum was raised from Rp 3000 ($AUDI.90) to Rp 4000 ($2.53). In Central Java it was raised from Rp 1600 ($1.02) to Rp 2000 ($1.26). It has also restructured the official and hitherto highly centralistic labour organization SP SI (AII-Indonesian Workers Union) to give greater autonomy to its "sector organizations". Thirdly it has revoked a 1986 regulation ofthe Minis- ter of Manpower authorizing military intervention in the affairs ofhis department - but has left intact a similar regulation ofBAKORSTANAS, the mainly military-staffed Coordinating Body for the Reinforcement ofNational Stability.

The value of these changes and their limitations are discussed in Tom Etty's paper in this coUection. Their overall effect has certainly been positive. But Indonesian government responses to the North Sumatran strikes and demonstrations of April 1994, which are discussed in the Amnesty International report in this Dossier, suggest that the basic features of the labor relations scene remain unchanged.

Moreover many Indonesian advocates of labour reform fear that their government may be "let olf the hook" before much longer. President C1inton is expected to be constrained by a desire for good personal relations with President Soeharto at the next summit conference of APEC, the Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation body, which is due to be held in Jakarta in November.

What these Indonesian reform advocates hope is that aid consortium members other than the US wilI henceforth press more actively for reforms ofthe type for which the US has hitherto been the main pacemaker.

F or AustraIia to take initiatives on Indonesian labour at the forthcotning meeting of the Consultative Group on Indonesia would fit weU with the ACTU's recent expansion of its Indonesian activities.

The ACTU has not found it easy to work in Indonesia, especially as it has persisted in opposing the efforts ofindonesia's SPSI to gain membership ofthe International Confedera- tion ofFree Trade Unions. However, it has established co-operative relations with the compo- nents of the SP SI which it sees as relatively independent and authentic. lts Trade Union Train- ing Authority has provided a smaII number of Indonesian unionists with practical training in industrial health and safety. It plans to participate in an AIDAB-funded project run by the ILO in Indonesia and four other Asian countries to promote hurnan rights observance, occupational health and safety, and establishing good relations at the enterprise level.

Martin Ferguson, the ACU President, who visited Indonesia in November-December 1993, has stressed the importance of "the struggle for award structures and industrial reforms

in Asia". Referring to the murder ofMarsinah in East Java, he recently asserted that "We as

the union movement must do more and more to encourage participation, equal opportunity and socialjustice in the region".(I)

Labour rights and legitimate mechanisms of dispute setdement

A principal reason why the aid consortium should concern itself with labor conditions in Indonesia has to do with the persistent violation oflabor rights set down in ILO conventions.

The Soeharto government continues to deny its workers the right to organize and bargain coUectively. It insists that the government-controUed SPSI (Serikat Pekerja Seluruh Indonesia, AII-Indonesian Workers Association) is the only legitimate trade union.

While formaUy acknowledging that workers have the right to strike, the government hedges that right in by cumbersome procedures which make legal strikes impossible. In the words ofthe US State Department's Report on Hurnan Rights in Indonesia in 1993, "Depart-

3

(8)

ment of Manpower procedures ... have litde credibility with workers and are mostly ignored.

Strikes therefore tend to be sudden" (2). All ofthe strikes which have hit the Jakarta, Surabaya and Medan areas in the last four years have been illegal.

It is clearly in the interests of Indonesia as weil as of the international community that reforms be introduced which make it possible to reduce the role of military personnel in industrial relations, and to get away from narrowly military definitions of stability. The need is for legitimate mecbanisms for setding the disputes and conflicts which inevitably arise in industrial situations.

Such mechanisms would not onIy further the civil and political rights side of the human rights agenda. They would also contribute to the Right to Development side of that agenda, by facilitating labour stability and raising the productivity of workers.

Towards more equitable development

But the aid consortium need not limit its concerns to labour rights or the smooth fune- tioning of Indonesia's industrial system. As part ofthe development assistance community, it has a right and a duty to concern itself with equitable development and the alleviation of poverty. It should properly countervail the tendency which is strong in Indonesia and many other developing countries for income inequality to rise in conditions of fast economie growth.

Having encouraged Indonesia to restructure its economy in the direction oflabour- intensive manufacturing for overseas markets, the community of consortium states has hitherto done very little to offset the trends towards social polarization and political repression to which this restructuring has given rise.

Australian taxpayers are righdy concerned that the system of concessionary loans to which they contnbute should not aggravate inequalities of income and welfare in the countries to whicb capital flows. As US Labor Secretary Robert Reich has recendy argued, "a country's ability to offer its citÏzens better working lives rises with development ... Jt is entirely appropriate to expect labor standards to improve as economies develop. "(3)

F ortunately the Australian govemment has acknowledged the importance of social dimensions of development in discussions of aid policy objectives. The recent AIDAB statement on "Aid and Hurnan Rights" refers to the UN Charter's call for "social progress and better standards oflife in larger freedom". It asserts that ''hurnan rights and development have a strong commonality of purpose", refers to "the fundamental mora!, humanitarian and political issues driving the hurnan rights debate" and discusses the importance of "good governance"

understood as "the effective management of a country's social and economic resources in a manner that is open, transparent, accountable and equitable. " (4)

According to AIDAB's Program Operations Guide, "the Govemment attaches high priority to the international promotion and protection ofhuman rigbts and is identifying OppOT- tunities for the development cooperation program to play a more positive role in the promotion of good governance and burnan rights" (5).

Such opportunities clearly exist in relation to the position of Indonesian workers.

Footnotes

1. David Nason "ACTU to push Asia labour reform", The Australian, 2 May, 1994

2. United States Mission to International Organisations, Geneva Indonesia: Country Repon on Human Rights Practiees for 1993, January 1994:25.

3. Keynote address to Symposium on International Labor Standards and Giobal Economie Integration, Washington, D.C., April 25, 1994.

4. Aid and Human Rights, A Submission to the Sub-Committee on Human Rights ofthe Joint Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs, Defenee and Trade, Australian International Development Assistanee Bureau, Canberra. July 1993.

5. Aid and Human Rights, Attachment A. pp. 18-19.

4

I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I I

I

(9)

I

I I I I I

I I I

I

I I I I I I

I

I I

INTERNATIONAL NGO FORUM ON INDONESIAN DEVELOPKENT ( I N F I D )

Ninth INFID Conference 22-24 April 1994, Paris, France The Labour Situation in Indonesia

The Ninth INFID Conference has followed with concern the protracted labour unrest in North Sumatra. Events in and around Keden in Karch and April exemplify the problems of the labour movement in Indonesia more generally, and the restrictions on the right to organise and the dengers of the

security approach to labour unrest in particular. The charges that NGOs were somehow responsible for these events demonstrate how NGOs of ten become

scapegoats for labour problems, when in fact they play an important role in helping to create the conditions for the protection of worker rights.

The grievances of workers in the Keden area have been typical of those in many of the strikes around the country: failure of employers to meet the minimum wage set forth in law or provide benefits to which they are

entitled, obstructions to organise independent unions, and gender-related issues such as unequal pay for equal work and lack of maternity or menstrual leave for women. There has been no true dialogue among workers, employers and the government to address these issues.

The government response has also been typical: arrest of workers, even for peaceful activities, and abuse, harassment, and ill-treataent af ter arrest.

In mid-April in Keden, accumulated grievances led to worker unrest and mass demonstrations which then turned violent. The INFID Conference deplores the tragic course of events, and condemns the violence as well as the racial incitement. There have been allegations that the disturbances were

masterminded by trade unionists. There have been other allegations that third parties have provoked them. INFID urges the Government of Indonesia to initiate a thorough and impartial investigation in order to identify those responsible and bring them to justice. INFID insists that the Government must not use their duty to prevent and combat violence as a pretext to undercut the workers' legitimate exercise of the freedoms of assembly, association and expression.

In the context of the Keden case, the INFID Conference reaffirmed its previous declarations on labour rights and stated that the desire of the Indonesian government to keep labour costs low in the interests of

attracting foreign investment cannot justify the violation of

internationally-recognised worker rights. The conference declared in particular the following:

I. The Right to Organise and Bargain Collectively

a. Freedom of association continues to be restricted in Indonesia. In recent legislation, the government recognises the right of workers to negotiate collective agreements at the factory level, but at the same time, it explicitly states that SPSI is the only trade union, and that if

enterprise level uni ons want to form federations, they must do so through SPSI. INFID urges the Government of Indonesia to repeal the Regulation of January 1994 on the registration of trade unions.

1

(10)

b. The onerous criteria set by the government for the registration of unions in terms of the number of members make it virtually impossible for

alternative trade uni ons at the sectoral level and for trade union centres to be established.

c. Labour legislation must be simplified and made transparent, and the law must be consistently and effectively implemented.

d. Tbe recent restructuring of SPSI 1nto sectoral un10ns may create better opportunities for rea 1 trade union vork including collective bargaining, but 1mplementation of this reform must be carefully monitored.

Implementation should not preclude the formation of other unions.

e. The right to organise is still denied to civil servants and workers in state enterprises who are required to become members of KORPRI. They should be given the same rights as workers in the private sector.

11. The Right to Strike

a. Despite the ILO's longstanding criticism of the cumbersome procedure in Indonesian law that effectively makes legal strikes impossible and thus encourages wildcat strikes, the government has made no progress in revising this law or simplifying the procedures involved.

b. Workers participating in strikes of ten are unfairly dismissed, for

example, by being forced by the security forces to sign their own letters of resignation. In addition, existing legislation strongly discourages strikes by stipulating that workers who are absent from work for six consecutive days are considered to have resigned.

111. Military Interference

Despite the repeal in January 1994 of Regulation 342/1986 legitimising military intervention in labour disputes, such intervention has continued. Moreover, other laws authorising this intervention remain in place, such as Bakorstanas Decree No.02/Stanas/XII/1990. The military is well represented in the "official" uni on SPSI through the presence of retired military

officers in key positions at the regional and local level. Tbe overwhelming majority of strikes continue to be broken up through intervention of the security forces. Military members of the HUSPIDA or HUSPlKA of ten sit in on negotiations between workers and management. These interventions should cease.

IV. Women Workers

Tbe case of Marsinah illustrates the importance of women as labour organisers and their vulnerability to repression. Women workers face

discrimination in pay and in the way their earnings are taxed (e.g. men can deduct for dependents, women cannot). It is no accident that much of the labour unrest has taken place in industries, such as shoes and garments, that employ mostly women because wages are of ten lower than in other

industries. It is also no accident that women are poorly represented on the governing boards of trade unions, both SPSI and SBSI, and in workplace

committees at the plant level. Women in both the formal and informal sectors also face abuse and harassment (such as reported in the plywood industry in

2

I

I I I I

I

I I I I I I

I

(11)

I , .

I

I I I I I

I

I I

I I I

I I

remote areas), which the Ministry of Manpower of ten fails to investigate. Women migrant workers, both domestic and international, face particular problems, and it is incumbent on both receiving and sending governments to protect these women against abuse and investigate allegations of ill-

treatment or mysterious deaths. Existing laws protecting women workers need to be explained to women workers and then fully implemented, but new laws may be needed as weIl to address some of the problems listed above.

Mechanisms should be established by the Government and trade unions to

receive and investigate complaints from women workers. Cases of

discrimination should be routinely investigated.

V. Child Labour

The Conference welcomed the fact that the Government of Indonesia has finally acknowledged that child labour is a major problem, and that it is investigating the problem in cooperation with the ILO. Every step must be taken to protect child workers in Indonesia in accordance with the

Convent ion on the Rights of the Child to which Indonesia is a party.

VI. Occupational Discr1mination

Occupational discrimination on the basis of status as an ex-tapol or on the basis of ethnicity should be ended, in line with a 1978 recommendation made by the International Labour Conference of the ILO that the Indonesian

Government reintegrate released tapols in society. The recommendation appeared in the Conference's conclusions on Indonesia's application of ILO Convent ion No 29 on Forced Labour, which it has ratified.

VII. Forced Labour

Credible allegations have been made about forced or bonded labour in the logging industry in Irian Jaya, where indigenous people were recruited to work as loggers and then not paid wages on the grounds that they had used up too much credit for purchase of basic needs at a company-owned store. As Indonesia is a party to the ILO Convent ion No 29 on forced labour, NGOs and international agencies such as the ILO should have full cooperation of the Government in investigating these allegations, including unhampered access.

3

(12)

I I I I

I I I I I

I

I I I

I I

I

(13)

I

I I

I I I

I I I I

I I

I

I I I I I

INTERNATIONAL NGO PORUM ON INDONESIAN DKVELOPMENT (I N P I Dl

INDONESIA IN 1993: THE LABOUR YEAR

By: Tom Etty

Ninth INFID Conference

GOOD GOVERNANCE IN RBGIONAL DKVELOPMENT 22-24 April 1994

paris - France

(14)

1

INDQNESIA IN 1993: THE LABOUR YEAR ¹

By Tom Etty, International Department FNV (Netherlands Trade Union Confed- eration); member of the Joint Steering Committee of INFID.

Introdyctory remarks

1.

The year

1993

has been a very eventful one in Indonesia if one

reviews it with workers' and trade union rights as points of orienta- tion. The Indonesian Government was under strong attack from the outside for various aspects of their labour policies. On the other hand, they tried to strike back on their cri tics with great determi- nation. It is interesting to note that also within the country Government policies and actions in the field of labour affairs appeared to be discussed and criticised in a much more straight- forward way than before. Human rights activists, non-governmental organisations and, indeed, an "alternative" trade union organisation

(which the Government refuses to register and recognise) made important contributions to this debate). The Government has taken a few positive measures, but it remains to be seen how these will work out in practice.

2. As I did in last year's report, I want to make the point that I do not claim that this review gives "the whole picture". I have paid one short visit to the country in

1993

and I have to rely predominantly on sources in the English language. I am confident, however, that

those familiar with the Indonesian labour scene will recognise the main lines of development and will not detect spectacular omissions. I hope that, for those who are interested but who do not have regular access to relevant information, the text will be a useful instrument for reference. I will be most grateful for any comments, corrections or additional information.

Government: a new minister of Manpower

3.

Shortly af ter the re-election of Mr. Suharto as President of the Republic for a sixth term

(1993-1998)

and the election of former Chief of Staff Mr. Try Sutrisno as Vice-President by the People's Consultative Assembly, early in March, a new cabinet was appointed.

Mr. Batubara, who had been minister of Manpower from

1989,

did not return. He was succeeded by Mr. Abdul Latief, a successful self-made businessman who owns, among others, the well-known Sarinah-department store. Mr. Latief had a somewhat unfortunate start in his new position. In May, workers from his enterprise went on strike. Among their demands was the setting up of a trade union in the enterprise.

4. The major challenge for the new minister was the review, conducted by the United States' Subcommittee on the Generalized System of Prefer-

ences (GSP) of workers' rights laws and practices in Indonesia.

An earl ier version or this paper was presented to the INFIO/CCFD-seminar on labor

relations in Indonesia, Paria, February 9th 1994

I I

I I I I I I

I I

I

I I I

I I

I

(15)

I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I

2

In June 1992. two American human rights organisations (Asia Watch and the International Labor Rights Education and Research Fund) had filed petitions claiming that Indonesia was denying internationally

recognised rights to its workers. The principal issues addressed were: the right to organise. the right to bargain collectively • . forced labour and child labour. Among the alleged violations of the right to organise was the interference by the army and the police in strikes.

Several of the points. brought up by the two organisations mentioned.

had been discussed for many years in the International Labour Organisation. These discussions had resulted in strong recommendations to the Government to review and change its law and practice.

The Government had hardly responded to this. Unlike the ILU. however.

the U.S. Government could implement sanctions if Indonesia would not make progress. $ 643.000.000, 14% of the value of Indonesia's exports to the USA, could be taken away by these sanctions. The US-Government gave Indonesia the opportunity to show significant improvements until February 15th 1994. Then a decision would be taken whether or not to

take the GSP-benefits away from Indonesia.

5. It seems that Mr. Latief and his colleagues in the new cabinet have tried hard to accommodate the Americans. Despite irritated language about interference in domestic affairs and repetition of earlier replies to critics (that there is nothing wrong in Indonesia. that Indonesia refuses to be tested against foreign standards. etc.) they went at work. Among the "progress in advancing workers' rights" they will certainly point to the restructuring of the "official" tradc uni on SPSI. the increase of the legal minimum wage, and the change in existing legislation which permits the military authorities to

interfere abundantly in labour disputes. Furthermore, the Government has invited a "Direct Contact-Mission" of the ILO to come to Indo- nesia in November 1993 in order to try and help solve the long standing violations of the ILO Convention on Collective Bargaining, which Indonesia has ratified. None of these initiatives have been taken under the pressure of the GSP-review - that is what the Govern- ment maintains. It would be interesting to know what it is that stimulated them to take these steps if it is ^nQtthe GSP.

It remains. of course. to be seen what will really change if and when Indonesia is left off the hook by the Americans.

Labour ledslation

6. By inviting an ILO-mission. the Government conceded that there were major discrepancies between Indonesian legislation and the Collective Bargaining-Convention (which. as a matter of fact. cannot be seen as something completely detached from the ILO's Convention on the Right to organise: it is pointless to have the lat ter if workers may not use their organisation to bargain collectively, and it is as pointless to have the right to bargain collectively if one is not allowed to organise with fellow-workers in a trade union). Unfortunately, the conclusions and recommendations of the Mission have not yet been made public. With a view to earlier statements of the ILO one can expect that the ILO will recommend a substantial number of changes.

(16)

7.

3

These may very weIl go along the same lines as developed, in the course of 1993, by several well-known Indonesian labour lawyers and some non-governmental organisations (NOO's). Lawyers have requested the Supreme Court to review the recent decrees 438/1992 and 03/1993

(l~spectively restricting the right to bargain collectively to ~ions

registered by the Government, and demanding severe numerical conditions to be met before the Government will register an organisation as a trade union.

Another petition brought before the Supreme Court concerns Decree 342 of 1986 which, among others, legitimises the interference by security forces in strikes. (There is hardly a significant strike in Indonesia which has not been crushed by the army or the police).

8 .

Indonesian NGO's have been very active commenting and criticising current labour legislation, discussing it with fractions in the DPR

(Parliament), or voicing demands on public seminars and conferences.

Main targets are legislation on ainimum wage, the right to strike, compulsory arbitration in labour disputes, and the right to set up unions at the enterprise level.

9.

In December, the Government announced a considerable increase in the legal minimum wage, coming into force on January lst, 1994 in 21 provinces and in April 1994 in the remaining 6.

Increases will be in the range of 30 - 40%. That seems quite a lot, but one should know that the present minimum wage covers, according to the Government not even the "Physical Minlmum" of a worker who has to support a family with two children. Even with the planned

increase, this standard (in which costs for education and recreation are not included) will not be met.

Batam (industrial zone in Riau) is the area with the highest minimum wage: Rp. 5550 per day now, to be raised to Rp. 6750 ($ 3.20) per day, next April.

In Jakarta, where the figure is Rp. 3000 now, employers will have to pay Rp 4000. Disparities in Java are considerable (in Yogyakarta it is less than half of the Jakarta-figure). In some of'the outer areas, people are entitled to considerably less.

In addition to that: one of the aain problems remains that a large number of employers refuse to pay their workers the legal minimum.

The Government knows it, but cannot (or does not want tol en force the law. Since 1989, only 35 companies have been taken to court for

violation of the law.

Labour conflicts

10. Labour unrest is still on the rise. Official figures showastrong increase in the number of strikes, the number of workers involved, and of working hours lost.

In 1989 the Government reported some 20 strikes, in 1990 60, in 1991 110, in 1992 200, and in 1993, according to minister Latief, 185.

I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I

I

(17)

I I I I I I I I I I I

I ' I I

I

I I I I I

11.

4

Two remarks must be made: first, that reality will most probably look even less favourable than these figures and, second, that one finds many discrepancies and inconsistencies in figures, apparently provided by the Government and reported in the papers.

The main causes for strikes are, reportedly, low wages (in particular below the legal minimum-wage), dismissais, denial of the right to set up a union, bad working conditions, and gender issues.

Most strikes occur in the textile and garment sector, followed by the shoe industry and by electronics. Virtually all strikes are wildcat strikes. The SPSl has never been reported to back up a strike, not to speak of leading or initiating one.

Workers who go on strike take considerable risk. The employer of ten calls in the police or the army, leaders (or sometimes people picked at random) are taken away and detained for several hours or days and frequently they are forced to sign a letter of resignation. Physical abuse is no exception.

12. One tragic and horrible incident, resulting from a labour dispute, occurred in May. Af ter a wage dispute in a watch factory in Sidoardjo

(East Java) a young woman and labour activist was abducted, tortured and raped, and eventually murdered. The press and several NGO's reacted vehemently. The authorities initially tried to play it down alleging there was no connection between the murder of Marsinah and the strike. Later, when the case had received international attention, they were unable to maintain that position. By the end of the year, several executives, staff and security officials of the company were on trial, charged with murder. A Sidoardjo military officer was removed from his function and also suspected of having been involved in the drama. lt appears that the Government, eager to get the case out of the way, has arbitrarily arrested suspects, maltreated them, and forced them to make confessions. Commentators have made the suggestion that this was done in order not to incriminate higher ranking military.

Deyelopments in tbc S.P.S,I.

13. At its "National Leaders' Meeting" of November 1992, the SPSl had decided to defer the formal decision on restructuring the

organisation until the Congress of 1995. Meanwhile. some of the

"sector organisations" could already transform themselves into trade unions, while others could prepare themselves for that change in 1995. However, in September 1993. the minister of Manpower in ceremo- nial sessions granted certificates of registration as trade unions to

twelve of the thirteen SPSl "sector organisations". lt was amazing that this happened without a prior Congress-decisions and. for

instance. without any decision on the future formal relations between the "trade union center" SPSl and the suddenly emerged unions.

Neither had the financial basis of the ~newly registered unions been clarified.

(18)

14.

5

At the same time there we re rumours that the minister of Manpower was dissatisfied with the performance of the SPSI-leadership and that he.

and some of his colleagues in the cabinet, had tried to convince the former Chairman of the unitary trade union center, Agus Sudono, to take up the leadership again.

To a large extent, these rumours appeared not to be false. Neverthe- less, no spectacular changes occurred in the SPSI. There will certainly be changes at the Congress next year. Most interesting ques- tion to be answered then is how strong the Government's grip on the SPSI and the "autonomous" unions within its fold will be. Probably it will remain very firm. Some genuine trade unionists, however, see a chance for real trade union work within the "official" framework.

They will need much intelligence, courage and stamina to succeed.

The SPSI now claims some 1.900.000 members in 10.500 enterprises.

Financially, it is still in a very weak position and dependent on the GclVernmen t .

Internationally it remains isolated. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) has decided to keep its application for membership pending until the Congress of 1995. The newly established sectoral unions may try to join the sectoral trade union interna- tionals ("International Trade Secretariats") but it is not foresee- abie that these will take a fundamentally different position vis a vis Indonesian trade unionism than the ICFTU.

The unions will first have to prove what they are by independently representing of tha interests of workers. And that has been, for almost thirty years now, anathema in Indonesia.

The SPSI claims that it has discussed, in the past few years, most of the points in the Indonesian system of labour relations that have raised criticism abroad with the authorities. These include labour legislation, industrial relation practices and the role of the army in industrial relations and in the trade union movement. Unfortu- nately they only do so confidentially, claiming that that is the only effective way in their country. For outsiders it is very difficult to judge what exactly their positions are, what the problems are which they encounter, and how they can best be supported in their efforts.

On those occasions where they could fairly easy take a different stand on certain issues than the Government, as in the ILO, when contradictions between Indonesian law and ILO standards are being discussed, they invariably take a neutral position (or they support the Government). When their Government sponsored, together with other ASEAN-countries, a resolution for the 1993 International Labour

Conference against the universality of ILO standards they did not raise their voice against it - although it was against one of the most fundamental workers' positions in the ILO. On most occasions, the SPSI gives the impression that it agrees with the Indonesian Government whenever the lat ter is under attack.

I

I I I I I I I

I I

I I I

I

(19)

I

I I

I

I I I I I

I

I I I I I I I I

6 The SBSI

16.

17.

The "alternative" trade union SBSI found itself in open confrontation with the Government. Aftel' having existed for one year and three months they organised their First National Congress in July.After three quarters of an hour, security forces interrupted the Congress under the pretext that the meeting took place without a permit. The permit had been applied for timely, but the authorities had ignored it. They consider the SBSI as an NGO, or a "political organisation", but not as a trade union. The Government has repeatedly declared that it will only allow one trade union centre: the SPSI.

The ICFTU, several foreign national trade uni on centres and some NGO's (both Indonesian and foreign) sent protests to the Government.

The United States' Trade Representative. working on the GSP.-case, took a close look at it and found that in the months preceding the incident many members and officials of the SBSI had been harassed, dismissed from their job, and arrested and detained for longer or shorter periods.

Under the circumstances it is quite remarkable that the organisation is still alive: it cannot, for the time being, deliver very much to its members (some

35.000

in

75

branches). Main activities have been training and eduction, for which the organisation has received limited financial support, both from Indonesian supporters and from organisations abroad (NGO's and trade unions) .

In October, the Executive Board of the organisation decided to set up 16 sector-oriented trade unions.

In December, they filed a complaint with the ILO against the Govern- ment for violating trade union rights of their members and activists.

The International Cpnfederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFIU) 18.

19·

The ICFTU sent a miss ion to Indonesia in April to examine the general trade union situation there, including the position of the four ICFTU affiliates in the country. Officially, these do not exist any more since the establishment of a Government-sponsored unitary trade union confederation in 1973. They have, however, remained on the membership list since and participated in ICFTU activities.

On the basis of the recoamendations of the mission, the ICFTU Execu- tive Board decided in December among others to keep in abeyance the rights of the four "paper" member organisations and to review their position at an appropriate time in the future, to continue to monitor the developments, to keep an eye on the SPSI and to assist it in efforts to achieve greater independenee and democratisation.

Furthermore, the ICFTU is considering the usefulness of lodging a new complaint against the Government of Indonesia. focusing on some

points in the complaint of some years ago where no significant

progress has been made and possibly also on the role of the military in the trade unions and in labour relations, and finally on the repression of the SBSI.

(20)

7

Most probably. the outcome of the ILO Direct Contact Mission to Indonesia in November 1993 will play an important role in taking the decision.

20. The Asian members of the ICFTU are strongly in favour of affiliating the SPSI. There is strong opposition from Europesn and North American unions. and some International Trade Secretariats.

Tbe International Labour Organisation

21. ILO-involvement in Indonesia consisted of a discussion at the Inter- national Labour Conference in June of the discrepsncies between Indonesian legislation on collective bargaining snd Convention No.

98. snd of the earlier mentioned Direct Contact Mission. The conclusions of the Conference were of the same critical nature as they have been on earlier occasions. The outcome of the mission is still confidential. It will. however. probably be communicated to the US Trade Representative before he formulates his conclusion on the GSP- complaints. mid-February.

22. The ILO-office in Jakarta continued its projects in Indonesia (a.o.

on child labour). It set up a system of regular meetings with the Government. the SPSI snd the Employer Federation APINDO to discuss current problems snd developments.

Foreign trade uniQDS and trade union related bpdies açtive in IndQDesia 23.

24.

The American-Asian Free Lsbor InstUute (MFLI) continued Us Legal Aid for Industrial Disputes Settlement (LAIDS)-Project. executed jointly with the SPSI. The aim of the project is to educate non- unionised workers about their rights under the law and to help them to gain better conditions in the factories. Surveyors/factory workers interview systematically fellow workers. On the basis of the results. action can be taken (e.g. a campaign to make employers pay the legal minimum wage. Workers who get into difficulties because of their psrticipation receive free legal aid. The project also aims at increasing awareness of bad working conditions snd of what workers can do to have them improved. not only among workers. but also employers. the Government. the media snd international labour.

In the course of 1993. tens of thousands of workers have been inter- viewed in six industrial centres in Java.

SPSI has assumed responsibility for the coordination snd implementation of the field work. MFLI takes care of administration. finances and evaluation aspects.

Throughout 1993. several LAIDS-surveyors were harassed and victimised by employers snd/or security forces.

The second major AAFLI-SPSI project aims at helping to build sectoral unions.

I I I I I I I I I I

I

I I

I

(21)

I I I

I

I I

I

I I

I

I I I I I I I

I

25·

26.

8

The SP KEP-SPSI (Chemical-Energy-Mining Workers' Union) was selected as a partner in January-February, shortly af ter the Bandung leadership meeting of the SPSI by the end of 1992 had shown that there might be a perspective for reviving the union-structure abolished by the FBSI/SPSI Congress of 1985. Purpose of the project is to de~elop

democratisation of trade union activities. The main instrument chosen is training.

This "Promoting Democratie Pluralism-Project" assists more than 50 enterprise-level trade unions in the field of activity of the SP KEP- SPSI in the Jabotabek-area (greater Jakarta). Several hundreds of

trade union activists participate in courses. Other activities

included publications, production of education materials, and safety and health-surveys.

Security forces showed a keen interest in this project as weIl. On some occasions they were uninvited guests at training courses, with obvious effect on the way these could be run.

Like AAFLI, the Friedrich-Ebert-Foundation (FES) has long standing activities in Indonesia. It is not a trade union institute, but rather linked up to the Social Democratie Party in Germany. The German trade unions have good links with FES and in most countries where the FES operates it runs, a.o., trade union related projects.

The long term cooperation contract of FES with the Indonesian Govern- ment expired in 1989. Up till then, the Germans rendered considerable support to training programs in the field of labour market polieies and industrial relations. lts institutional counterpart for this was the YTKI-institute.

Sinee 1989, FES and the Government have been trying to review and reform their eooperation. It appears that this is not an easy operation. The YTKI struggles, apparently, with considerable managerial and professional diffieulties. For the time being, FES has only supported a few seminars, studies and small seale ad hoc projects

(a.o. related to the problem of child labour).

FES has only worked with the official trade union SPSI, just as AAFLI. For various reasons it is not foreseeable that they will change this policy. It has followed with great interest the moves towards a restructuring of the SPSI, reviving the old sectoral union system. FES might very weIl. just as the Americans. seek to support

the eonstruction of one or more of these unions by means of trade union training and education programs.

The new minister of Manpower. Mr. Latief, visited Germany in June 1993 when he was in Europe to attend the International Labour Confer- ence in Geneva. He will, no doubt, have discussed future German assistance and the FES-role therein in the field of his responsibil- ities.

The Australian COllncil of Trade Unions (ACTIJl will. most probably, be a new actor in the field.

(22)

9

They have recently studied the Indonesian labour scene thoroughly and it is most probable that they will participate, one way or the other, in cooperation programs offered by the Australian Government to

Indonesia.

The ACTU seems to be interested in training and education activities directed to trade unionists at the plant level.

Tbe role of Indonesian NOP's in tbe field of labour

27. NGO's have been very active in promoting workers' rights, not only by trying to influence changes in labour legislation as indicated

earlier, but also by educational activities, lobbying politicians, publicity, research, and so on. A number of NGO's, based in several ei ties in Java, set up a "Solidarity Forum" which organised some lobbying activities jointly (e.g. pertaining to the reduction of military intervention in labour disputes).

28. These organisations hold the view that setting up a union and being active in it is only workers' business. They are, for that reason, very critical vis-a-vis the trade union movement as it manifests itself currently in Indonesia: "outsiders" play the leading role there. Clearly, their main target is the SPSI. But remarkably enough some of them are also somewhat weary of the SBSI, whose General Chairman is a lawyer by profession. Nevertheless, they look at the SBSI's struggle with great interest and hope. If it succeeds, it wil 1 also mean a big leap forward to freedom of association for other groups in Indonesia than workers.

21 April 1994 T. Etty

I I I I I I I

I I

I

I I I I I

I

(23)

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

amnesty international

INDONESIA

labour Activists Under Fire

May 1994

AI Index: ASA 21/10/94 Distr: SC/CO/GR

INTERNATIONAL SECRET ARIAT. , EASTON STREET. LONDON WC, X aDJ. UNITED KINGDOM

(24)

INDONESIA

labour Activists Under Fire

Introduction

More than I ()() workers and labour activists were arrested during and immediately af ter a week of massive strikes and demonstrations in the vicinity of Medan, North Sumatra in mid-April. The demonstrations marked a peak in a rising tide of labour unrest in Medan and throughout Indonesia over the past two years. Unlike most recent protests.

those in Medan degenerated into anti-Chinese violence, resulting in the death of one Indonesian businessman of Chinese descent, the injury of several others, and the widespread destruction of property .

Amnesty International does not condone the acts of violence committed during the recent demonstrations in Medan. It deplores the murder of a businessman on 15 April.

and recognizes the Indonesian Government's right to bring the perpetrators of such violence to justice. However, it is concerned that the authorities may be using the unrest in Medan as a pretext for a broader crackdown on peaceful labour activism, and to silence the advocates of workers' rights.

It is particularly concerned by the arrest of several officials of the Indonesian Prosperous Workers Union (Serikat Buruh Sejahtera Indonesia -SBSn, an independent trade union not recognized by the govemment. Notwithstanding allegations by the authorities that SBSI officials incited the violence in Medan, Amnesty International believes that at least five of those arrested may be prisoners of conscience, held solely for their non-violent political or trade union activities.

The organization is also concerned that some of those detained, whether prisoners of conscience or not, may have been or may be ill-treated while under interrogation. III- treatment and torture of both criminal and political suspects is routine in Indonesia; and at least one of those recently detained in Medan is said to have been badly beaten.

Amnesty International is therefore calling upon the authorities to ensure that the detainees are accompanied at all stages of investigation by a lawyer of their choice, as guaranteed by the Indonesian Code of Criminal Procedure, and that a regularly updated public register of all those detained is maintained.

Finally, Amnesty International is concerned by a broad and persistent pattern of military and police intervention in labour disputes in Indonesia, which has resulted in workers and activists facing ill-treatment, imprisonment, torture, rape, and even death.

Amnesty International May 1994

AI Index: ASA 21/10/94

I I I I

I

I I I I I I I I I I I

I

(25)

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

2 Labour Activists Under Fire

The problem has been exemplified by the death of two young labour activists within the past year: Marsinah, a young woman and labour activist raped and killed in May 1993 in East Java; and Rusli, a 22-year-old worker, whose body was found floating in a river on 13 March 1994, a few days after he lOOk part in a strike at a factory near Medan. Given strong indications of military and police responsibility in both deaths, Amnesty International is urging that those responsibie be brought promptly to justice before a civilian court.

1. Restrictions on Labour: The Context

The Indonesian Government imposes heavy restrictions, both in law and in practice, on the right to strike and to organize. Only one trade union federation is recognized, the government-sponsored All Indonesia Workers Union (Serikat PekLrja Seluruh Indonesia -SPSI). Despite government assurances in the past year that restrictions on freedom to organize would be loosened, a recent Ministry of Manpower Decree (No.11l994) continues to define SPSI as the sole recognized trade union.

In addition, the government has used various methods, including intimidation and arrest, to undermine independent unions such as the SBSI, established in June 1992. In February 1994, for example, at least 19 members of the SBSI - in.f.!llil.il1g the union's national chairman, Muchtar Pakpahan, a member of its national executive council, Sunarty, and the chairman of its executive council for Central Java, Trisjanto - were detained on the eve of a national strike called for II February. Amnesty International believes that their arrests were designed to prevent them from organizing the strike, and to intimidate others from taking part in it. Though all were released within a few days, the three named above were charged with incitement and expressing feelings of hostility toward the government. ^IMilitary surveillance, intimidation and arrest of SBSI officials and their families has increased since the April unrest.

In addition to such legal obstacles, direct military and police interventio" is wutiRIl in Indonesia, even in the most peacèful labour disputes. In some cases, military authorities resort to ill-treatment, torture, rape and even killing, in order to intimidate or silence workers and labour activists. The tragic consequences of routine military intervention in labour disputes are highlighted by the death within the past year of two young labour activists, Marsinah and Rusli, whose cases are outlined in Section 5 of this report.

I See Amnc::sty International report. Indones!'a: lAbour AI.:tivi.tI.f Detained (ASA 21/06/94)

AI Index: ASA 21/10/94 Amnesty International May 1994

(26)

Labour Activists Under Fire 3

In most cases, however, military intervention is less over!. In the course of a labour dispute, particularly active or vocal workers are rou.!i!1~ly summoned to the local or district military headquarters, where they are accused of communist sympatJÏiës,-;md threateiïèë wlth Impi'ïsonmeot or--physicaLYI.o!~!1c.e~ locludmg a~~-"_ unl~}~iIl~·ä.&~,:~

010 resign "voluntarily" from their job. Whether they "resign" or not, the names of such workers are recorded on a blaëk-=-Iis't, compiled by military intelligence authorities, and distributed on a regular basis to all factories within the command area. As a consequence, once dismissed, active or vocal usually workers find it difficult, if not impossible, to find a new job.

Despite such dangers and restrictions, Indonesian workers have carried out strike actions and demonstrations with increasing frequency in recent years. Most of these strikes have occurred in the major industrial centres near the capital city of Jakarta, in Surabaya, East Java, and in Medan, North Sumatra. On the whoie, strikers have called for improvements in working conditions, and wages which, at the equivalent of about US$1.50 per day, are among the lowest in Asia. However, like those in Medan in March and April, some strikers have also demanded freedom to organize, an end to military intervention in labour disputes. and proper investigations into past human rights abuses against workers.

These concerns have been echoed by the office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) which, in June 1993, warned that tariff benefits granted to Indonesian exports under the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) programme might be suspended uniess there were significant improvements in the protection of internationally-recognized labour rights. The USTR was due to announce its decision in February 1994 but chose instead to extend its period of review for a further six months to August 1994. In the months prior to that decision, the Indonesian Government took some initiatives aimed at answering both domestic and international criticism. In January 1994 it announced the repeal of Ministry of Manpower Decree No 342 of 1986, which explicitly authorized military intervention in the settlement of labour disputes. While a welcome step, the repeal of this decree did not put an end to military intervention in labour disputes in practice.

2. Tbe April Demonstrations

Beginning on 14 April, and continuing for more than one week, the demonstrations in the Medan area involved tens of thousands of workers from most of the factories in the area. At the outset, the demonstrations were orderly and peaceful, and the demands of the protesters related solely to working conditions, wages and labour rights. However, toward the end of the first day, and accelerating in the following days, they began to

Amnesty International May 1994 AI Index: ASA 21/10/94

I I I I I I

I

(27)

I I I

I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

4 Labour Activists Under Fire

degenerate into violence, providing opportunities for the articulation of anti-Chinese sentiments, the destruction of property, and the killing of a Chinese-Indonesian businessman, Yuli Kristianto (Kok Joe Lip).

Stirred by long-standing grievances over low wages and poor labour conditions, and sparked by the suspicious death of a fellow-worker, Rusli, between 20.000 and 30,000 workers from dozens of factories gathered at the office of the Provincial Governor in Medan on the morning of 14 April to demand, among other things:

• an increase in the daily minimum wage from Rp 3,100 (about USS 1.50) to Rp 7,000 (about USS 3.50),

• the repeal of Ministry of Manpower Decree No. 111994 that defines the government-backed SPSI as the sole trade union; and official recognition of the independent SBSI;

• a prompt and impartial investigation into Rusli 's death;

• the reinstatement of some 389 workers dismissed after a strike at the factory PT Korek Api Deli in March 1994.

After negotiations between 23 workers and the government authorities failed to produce any concrete response to their demands, some of the assembied workers grew restive. Government reports said that troops were called in to quell rioting which erupted after protesters began to throw rocks at shops along the road from Medan to Belawan.

Some non-govemmental sources c1aimed that the worst violence was triggered by the heavy-handed intervention of the security forces. As the demonstrators retumed to their homes in various industrial areas on the outskirts of the city. they were confronted by hundreds of armed riot police and soldiers. According to one report, at about 4:30pm, as the protesters reached the Jalan Glugur By-pass, riot police moved in, firing tear-gas and attacking the crowd with batons. Protesters responded by throwing stones and other projectiles. In the course of the confrontation, several protesters were arrested. Later the same night, at about 2am, police arrested an SBSI official, Riswan Lubis, at his home

in Medan. .

Open clashes erupted again the following moming, Friday IS April, as thousands of workers from the industrial centres outside Medan were prevented by security forces from entering the city to meet the Govemor. They were met by thousands of fully-armed troops of !he Police Mobile Brigade, soldiers from the District Military Command (KODIM), as weil as crack airforce troops (LINUD), military police (POM), and regular police units. At least nine armoured vehicles were deployed nearby and helicopters

AI Index: ASA 21/10/94 Amnesty International May 1994

•

LABOUR RIGHTS

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

LABOUR RIGHTS

& EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT

IN INDONESIA

The challenge fo Ausfralia

\-. ______ ... _ . T_·'_·"_ .. ~ .. I

I

A dossier prepared for the consultation between

the Indonesia-Australia Program for Co-operation and AIDAB,

preparatory to the July 1994 meeting of the Consultative Group on Indonesia

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I

I

I

I

I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I

Contents

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

I I

I

I

I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I I

I

I

lntroduction Pat Walsh

Secretary, Indonesia-Australia Program/or Co-operation

ao

I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I

I

I

I

I

1

I

j

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

us

I I I I I I I I I I I

I

I I

I

I

I

I

I

I I I I I

I I I

I

I I I I I I

I

I I

I

I

I I I I

I I I I

I

I I I I I I

I

I

I

I , .

I

I I I I I

I

\-. ______ ... _ . T_·'_·"_ .. ~ ^.. I