PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP TENAGA KERJA DALAM HAL PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA KARENA ALASAN EFISIENSI PERUSAHAAN BERDASARKAN UNDANG-UNDANG NOMOR 13 TAHUN 2003 TENTANG KETENAGAKERJAAN PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 19/ PUU-IX/2011
| Main Author: | YULIANAH, YULIANAH |
|---|---|
| Format: | Thesis NonPeerReviewed Book |
| Bahasa: | ind |
| Terbitan: |
, 2016
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: |
https://eprints.untirta.ac.id/11287/1/PERLINDUNGAN%20HUKUM%20TERHADAP%20TENAGA%20KERJA%20DALAM%20HAL%20PEMUTUSAN%20HUBUNGAN%20KERJA%20KARENA%20ALASAN%20EFISIEN.PDF https://eprints.untirta.ac.id/11287/ |
Daftar Isi:
- The use of article 164 paragraph (3) law no. 13 years 2003 on employment by businesses as legal basis for did working termination with efficiency reason without the lid companies have become polemics in practice law employment. Workers and or union often hostile to termination a working relationship with efficiency reason because according to they have no article in law no. 13 year 2003 governing efficiency without the lid it can be used as an excuse he did working termination by businessmen. Polemic jobs because efficiency reason also had has been a problem by asep ruhiyat, etc workers at hotel papandayan in laid off with efficiency reason .The constitutional court do the materil to article 164 paragraph (3) in your his ruling number 19 / PUU-IX / 2011. To analyze these problems, research methodology used was a qualitative methodology, with the approach juridical normative. The results of the study showed that: ( 1 ) with the establishment of the award MK no. 19 / PUU-IX / 2011 was not made laid off with efficiency reason become clear .This is at least seen in decisions of the supreme court no. 48 k / pdt.sus / 2013, no. 627 out k / pdt.sus-phi / 2014, and no. 660 k / pdt.sus / 2012. Judge answer laid off from businessmen based on article 164 paragraph (3) the act of number 13 year 2003 on employment. (2) an attempt legal protection for the workers have been done by the government with the issuance of legislation in employment, but it was have not fulfilled legal protection for workers / laborers. This can be seen of the award the judges who hears working termination whose entrepreneurs. The judges in deciding cases pertaining to laid off just saw of the aspect of juridical, without seeing other aspects, namely sociological and philosophical aspects of the termination of the working.