Jurnal KAJIAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA OLEH PENGUSAHA DIKARENAKAN PEKERJA MANGKIR STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 128 KPDTSUS-PHI2014

Download Jurnal Disini
Jurnal KAJIAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA OLEH PENGUSAHA DIKARENAKAN PEKERJA MANGKIR STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 128 KPDTSUS-PHI2014

In the theory of labor law employers may dismiss based on Labor Law This research is motivated by the termination of employment between employers and workers beginning with employee objections to the mutation policy of the entrepreneur and realized by the act of defaulters to him has been delivered the summons I and II by the employer The Dispute Resolution continues until the decision of the Supreme Court of Appeal Supervisory Board Number 128 KPdtSus-PHI2014 where the judge of the cassation judge rejects the appeal request submitted by the employer and strengthens the industrial relations court's decision to grant a worker's claim requesting that the judge declares that the employer has legitimately laid off Article 161 1 Law Number 13 Year 2003 concerning Manpower In this thesis the problem to be investigated through the decision Number 128 KPdtSus-PHI2014 is whether the reason workers lost to followers can be used as an excuse to justify the CPH and what if the compensation obtained by workers in the decision has been in accordance with Labor Law To answer the question the authors conducted a normative study with analytical descriptive approach The results obtained are that the reasons workers lost to follow-up can be used to justify layoffs it is based on Article 168 paragraph 1 Law No. 13 of 2003 on Employment in which employers may submit written evidence that workers have been lost to follow-up for more than 5 consecutive business days without a valid reason and the employer has summoned the worker appropriately 2 times. With regard to this, the legal basis of Article 161 Law Number 13 Year 2003 concerning Manpower used by the Panel of Judges is mistaken Given the legal basis for the reasons for the dismissal of the employee, the Compensation for Termination of Employment is wrong because the dismissal can be justified under Article 168 paragraph 1 of Act No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower then the compensation to workers is based on Article 168 paragraph 3 of Act No. 13 of 2003 on Employment Suggestions that can be given are in the working relationship execute the employment order of employers is the obligation of workers Workers should be more careful in responding to employers policies by keeping under the Labor Law Dan that the judges should be more careful in making decisions by taking into account and considering the existing legal facts and based on the Manpower Law In compensating workers should be based on the reasons for a dismissal

Download Jurnal Disini

Leave a reply "Jurnal KAJIAN HUKUM TERHADAP PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA OLEH PENGUSAHA DIKARENAKAN PEKERJA MANGKIR STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 128 KPDTSUS-PHI2014"

Author: 
    author