DISSENTING OPINION HAKIM DALAM PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA KARENA PELANGGARAN DISIPLIN (STUDI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH AGUNG)

Abstract

This study examines a judge's dissenting opinion in a case concerning the validity of an employee's termination on the ground of a disciplinary violation, as reflected in Supreme Court Decision No. 681K/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2020. The main issue addressed is the divergence between the majority judges and the dissenting judge in determining whether the employee's conduct amounted to a serious violation that could justify termination of employment. This study aims to analyze the accuracy of the panel's ratio decidendi in categorizing the employee's conduct as a serious violation and to examine the differing constructions of ratio decidendi between the majority and the dissenting judge in interpreting the principle of proportionality of sanctions for employee disciplinary violations. The research employs normative legal research using a statutory, conceptual, and case-based approach, drawing on primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials analyzed prescriptively. The results show that the majority judges held that the employee's conduct did not meet the elements of a serious violation and that the termination procedure did not comply with labor law provisions, so the termination was declared invalid; conversely, the dissenting judge considered that the conduct met the elements of a disciplinary violation that could validly justify termination. This divergence indicates the absence of clear and consistent parameters for determining the boundary of disciplinary violations that may justify termination of employment.

Keywords: dissenting opinion; termination of employment; disciplinary violation; ratio decidendi.