PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM BAGI PEKERJA DALAM PEMUTUSAN HUBUNGAN KERJA AKIBAT MANGKIR STUDI PUTUSAN NOMOR 370 K/PDT.SUS-PHI/2020

Abstract

Termination of employment due to absenteeism is governed by Article 168 paragraph (1) of Law Number 13 of 2003 on Manpower. The provision requires three cumulative elements: absence for at least five consecutive working days without a valid written explanation and two proper written summonses issued by the employer. However, Supreme Court Decision Number 370 K/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2020 classified the worker as having voluntarily resigned despite the absence of proper written summonses. This study analyzes the conformity of the Supreme Court's legal reasoning with the principle of legal certainty and examines legal protection for workers. This normative legal research applies statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The findings indicate that the Supreme Court's legal reasoning is inconsistent with the principle of legal certainty because Article 168 requires all cumulative elements to be fulfilled before a worker may be deemed to have resigned. Legal protection is realized through the fulfillment of normative rights according to employment status. Workers under indefinite-term employment agreements are entitled to severance pay, long-service pay, and compensation of rights under Article 156 of Law Number 13 of 2003 on Manpower.