This is the comment to my "Reagan" article. I actually complained to my editor at the Jakarta Globe, asking how on earth he published this without first informing me, and thus I could put my reply right next to his. My editor conceded that it was an error on his part, and asked me to dash a reply ASAP.
I wrote mine in less than 1 hour.
While his idea is great at a glance, by the end of the day, his left-wing solutions, pursued to its logical conclusion, would lead to more anarchy. Why would anyone rely to the judicial system if there's a more effective way to get what you want, e.g. violence?
Change the players, and you may end up completely disagree with his entire premise. Take the example of extremist groups such as the Islamic Defender Front (FPI). The Islamists were also harrassed and banned during the New Order, not unlike the Labor Union. Therefore,should we give them a free pass? Should we allow them to pursue their anarchic actions in closing houses of worships, attacking stores that stock alcoholic beverages, and restaurants that sell food during the fasting month, since they obviously cannot rely on a "long and expensive courts?"
I am consistent. I oppose anarchic actions by every single group because it may create a legal precedent and further undermine the judiciary system.
Left unmentioned were the leftist's strikes and unrests in the 1950s that played a major role too in causing the collapse of the Constitutional Democracy of 1950s, as it undermined the technocratic governments of Natsir and Wilopo, and also the communist-backed takeover of Dutch's enterprises led to the eventual military takeover of those enterprises and setting up the foundation of the New Order.
Therefore, the title "Study History First" is flat wrong. The esteemed writer, I think, has a very little understanding of Indonesian history.
The bad thing about the debate? I wasn't paid at all. What a waste of time.
Anyhow, I would suggest everyone to read George Orwell's marvelous books, such as Down and Out in Paris and London and Road to Wigan Pier, and his essay “The Lion and the Unicorn." It is a good preparation to harsh world ahead.
---
Letter to the Editor: Study History First, Don’t Bash Workers
Sigfried S. Looho | February 20, 2012
Earlier this month, there was a disturbing opinion
piece in your paper regarding traffic disturbances caused by labor
protests (Yohanes Sulaiman, “When It Comes to Taming Labor Unions,
Indonesia Can Learn a Lot From Reagan, ”Jakarta Globe, Feb. 3). One need
not be a leftist to shudder at biased insensitiveness. This struck me —
a student of free-market economics and securities law — as historically
uninformed. I believe the esteemed writer must carefully consider his
own history before embarking upon such workers bashing.
First, the esteemed writer overlooked the long plight of workers who suffered “severe repression in the name of socially responsible economic unionism” during the New Order, as argued by scholar Michele Ford in 2005. After the banning of left-wing unions and the annihilation of the communist-linked All Indonesia Center of Labor Organizations (SOBSI), Indonesian labor activism was castrated by single-union policy.
This leads to my second point: that although Reformasi saw an influx in the formation of unions, 10 years later, there is still no coherent workers representation at the national political level. Here I also note scholar Dan Slater’s scathing 2004 analysis of the cartelization of Indonesian politics, which further asphyxiated the workers’ voice. Therefore, the esteemed writer’s suggestion that the government “learn to act with determination vis-a-vis workers” is oddly juxtaposed with New Order “heavy-handedness.”
Third, the argument about the judiciary is simply hard to follow. The writer basically argues that the unions would have “submitted” to an Indonesian Employers Association (Apindo) victory but for the Indonesian judiciary’s bad image, hence the case for judicial reform. This argument is again insensitive and shows a misguided conception about legal systems in general. Even in the United States lawsuits are long and expensive. It is hard to imagine unions having a chance against well-organized and well-financed bodies such as Apindo.
Finally, the esteemed writer’s comparison of the judiciaries of Indonesia and the United States is just unfortunate. If the integrity, efficiency and consistency of our legal system would be half that of the United States, Indonesia would be a totally different country.
My message is simple: unless one genuinely considers our workers’ pain-riddled history and current disenfranchisement, one should not conduct such virulent worker bashing. As we embark upon reforming our labor code in order to make Indonesia more attractive for much-needed investment, genuine history lessons become even more necessary.
Sigfried S. Looho, law and business graduate student at Cornell Law School and the London School of Economics
First, the esteemed writer overlooked the long plight of workers who suffered “severe repression in the name of socially responsible economic unionism” during the New Order, as argued by scholar Michele Ford in 2005. After the banning of left-wing unions and the annihilation of the communist-linked All Indonesia Center of Labor Organizations (SOBSI), Indonesian labor activism was castrated by single-union policy.
This leads to my second point: that although Reformasi saw an influx in the formation of unions, 10 years later, there is still no coherent workers representation at the national political level. Here I also note scholar Dan Slater’s scathing 2004 analysis of the cartelization of Indonesian politics, which further asphyxiated the workers’ voice. Therefore, the esteemed writer’s suggestion that the government “learn to act with determination vis-a-vis workers” is oddly juxtaposed with New Order “heavy-handedness.”
Third, the argument about the judiciary is simply hard to follow. The writer basically argues that the unions would have “submitted” to an Indonesian Employers Association (Apindo) victory but for the Indonesian judiciary’s bad image, hence the case for judicial reform. This argument is again insensitive and shows a misguided conception about legal systems in general. Even in the United States lawsuits are long and expensive. It is hard to imagine unions having a chance against well-organized and well-financed bodies such as Apindo.
Finally, the esteemed writer’s comparison of the judiciaries of Indonesia and the United States is just unfortunate. If the integrity, efficiency and consistency of our legal system would be half that of the United States, Indonesia would be a totally different country.
My message is simple: unless one genuinely considers our workers’ pain-riddled history and current disenfranchisement, one should not conduct such virulent worker bashing. As we embark upon reforming our labor code in order to make Indonesia more attractive for much-needed investment, genuine history lessons become even more necessary.
Sigfried S. Looho, law and business graduate student at Cornell Law School and the London School of Economics
----------------
Letter to the Editor: Study Indonesia First, Don’t Bash Opinions
Yohanes Sulaiman | February 21, 2012
I would like to thank Mr. Sigfried S. Looho for his comments. While Mr. Looho raised many interesting points in his reply to my Feb. 3 article titled “When It Comes to Taming Labor Unions, Indonesia Can Learn a Lot From Reagan,” unfortunately his replies were marred by careless reading.
Let me address his third point first, which is built upon grave mischaracterization of my argument. I argued that trust in the Indonesian judiciary is declining, which would raise the issue of fairness, whether the court is influenced by the moneyed interests or the pitch-fork-wielding mob. Regardless of who wins, there will be someone crying foul: thus the difficulties to rely on the judiciary as the disinterested party.
Mr. Looho, however, seems to argue that the workers should instead disregard the judiciary system because “lawsuits are long and expensive.” While such action would seem to be appropriate from the comforts of the ivory tower in the prosperous and stable the United States or Great Britain, without trust in law enforcement, could any state function?
Like I argued in one of my recent articles, people then would rely on the mob, causing social and religious conflicts. Such anarchic condition, which will cost many in terms of property and even life, seems to be a welcomed development for Mr. Looho. Unfortunately, Indonesia had enough of its share of social unrest, which happened in the early years of Reformation and caused much economic and social hardship, and not to mention deaths. A second helping is not welcomed.
In fact, such was the fear of many Indonesians that the anarchic actions by labor unions and many other groups are not that popular. In my article I suggested the labor unions behave strategically, ensuring that the population remains behind their back thanks to their orderly and wise course of actions. Thus the lesson from Reagan: because people do not like massive public discomfort, unions should avoid causing just that.
In short, I believe the esteemed commenter must carefully consider what’s going on in Indonesia before embarking upon such opinion bashing.
-------------------------
nonredneck
9:11pm Feb 20, 2012
Sigfried: Are you going to make appearances to defend your stance and be prepared for onslaught like yohanes do on almost all his pieces ?? If not then NOBODY should take this complaining piece seriously.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
12:19am Feb 21, 2012
trueblue
7:23am Feb 21, 2012
You are spot on. The repetitious use of the condescending term "esteemed writer" attempting to demean Yohanes, shows the stuff that comrade Sigfried is made of. Give him a miss.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
7:56am Feb 21, 2012
@SirAnthony: That response that I submitted will also answer your comments.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
7:57am Feb 21, 2012
nonredneck
4:14pm Feb 21, 2012
nonredneck
4:15pm Feb 21, 2012
nonredneck
4:16pm Feb 21, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
4:32pm Feb 21, 2012
Anyway, my reply to this letter is up.
nonredneck
6:06pm Feb 21, 2012
The reply not so visible but found it here:
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/letter-to-the-editor-study-indonesia-first-dont-bash-opinions/499454
S.S.Looho
1:46am Feb 22, 2012
http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/opinion/letter-to-the-editor-study-indonesia-first-dont-bash-opinions/499454
shalom wass.
agentmacgyver
7:44pm Feb 21, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
9:15pm Feb 21, 2012
Still, that does not undermine my argument that judicial reform is a must in order to create a lawful and just society.
agentmacgyver
10:00pm Feb 21, 2012
Serigala-Berbulu-Domba
10:18pm Feb 21, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
10:48pm Feb 21, 2012
@Serigala-Berbulu-Domba: I agree, and it is a deplorable system that needs to be fixed.
S.S.Looho
1:45am Feb 22, 2012
Dr. Sulaiman, thank you for your reply. Indonesia is undergoing a period of legal stabilization. Every segments of society are realizing newfound liberties and rights. Islamists have their parties, Christians their NGOs, businesses their lobby groups, Chinese their charities. Sadly, the labor movements are fragmented and aphonic. Going to the streets is, therefore, cathartic – a response to disenfranchisement and legislative and executive neglect.
Unfortunately, the only way for workers to politically engage the Jakarta public is to cause ‘sedikit macet-macet’. After all, we, the middle class, were too busy riding Indonesia’s emerging markets boom and neglect them continually. Further, ‘macet-macet’ is not a monopoly of laborers: anything – from demonstrasi to weddings to mother nature – causes traffic jams these days! Maybe the main issue at play is poor infrastructure!
The leap from collective action to anarchism – even when conditioned by a weak judiciary – seems far-fetched. The former is a “fundamental right of workers”, while the latter is a failure of law enforcement & governance. Collective action is not a necessary condition of anarchism nor of traffic disturbances. Moreover, weak governance should not discount this “fundamental right”.
Indonesia suffered from too much bloodbath which remain unanswered and unpunished. One of the victims of our history is the kaum buruh and by virtue of their past pains, Indonesia owes much ethical duties. The middle ground espoused by @agentmacgyver should be a musyawarah-spirit. Society – led by intellectuals like Dr. Sulayman – should react by facilitating genuine labor-business discourse instead of pushing for government clamp down. Genuine discourse will act as a release valve which – in the long run – will prevent that much-feared “anarchic condition”.
In short, rather than feeling alienated, we must have compassion. Rather than being angry for ‘macet-macet’, society must really study how our workers arrived to where they are – voiceless and defenseless – that they had to resort to the streets to risk their livelihood.
POSTSCRIPT
@TB: the term “esteemed writer” signifies Dr. Sulaiman’s academic seniority.
@TB & NRN: calling one “comrade” – implying Communist affinities – may be jokey in Anglo-Saxon societies. In Indonesia, millions died because of such accusations. Such name-calling is therefore distasteful and shows the ahistorical insensitivity I had been writing against.
Finally, to clarify, I made no arguments, implied or otherwise, (i) that workers “should” disregard the legal system or (ii) that I “welcome” anarchism. With regards to (i) I merely described an obvious fact: the asymmetry of resources and organizational capabilities between Apindo and the Bekasi workers.
On (ii), suggesting that someone could welcome any form of “anarchic condition[s]” is an insult to all Indonesians – from Glodok to Ambon – who suffered post-Reformasi butchery.
DrDez
6:23am Feb 22, 2012
Without wishing to be portrayed as a doom merchant I do not think that our judiciary will reform within a frame that heads off the current and impending social/economic unrest and I cannot see trust returning to our administration (enough for them to blag it out anytime soon. Therefore I anticipate more of the same
Yohanes-Sulaiman
9:59am Feb 22, 2012
Collective action is not a license to cause social disruptions. Rather, should they want to do the work stoppage, do it within the confines of the factories.
ON your postcript2(ii): frankly, I don't insult all these Indonesians. It is you, by your trivializing the social disruptions and advocating the disregard to the rule of law and even breaking the law, are the one who are insulting to many Indonesians.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
10:40am Feb 22, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
11:38am Feb 22, 2012
Apparently I was wrong.
trueblue
12:39pm Feb 22, 2012
A chink in the armour is revealed! We know that on this subject you are bent. Normally you are straight down the line, and on the level . . .
DrDez
12:43pm Feb 22, 2012
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
1:24pm Feb 22, 2012
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
1:31pm Feb 22, 2012
trueblue
1:52pm Feb 22, 2012
Please don't go down the propaganda path as there's every chance the Godwin factor will spoil the duel.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
2:38pm Feb 22, 2012
S.S.Looho
4:11pm Feb 22, 2012
This is what you wrote:
“It is you […] are the one [sic] who are insulting to many Indonesians.”
Once again, as I said in Postscript 2(i) I did not “advocat[e]” (prescribe) or "trivializ[e]" the disregard or breaking of law. I merely stated (descriptively) it is human nature for workers to resort to catharsis – we therefore should not be surprised. My appeal to musyawarah will allow society and government to embrace their concern (mengayomi mereka) and help ensure that in the future such traffic disturbances will not happen again.
nonredneck
4:13pm Feb 22, 2012
Hmm..too long where do I begin,I hope webed's system is able to handle it. The word limits should be applied only to new accounts & only occasional commenters btw, nobody likes the word limit.
Appetizer to comrade sigfried: academics especially those coming from an anglo-saxon society like yourself shouldn't be ideologically hypersensitive to a jokey, call me comrade nonredneck anytime, comrade.
Now next to the meaty part.
I don't have the patience to outread the academics here, but I'll share my views based on experience on the ground & practicality outside of books.
Lets look at the 3 major force in this equation:
1. The people (sub sect: customers, employable pool of workforce & their family, bystanders)
2. The engine (sub-sect: start-ups, SME, MNC, investors, innovators)
3. The middle-man (sub-sect: exec-judi-legit, +other interest groups)
In ideal condition,all #1-#3 higly inter-linked equally powerful & influential.This ideal situation is subject to market forces jst like stock prices,from time to time one will be over/under powered,hence correction (crisis) is inevitable everywhere.
In countries where #3 is highly evolved,they act as an expert with their brokerage services. Incompetence leads to replacement or non contract renewal for the next term.
In indo context however;#3 served not as broker,but impediment to#2 & powerful manipulator over#1. [Note: opportunistic parasites/mega-corps utilizing lobbies are considered as #3"interest groups",not the #2engine I'm talking abt to fuel real-econ health).
It is clear in indo situation that both #1 & #2 needs each other & cut the middle-man not offering their expertise,but only sucking parasites to #1 & #2.
Both Sigfried&Yohanes argues on the level of pro-"compassion" vs pro-"sympathy", both agree good judiciary system is needed (only wishful thinking fr now)Majority here always complain abt the govt & how cr3p it is. YES IT IS. But to assume that changes need to be made @govt-level is only dreaming. In indo: govt isn't the solution, it is the problem.
I don't support govt clamp-down bcs it is an oppression, and I don't support MVF or ford's tactic of attacking protesters. I also do not support street protests in general, because of inability to control emotion & rage, unless the extremely rare leader like gandhi can keep the movement's emotion on the right focus.
Sigfried's argument on having labor union-rep inside the parasitic govt is absolutely out of touch. I can guarantee you 100% whatever rep you put inside there to represent the some kind of union will be infiltrated, contaminated, manipulated, exploited and used as extortion attack dog by the most powerful shadow (e.g. brotherhood of teamster was most severly exploited in the past by the mafia).
"macet-macet" here is NOT "SEDIKIT" like NS-101 during rush hour. We're talking about having a picnic on the highway complete with basketful of food, champagne, watching 2 full movies. Again, you're out of touch even with "macet" I can safely assume YOU WEREN'T THERE!
Sigfried's argument on "fundamental-right" is actually fundamentally-wrong..How so? Fundamental right granted free speech, free to protest, free to advance one's mind, free to pursue wealth and recycle this wealth to educate their next gens, IT DOES NOT GIVE RIGHT TO KIDNAP! DAMAGE other's property, or to ROBBING bystanders/customers of their time, goods, services, or passing through.
Sigfried's "compassionate" is visibly a sign of stockholm syndrome: "Oh pity them..these people are cornered, they're hungry. To fight for their 'fundamental rights' so they should be allowed to kidnap comrade nonredneck to demand ransom from comrade trueblue, in order to feed their poor kids at home"
How does this "compassionate" work if airline/train/bus workers decided in order to get a "holiday bonus" they kidnap the passangers/travelers with strike during christmas /thanksgiving /idulfitri /chinese new year??? sedikit macet-macet ay.
Here's what I think is practical: 1. stop complaining! 2. stop self-pity! 3. nothing is free except for the air we breathe. REALIZE THIS: Changes starts from the people, not the govt, and the engine of econ (aka businesses) NEED GOOD PEOPLE TO RUN either in producing high quality product, or providing high quality services, good management, efficient approaches.
So what is the solution? Definitely not judiciary cr3p. Both workers and businesses need to realize high interdependece nature of their relationship, it is not one of opposition, but of alliance. Any good labor union movement will therefore not support street protests, but to encourage skills & education promotion within it's members.
Any business person will know the most chalenging part of business is none other than its PEOPLE, the most important yet most difficult, keeping quality workers therefore scores highly as a business incentives bcs efficiency, quality, speed, all translates to profit.
Both labor-unions & business-orgs should work together to fund & promote upgrading-skills program, self-enhancement, efficiency approaches, quality services trainings to all the labor union members. Businesses should have no worries bcs there will always be lazy ones out there not willing to attend these programs even if its free for their own benefit, let these pool be the low-skilled demand. At the same time increasing the quality talent pools to reduce need for expat imports /outsource /replace 10-inneficient workers with only 1.
Right now those strikers genuinely want to fight for their own prosperity, wealth, & advancement has no other means but to protest, and they're bunched up together with the opportunistic parasitic ones. How can one tell the difference? Nobody can. Again in all programs, cut the cr3p, keep the parasitic middle-man off.
S.S.Looho
7:23pm Feb 22, 2012
(i) quick fyi – Law No. 13 of 2003 Article 137 states that strike is a "fundamental right" of workers and trade unions. Perhaps you would like to lobby the DPR to amend this?
(ii) True, I cannot find a "right to kidnap", "to rob[]" or to "damage [] property" in the labor code.
(iii) Can you explain what disease is causing my compassion "syndrome"? What disease is it to have compassion to our much-repressed workers – who at one point faced segmental annihilation? If John 13:34-35 is a disease, then I am thus afflicted.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
8:49pm Feb 22, 2012
Just to make it clear: any mob on street is bad in my book. Whether it is Pemuda Pancasila, FPI, unions, or any obscure NGO that came out of nowhere is bad, as it has the potential of causing social disruptions, economic damage, and violence.
If the labors don't like the wage, then go to strike by all mean, but do it within the confines of the factories or simply don't come. Plain and simple. No need to go on street.
@Looho: Didn't you say that "Even in the United States lawsuits are long and expensive?" Basically, don't use the mechanism of law because it is "long and expensive." "Even in the United States?" That's a prescription for lawbreaking.
I am just taking your argument to the fullest extent, mind you.
nonredneck
9:01pm Feb 22, 2012
I'll only hint on how I'd answer your points:
(i) "Changes starts from the people, not the govt (aka cr#3p)". Lobbying defeats your own point.
(ii) How is blockade of a major road artery isn't a kidnapping of innocent bystanders/road-users refused to be let pass through, or goods/service deliveries unable to reach on schedule (some incurring penalty fees on shipment) ???
(iii) stockholm syndrome not a disease, google it if its not clear. And next time someone wants to use king james bible in a debate, i'll pull out my super human kryptonian bible.
Yohanes-Sulaiman
9:02pm Feb 22, 2012
@Looho: Again, fundamental rights to strike does not give workers and trade unions the license to cause your so-called "sedikit macet-macet."
Unless you can bear sitting down in traffic for 8+ hours thanks to people blocking the road, you have no rights to tell others to do the same. And no, having a chauffeur does not count.
You reminded me of George Orwell's essay on liberalism. A good one is “The Lion and the Unicorn." Try reading it once in a while.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
11:10pm Feb 22, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
6:30am Feb 23, 2012
@SirAnthony: You know, you raised an interesting point. You said, "It's not a conspiracy if people explicitly tell you they are running your lives and they are doing it for your own good." -- isn't that what YOU are exactly doing at this moment? That, hey, you have to tolerate the strikers who blocked the roads because it is good for you?
In essence, cannot we argue that you are also a huge part of this conspiracy to undermine the stability of the nation, making Indonesia not attractive to investors due to all these strikers, part of commie conspiracy theory, etc? The argument cuts both ways.
Of course, the problem with that argument is that I may do it just for malice, just to make you looks horrible and undermine your credibility, just to score a cheap point, since you cannot refute it, since regardless of anything you do, you are already branded as a part of this "huge conspiracy?"
Just to make my point here, that what you said is an "ad-hominem" attack
trueblue
6:50am Feb 23, 2012
So your fix-it method, as suggested in the Gospel you referred to, is a 1970,s lovey dovey sit in a cicle holding hands group session and singing Kumbyaya. Time for a reality check!
enakajah
8:41am Feb 23, 2012
Personally I know that the labour laws here are some of the most pro-worker and hardest on employers/investors I have worked with. This makes corner cutting by those in mass production a necessity and all the evil that goes with it. It is harder and harder to make a profit here as labour laws and worker protection make most companies non-competitive, hence major producers moving to other countries.
Management is the key and co-operative operations with the employees, however most companies do not have this luxury and in the end either use draconian methods or close and everyone looses.
Fundamental right to strike? The worker has a fundamental right to withdraw labour yes. But the employer does not have the same right to withdraw employment!
NRN- you rock.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
10:09am Feb 23, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
11:03am Feb 23, 2012
By the end of the day, nobody dares to quote Reagan because the fear of raising the ire of you and your fellow Reaganphobes.
Any dissent would be seen as the "neoliberal economic" stooges, not impartial, victim of propaganda, etc.
Sounds to me like just a censorship that does not allow the exchange of idea. Thoughtpolice anyone?
@enakajah: right on the money.
DrDez
11:33am Feb 23, 2012
We started small & quickly we had a core group of workers 'with us' We paid them better, trained them better, gave them educational opportunities, promoted progression & above all were honest & open. Many of the 'First Team's'* kids & granddkids are now here
This policy has stood us since Noah was a lad and continues
That said it has become increasingly difficult as outside influences have increased incredibly over the last decade. These range from mosques, village leaders, govt officials, police, other local comps etc (all grabbing) About 4 years ago I employed a person who spends her time anticipating conflict and dealing with it at grass roots before it becomes a problem This was a very good move as we have very rarely been caught out - again this builds on the trust.
*Building the First Team to come
EJ - The concept of First Team grew as we needed trainees (2nd Team)
It stuck so we built our pay structure around it.
The FT is open to anyone. It requires a lot of effort, skill & study including spells in all parts of the business (hr/fin/log/plan/eng/des even security). Once a person is FT then managerial roles are available thereby we create a definite progression structure for all
Some are happy to remain as FT as they earn 20% more than a standard op and we use them wherever there is a need (floating trained ops) no negotiation required, no delays, no conflict no loss of output
The best thing is those who take management positions(1 first FT is currently a Director and 2 relocated to Malaysia) already have a deep understanding of the business and carry with them shop floor trust and inter dept cooperation. what this means is if we make a mistake (and we do) rather than have a demo we have a talk and we are trusted to sort it out
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
11:57am Feb 23, 2012
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
12:54pm Feb 23, 2012
trueblue
1:20pm Feb 23, 2012
oops, I hope the "fascist goon squads" don't lead into Godwin territory and spoil the cerebral circus!
enakajah
1:49pm Feb 23, 2012
Indonesian labour costs extremely low??? Nonsense. If this was so why would so many people have left to set up in Vietnam, Phils and other countries? At no stage have I advocated against employees. So I am constant with the street stalls and here. You are just getting angry and personal again.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
1:53pm Feb 23, 2012
Yohanes-Sulaiman
1:57pm Feb 23, 2012
Talk about leftist's victim mentality.
Anyway, I am bowing out from this debate. This is not a productive use of my time, and I am tired of this "I am rubber and you are glue" debate.
Have fun.
enakajah
2:01pm Feb 23, 2012
Not everyone has that luxury and perhaps fewer care. Hence the problems. But the labour laws are so restrictive that what is happening has been on the cards for a long time. Regardless of SAKB's diatribes the fact remains that labour laws cause more problems than they resolve. However through the 90's there were virtually no rights for workers at all... so the pendulum has perhaps swung too far the other way.
enakajah
2:05pm Feb 23, 2012
Better things to do.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
2:18pm Feb 23, 2012
...because the endless rent-seeking officials and thugs here and because of the greater legal certainties there, but we've just been though all this and so has Dez. Indonesia has some of the lowest labour costs in the region. Fact.
SirAnthonyKnown-Bender
2:20pm Feb 23, 2012
I see, very hoity. Well you get to ya Reagonomics classes then. Good luck Sir.
DrDez
2:37pm Feb 23, 2012
EJ
The pendulum has swung too far of that I am certain. when it swings back it will no doubt do more damage - as is the way of most things
On this debate, its fair to say that all parties are actually right, certainly from where they stand
My own fear is that the workforce are just being used as pawns - and to what ends??
But as NRN suggests I am perhaps prone to looking on the darker side and so I am sure like all reasonable men they will sit around and find a solution.. I predict new cars for the union leaders as the short term solution
nonredneck
10:39pm Feb 23, 2012
As for Reagan: I know u're anti-reagan, anti-hitler, anti-stalin, anti-imperial, anti-liberal, anti-religion, anti-fascist, anti-monarchy, anti-authoritarian, anti-socialist,etc basically anti-everything. So what aren't you anti- of ?
Ur question: "So where's Indonesia's empoyEEs' association?"
Here: http://www.thejakartaglobe.com/news/indonesian-activists-worry-about-unions-growth/499895
We both know how this "union" or "association" will be abused if the "protest path" is encouraged from within. There is no way to prevent infiltration, all organizations are prone to this.
However through the path of upgrading skills, improving efficiency, learning new techniques or new 'how to'-[create/fix sth], etc all the programs which enable its members to enhance themselves for future use, what is there to manipulate ??
nonredneck
10:41pm Feb 23, 2012
Of course, none of us are advocating violence, BUT, can you prevent violence?
When the emotion is high on the street, the air is dusty-hot-stuffy-sweaty, the shout on loud speakers not heard, provocator/infiltrator started with little talk here &there,
one thing leads to another, before you know it,
the tiniest spark turned into wildfire, we're no gandhi.
And remember this, any side resorting to violence is a guaranteed to get violent replies, all sides will bleed.
nonredneck
10:42pm Feb 23, 2012
I put "vs." because this is the current view, there is no trust (on national level) between employees & employers.
This level of family-like trust at your company, is highly unlikely to happen at national level.
And your suspicion that the workforce are just being used as pawns, I have no doubt.
But as I previously mentioned to SAKB, there is no way to manipulate the workers IF the path to progress is focused on advancing the worker's skill, capability, & their own efficiency through training & learning programs funded by labor-union vs. bussines-assoc. Win-win-screwgovt situation.
No comments:
Post a Comment