On June 16, 1997, the Indonesian Government will introduce the Manpower Bill to parliament and force its passage into law, thereby consolidating its repression of the labour movement. This proposed 'Law on Manpower' will give the Government extensive control over every aspect of industrial relations, with unlimited power to intervene in labour disputes, and direct control over trade unions in the workplace. The new law will severely restrict workers' organising activities and reduce their collective bargaining power.

The Manpower Bill will repeal or amend six Ordinances and eight Acts as follows:

1. Ordinance No.8 of 1887 on Recruitment of Indonesians for Overseas Employment
2. Ordinance No.647 of 1925 on Measures Limiting Child Labour and Nightwork for Women
3. Ordinance No.87 of 1926 on Measures Child Labour and Youth on Vessels
4. Ordinance of 1936 (State Gazette No.208) on Recruitment
5. Ordinance of 1939 (State Gazette No.545) on Repatriation of Workers who are employed or recruited outside of Indonesia
6. Ordinance No.9 of 1949 on Amending Regulation on Measures Limiting Child Labour
7. Act No.1 of 1951 on Labour Act No.12 of 1948 of The Republic of Indonesia bringing into operation throughout Indonesia
8. Act No.3 of 1951 on Labour Inspection bringing into force Act No.23 of 1948
9. Act No.21 of 1954 on Collective Labour Agreement between Trade Unions and Employers
10. Act No.22 of 1957 on Settlement Labour Disputes
11. Act No.3 of 1958 on The Employment of Foreigners
12. Act No.7 of 1963 on The Prevention of Strike and Lock Out in vital companies, public enterprises, and institutions
13. Act No.12 of 1964 on Termination of Employment in Private Undertakings
14. Act No.14 of 1969 on The Basic Provisions Respecting Manpower.

The ordinances and acts above are in fact better than the Manpower Bill and are still relevant to practice in Indonesia. On the other hand, the Manpower Bill is worse and cannot protect workers in an era of globalisation.

In this sense the Manpower Bill embodies all of the anti-worker legislation which prompted mass protests and strikes recently in South Korea and Australia. As members of the APEC free trade regime, the Governments of these countries have imposed a neoliberal agenda which combines free trade and freedom for international capital with strong state intervention to repress workers' movements and systematically destroy workers' collective rights. While labour standards in industrialised and newly industrialising countries are being driven down by global competition to attract transnational capital, countries such as Indonesia are driving standards even lower by institutionalising its repressive labour practices in a new law which supposedly clarifies workers' "rights". The proposed law only clarifies workers' rights to the extent that it's clear they don't have any.

If the Manpower Bill is passed by parliament it will impose severe restrictions on the right to organise and freedom of association, the right to bargain collectively and the right to strike. Without these fundamental rights the provisions in the Bill concerning wages and working hours cannot be monitored or enforced. The extent of this attack on workers' fundamental rights is demonstrated in the following aspects of the Manpower Bill:

(1) Restrictions on freedom of association and reinforcement of the system requiring unions to be registered with and approved by the Government (Article 34). This reinforces the Decree of the Minister of Manpower (No.PER01/MEN/1994 and No.PER 03/MEN 1993) on the establishment of trade unions in workplaces, whereby all trade unions must register with the Ministry of Manpower and provide a list of names of trade union committee members. The Decree bans union pluralism in the workplace and states that trade unions must seek affiliation to the Government-controlled All Indonesia Workers' Union (SPSI).

(2) Severe restrictions on the right to strike, with unlimited power of Government intervention to end disputes. These restrictions include the requirement that workers seek permission from the Government at least 72 hours before strike action, and that the names of strike leaders must be

(3) Article 83 bans sympathy strikes and strikes which are not directly related to the company concerned.

(4) Article 84 further undermines workers' right to strike by stating that: "Workers shall have no rights to wages during a strike."

(5) Strike action is restricted to the company grounds and any strike action taken outside is illegal. This effectively prevents workers from participating in protest marches or public demonstrations. At the same time, Article 88 allows employers to expel workers from the company grounds: "All employers have the right to start a lockout."

(6) Collective bargaining rights are not guaranteed.

(7) Collective agreements only need to contain references to the "rights and obligations" of employers and workers, and company rules and regulations. Agreements do not need to contain specific provisions on wages, working hours, or working conditions. Also, employers can replace collective agreements with "company regulations" when a union "no longer exists" in the workplace. (8) Collective agreements must be negotiated "without any pressure", which means workers cannot petition the management or threaten industrial action to enforce their demands.

(9) There is inadequate protection against unfair dismissal. In addition, Article 78 fails to guarantee the right to compensation for dismissed workers by stating that dismissed workers should receive severance pay or service money or compensation, when in fact workers should be entitled to all of these.

(10) There is inadequate protection of the rights of women work ers, child and youth labour, Indonesian workers for overseas employment, and foreigners. This problem also applies to the provisions on health and safety.

(11) Many of these "rights" open to arbitrary decisions by Ministry of Manpower officials.

(12) Several articles in Bill contain the qualification that regardless of the "rights" granted to workers, the Government has (and also the employer in fact, because the workers'problem is lack of bargaining power) the unlimited (and unchecked) power to interpret and determine the application of these provisions, example for Overtime (Article 96) and Rest Times (Article 97) Consolidating State Repression Throughout the Manpower Bill there are references to "Pancasila Industrial Relations", which subordinates all labour issues to the decisions of the Government over national interests, unity and order. Article 24 of the Manpower Bill reinforces authoritarian control over workers and trade unions by asserting that all activities must conform to "Pancasila Industrial Relations" which is "designed to promote harmonious, integrated and compatible industrial relations" whereby "all workers shall promote a sense of belonging to and awareness of maintaining and preserving the business." This aspect of the Manpower Bill will give the Government power to enforce an existing Decree issued by the Minister of Manpower in 1994 which states that: "The trade union at the enterprise level is characterised by the principles of Pancasila" and its role is "to ensure continued existence of the enterprise" and "increase the productivity of workers".

The Manpower Bill further diminishes workers' rights by expressly defining workers as a national resource and as goods to be used for national development, where "manpower development aims to regulate, supervise and control the activities pertaining to manpower." Whereas an employer is defined in the Manpower Bill as "a person", a worker is defined only as "manpower".

Finally, the Manpower Bill excludes workers' organisations, trade unions and other labour organisations not registered with and approved by the Ministry of Manpower from providing support to workers in strikes, labour disputes or collective bargaining negotiations. This will leave workers relatively powerless in the face of government officials and progovernment union officials whose interests are aligned with foreign and domestic capital.