Labor Market Flexibility: Advantages for Workforce or Threat?

Main Article Content

Alih Aji Nugroho


Labor Market Flexibility (LMF) which is supported by the law of supply and demand are considered capable of creating an efficient labor market. As well as apprenticeship programs were considered to improve the quality of the labor force which can suppress the number of unemployed. Whether the application of LMF can be a positive impact like as imagined by its proponents? This is the result of research that seeks to see the dynamics of industrial relations faced by the workforce under the LMF system and dismantle the neoliberal project of the apprenticeship system. The study was conducted during September-November 2016 in the industrial area of Bekasi. The study used a descriptive qualitative approach. Collecting data through participatory research or live in. Searchable data sources using methods of a snowball effect. In the end, this study involved seven trade unions, six companies, two foundations labor brokers, three government agencies, 35 workers (10 contract workers, 10 workers outsourcing, and 15 workers apprenticeship) and three labor activists. The result is the implementation of contract system and outsourcing many violate the rules. In the industrial area of Bekasi composition flexible workforce of more than 50% of the total workforce. And under the LMF system occurs bureaucratization in industrial relations. In addition, LMF policy does not reduce unemployment but only rotate unemployment. and the apprenticeship system is expected to increase human resources in the labor force application only used by the owners of capital to get cheap labor.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
NUGROHO, Alih Aji. Labor Market Flexibility: Advantages for Workforce or Threat?. Policy & Governance Review, [S.l.], v. 2, n. 2, p. 132-147, nov. 2018. ISSN 2580-4820. Available at: <>. Date accessed: 11 dec. 2018. doi:


Atkinson, J. (1984). Flexibility, Uncertainty and Manpower Management (Rep. No. 89). Brighton: Institute of Manpower Studies.
Barbieri, P. (2009). Flexible Employment and Inequality in Europe. European Sociological Review, 25(6), 621-628. doi: 10.1093/esr/ jcp020
Beau, A. (2004). Un siècle demplois précaires: Patron-ne-s et salarie -e-s dans le grand commerce, XIXe-XXe siècles. Paris: Payot.
Betti, E. (2016). Precarious work: Norm or exception of capitalism? Historicizing a contemporary debate: A global gendered perspective. In B. Eloisa & K. Miller (Eds.), The Power of the Norm: Fragile Rules and Significant Exceptions (Vol. XXXV). Vienna, Austria: Institut für die Wissenschaften vom Menschen.
Breman, J., & Linden, M. V. (2014). Informalizing the economy: The return of the social question at a global level. Development and Change, 45(5), 920-940. doi:10.1111/ dech.12115
Caraway, T. L., Rickard, S. J., & Anner, M.S. (2012). International negotiations and domestic politics: The case of IMF labor market conditionality. International Organization, 66(01), 27-61. doi: 10.1017/ s0020818311000348
De Benedetti, A. (2006). Il masso di Sisifo. Studi sull’industrializzazione in bilico. Carocci Rome.
De Vito, C. (2017). Labour flexibility and labour precariousness as conceptual tools for the historical study of the interactions amongs labour relations. In K. H. Roth (Ed.), On the Road to Global Labour History. Leiden: BRILL.
Deyo, F., & Doner, R. (n.d.). Economic governance and flexible production in East Asia. In F. Deyo & R. Doner (Eds.), Economic governance and the challenge of flexibility in East Asia (pp. 1-32). Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield.
Gilles, S. P. (1994). Staff Papers. International Monetary Fund, 41(4), pp. 624-642.
Habibi, M. (2016). Surplus pekerja di kapitalisme pinggiran: Relasi kelas, akumulasi, dan proletariat informal di Indonesia sejak 1980an. Tangerang Selatan: CV Marjin Kiri.
Hadiz, V. R. (1997). Workers and the state in new order Indonesia. London: Routledge.
Hadiz, V., & Robison, R. (2005). Neo-liberal reforms and illiberal consolidations: The Indonesian paradox. Journal of Development Studies, 41(2), 220-241. doi:10.1080/0022038042000309223
Harrod, J., & O’Brien, R. (2002). Organized labor and the global political economy. In J. Harrod
& R. O’Brien (Eds.), Global unions? Theory and strategies of organized la-bor in the global political economy (pp. 3-28). London: Routledge.
Hefeker, C. (2001). Labor market rigidities and EMU. Journal of Economic Integration, 16(2), 229-244. doi:10.11130/jei.2001.16.2.229
Islam, I. (2000). Employment, labor market and economic recovery in Indonesia: Issues and options (Working paper No. 00/04). Jakarta: UNSFIR.
Juliawan, B. H. (2010). Extracting labor from its owner. Critical Asian Studies, 42(1), 25-52. doi: 10.1080/14672710903537464
Juliawan, B. H. (2011). Street-level politics: Labour protests in post-authoritarian Indonesia. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 41(3), 349-370. doi:10.1080/00472336.2011.582706
Leleux, M. (2015). Aux sources de la précarite: Linstrumentalisation du travail dans le Nord 1848-1914. Villeneuve dAscq: Presses Universitaires du Septentrion.
Linden, M. V. (2014). San Precario: A new inspiration for labor historians. Labor Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas, 11(1), 9-21. doi: 10.1215/15476715-2385372
Livingstone, D. W. (2018). The education-jobs gap: Underemployment or economic democracy. NY, NY: Routledge.
Lorenzo E. Bernal-Verdugo, Davide Furceri,
Dominique Guillaume. 2012. Labor market flexibility and unemployment: New empirical evidence of static and dynamic effects (Working Paper). IMF.
Mather, C. (2004). Contract/agency labour: A threat to our social standards. Brussels: ICEM.
Migdal, J. S. (1988). Strong societies and weak states: State-society relations and state capabilities in
the Third World. Princeton (N.J): Princeton University Press.
Mosoetsa, S., Stillermann, J., & Tilly, C. (2016).
Precarious Labor, South and North: An Introduction. In Mosoetsa, S., Stillermann, J., & Tilly, C., (Ed.), Precarious labor in global perspective, special Issue “International Labour and working-class history”, 89, pp. 5-19.
Nordholt, H. (2004). Decentralisation in Indonesia: Less state, more democracy? In John Harriss, Kristian Stokke, & Olle Tornquist (Ed.), Politicising democracy: The new local politics of democratization. Basingtoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Nugroho, A. (2016). Relasi industrial pada pasar tenaga kerja fleksibel dan perjuangan buruh menuntut upah layak serta jaminan kerja di kawasan industri Bekasi (Unpublished master ’s thesis). Yogyakarta: Universitas Gadjah Mada.
Nugroho, A. (2018). Serikat Buruh dalam Pusaran Neoliberalisme: Antara Kontrol Represif dan Ilusi Kebebasan Berserikat. In Pramusinto, A., Kebijakan Publik dalam Pusaran Perubahan Ideologi: Dari Kuasa Negara ke Dominasi Pasar? Yogyakarta: UGM Press.
Purdy, D. (1988). Social power and the labour market: a radical approach to labour economics. London: Macmillan Education Ltd.
Rodgers, G. (2007). Labour market flexibility and decent work (DESA) (Working Paper No. 47). New York: United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs.
Rubery, J. (2003). The organization of employment: An international perspective. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire; New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Sidel, J. (2004). Bossism and democracy in the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia: Towards analternative framework for the study of “local strongmen”. In John Harriss, Kristian Stokke, and Olle Tornquist (Ed.), Politicising democracy: The new local politics of democratisation. Basingtoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
Stunding, G. (2011). The precariat: the new dangerous class. London: Bloomsburry.
Tjandraningsih, I., Heraw ati, R., & S. (2010). Diskriminatif dan eksploitatif: Praktek kerja kontrak dan outsourcing buruh di sektor industri metal di Indonesia. Bandung, Indonesia: AKATIGA.
Törnquist, O. (2004). Labour and democracy?
Reflections on the Indonesian impasse. Journal of Contemporary Asia, 34(3), 377-399. doi: 10.1080/00472330480000171