An HR team receives a written recommendation from a Manpower Office (“Disnaker”) mediator after bipartite negotiations with a former employee break down. They read it as a non-binding suggestion and let it sit unanswered. Three months later, a summons arrives from the Industrial Relations Court, and the ignored recommendation becomes the judge’s primary reference point for assessing each party’s good faith.
This scenario recurs across Indonesian industrial relations practice. A Disnaker mediator’s recommendation is not a court ruling, but companies that treat it as an ordinary letter, safe to ignore, often weaken their position before litigation even begins.
What Is a Mediator’s Recommendation?
Under Law No. 2 of 2004 on Industrial Relations Dispute Settlement (“IRDS Law”), a dispute reaches mediation only after bipartite negotiations fail. Once that failure is formally recorded, either party may register the dispute with the competent manpower authority and choose mediation, conciliation, or arbitration. Disputes over employment rights or termination that go unselected default to mediation.
The mediator convenes the parties, clarifies the facts, and works toward a settlement. If no agreement emerges within ten working days of the first session, the mediator must issue a written recommendation setting out his or her assessment of the dispute.
This is where a recommendation diverges from a judgment. It is an administrative product reflecting the mediator’s evaluation, not the result of judicial proceedings governed by civil procedure or formal rules of evidence. It carries no executory force on its own.
Is the Recommendation Legally Binding?
The answer is more nuanced than a flat no. The Constitutional Court has held that “written recommendation” under the IRDS Law cannot mean a final, binding decision that imposes obligations automatically, without giving the parties a chance to state their positions. A recommendation gains legal significance only once the parties accept or reject it, not upon issuance.
If both parties accept, the mediator helps them record the terms in a Collective Agreement (Perjanjian Bersama), signed by the parties and witnessed by the mediator. Once registered with the Industrial Relations Court, that agreement carries the same executory force as a final court judgment.
If either party rejects the recommendation, the aggrieved party may commence proceedings before the Industrial Relations Court. At that point the recommendation stops functioning as a dispute resolution tool and becomes part of the case’s procedural history, which the panel may weigh when assessing how each party conducted itself.
Can an Employer Refuse to Comply?
Employers may reject a mediator’s recommendation, as may employees. That right comes with a procedural condition as the IRDS Law requires each party to notify the mediator in writing, within ten working days of receipt, whether it accepts or rejects the recommendation. Silence is deemed rejection by law. There is no neutral option.
Many employers reject passively, declining to implement the recommendation without building a reasoned legal basis, on the assumption that non-compliance is self-explanatory. That assumption is costly. Industrial Relations Court judges routinely treat the recommendation, and each party’s response to it, as part of the factual record. A rejection built on weak legal grounds can read as bad faith, coloring the court’s view of the case well beyond the specific issues the recommendation addressed.
Available Legal Remedies Where the Recommendation Is Not Followed
Industrial Relations Court Proceedings
Once a party rejects the recommendation, expressly or by silence, the aggrieved party may file with the Industrial Relations Court (Pengadilan Hubungan Industrial) attached to the District Court with jurisdiction over the employee’s place of work. The mediation report and recommendation join the case file, giving the panel the dispute’s chronology and each party’s position before litigation began. The recommendation is not formal evidence under Indonesian civil procedure, but as an independent record from a neutral third party, judges rarely disregard it. It typically informs their view of the employer’s consistency, the dispute’s timeline, and the parties’ conduct throughout.
Labour Inspection
Employers often overlook this second avenue. Labour inspectors hold statutory authority to supervise compliance with Indonesian labour law, including wages, working hours, occupational safety, and lawful termination. This mechanism matters most where the ignored recommendation concerns a breach of mandatory labour standards rather than a contractual disagreement. Employees or unions may report the alleged violation to the manpower authority, triggering an inspection that can result in a Nota Pemeriksaan (inspection memorandum) ordering corrective action. Labour inspection runs independently of IRDS Law mediation, but the two can proceed in parallel where mandatory employment norms are at stake.
Criminal Liability
This point is frequently misread. Ignoring or declining to implement a mediator’s recommendation is not, by itself, a criminal offence under Indonesian labour law. Criminal sanctions attach only to specific violations the law expressly designates as offences, such as failures to meet defined statutory obligations to employees, not to the act of rejecting a recommendation. Criminal exposure arises only where the employer’s conduct goes further and independently breaches a provision that carries criminal sanctions. Equating non-compliance with automatic criminal liability is an oversimplification that leads to poor strategic decisions.
Practical Recommendations for Employers
Rejecting a mediator’s recommendation is a legal right available to both employers and employees, but it should be exercised with a clear view of its consequences. Silence is rarely sound strategy and can weaken an employer’s position if the dispute reaches litigation.
An employer’s acceptance or rejection becomes part of the record before the Industrial Relations Court. Judges may weigh how each party conducted itself during mediation, including whether they made a genuine effort to resolve the matter before suing, in assessing the case as a whole. A well-reasoned rejection, backed by legal analysis and contemporaneous documentation, puts the employer in a stronger position throughout the proceedings.
“Legal advice at the mediation stage lets employers evaluate the recommendation, weigh litigation risk, and choose a course of action before the dispute reaches court. Early input also helps preserve evidence and keeps each procedural step aligned with the employer’s broader legal and commercial objectives.”
For strategic advice on employment structuring, regulatory compliance, or workforce risk management in Indonesia, please reach us at info@indvesto.com. We are ready to assist you with legal strategies designed to support and strengthen your business operations in Indonesia.
info@indvesto.com
