Regulating Platform Work in Indonesia: Exploring Legal Options for Workers’ Protection

Abstract

The rise of digital labour platforms has disrupted traditional labour market arrangements and exposed significant gaps in Indonesia’s regulatory framework. Existing labour law instruments, does not adequately capture the relationship between platform companies and workers, as such arrangements fall short of the definitional threshold of an employment relationship. On the other hand, the partnership model under Law on Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises is equally ill-suited to address the dependent and asymmetric nature of platform-mediated work. This regulatory vacuum has enabled the systemic exploitation of gig workers by denying their access to basic labour protections and, at the same time, precluding the possibility of equitable partnership with the platforms.

In this paper, we explore three potential options for regulating platform in Indonesia. First, enacting a specific law on platform work that establishes a sui generis “third box” legal category for platform- based labour relations. Second, redefining the concept of “employment relationship” within a revised Manpower Law to encompass platform work and other non-standard forms of employment. Third, incremental reforms through technical regulations in the form of Presidential Regulations or Ministry Regulations that provide partial protections without altering the underlying legal categories of work.

References

Adams, A., Freedman, J., & Prassl, J. (2018). Rethinking legal taxonomies for the gig economy. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 34(3), 475-494.

Aloisi, A. (2022). Platform work in Europe: Lessons learned, legal developments and challenges ahead. European Labour Law Journal, 13(1), 4-29. https://doi.org/10.1177/20319525211062557

De Stefano, V. (2018). The gig economy and labour regulation: an international and comparative approach. Law Journal of Social and Labor Relations, 4, 68-79.

Dewi, R. K., & Dzulfaroh, A. N. (2025, September 2). Susul Singapura, Malaysia terbitkan UU pekerja gig yang bisa melindungi ojol. Kompas.id. https://www.kompas.id/artikel/susul-singapura-malaysia-terbitkan-uu-pekerja-gig-yang-bisa-melindungi-ojol

Feulner, F. (2024). The Indonesian House of Representatives and itsrole during democratic regression. The Theory and Practice of Legislation, 12(2), 229-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2024.2351763

Ford, M., & Honan, V. (2017). The Go-Jek effect. In E. Jurriens & R. Tapsell (Eds.), Digital Indonesia: Connectivity and Divergence. ISEAS-Yusof Ishak.

Heeks, R., Gomez-Morantes, J. E., Graham, M., Howson, K., Mungai, P., Nicholson, B., & Van Belle, J.-P. (2021). Digital platforms and institutional voids in developing countries: The case of ride-hailing markets. World Development, 145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2021.105528

Hukumonline. (2025, September 1). RUU pekerja gig disahkan jadi UU, payung hukum perlindungan bagi 1,2 juta orang. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/ruu-pekerja-gig-disahkan-jadi-uu--payung-hukum-perlindungan-bagi-1-2-juta-orang-lt68b56845d9e69/?page=2

Izzati, N. R. (2018). Exploring Legal Landscape of Indonesia's On-Demand Transportation: Case of Go-Jek and The Workers Social Protection SSRN. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4146661

Izzati, N. R. (2021). Eksistensi Yuridis dan Empiris Hubungan Kerja Non-Standar dalam Hukum Ketenagakerjaan Indonesia. Masalah-Masalah Hukum, 50(3), 290-303. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.50.3.2021.290-303

Izzati, N. R., & Sesunan, M. M. G. (2022). ‘Misclassified Partnership’and the Impact of Legal Loophole on Workers. Bestuur, 10(1), 57-67. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.20961/bestuur.v10i1.62066

Kompas.id. (2024, September 10). Mendahului Indonesia, Singapura mengesahkan undang-undang pekerja platform. https://www.kompas.id/artikel/mendahului-indonesia-singapura-mengesahkan-undang-undang-pekerja-platform

Labor & Workforce Development Agency. (n.d.). ABC Test. State of California. https://www.labor.ca.gov/employmentstatus/abctest/

Mbioh, W. (2025, October 15). Mapping Precarity: How the UK Supreme Court Redistributes Risk and Value in the Gig Economy. Industrial Law Journal. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1093/indlaw/dwaf037

McNicholas, C., & Poydock, M. (2019, November 14). How California’s AB5 protects workers from misclassification. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/publication/how-californias-ab5-protects-workers-from-misclassification

Ministry of Manpower, Singapore. (2025, January 27). Platform Workers Act: what it covers. https://www.mom.gov.sg/employment-practices/platform-workers-act/what-it-covers

Novianto, A., Wulansari, A. D., & Keban, Y. T. (2023). Searching for a better job: Indonesian gig workers and limits of decent work agendas. Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 17(2), 71-90. https://doi.org/10.13169/workorgalaboglob.17.2.0071

Paul, K. (2020, October 15). Prop 22 explained: how California voters could upend the gig economy. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/15/proposition-22-california-ballot-measure-explained

Permana, M. Y. (2022). Trapped in the gig economy: What is the exit strategy? Lessons learned from Jakarta. Retrieved 1 Agustus 2023 from https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/seac/2022/10/06/

Permana, M. Y., Izzati, N. R., & Askar, M. W. (2022). Measuring the Gig Economy in Indonesia: Typology, Characteristics, and Distribution. Jurnal Manajemen Teknologi, 21(3), 339-358.

Prosser, C., & Mohan, S. (2025, March 18). Understanding day one rights: Employment Law Bill. Hill Dickinson. https://www.hilldickinson.com/insights/articles/understanding-day-one-employment-rights

Putri, T. E., Izzati, N. R., Darmawan, P., Asmara, A. A., Kusumaningtyas, A. P., Simanjuntak, R. T., & Heeks, R. (2021). Fairwork Indonesia Ratings 2021: Labour Standards in the Gig Economy (Fairwork Ratings, Issue. https://fair.work/wp-content/uploads/sites/131/2021/12/211209_Fairwork_Report_Indonesia-2021.pdf

Rachmawati, R., Safitri, Zakia, L., Lupita, A., & De Ruyter, A. (2021). Urban gig workers in Indonesia during COVID-19- The experience of online ‘ojek’ drivers. Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation 15(1), 31-45. https://doi.org/10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.1.0031

Rosenblat, A., & Stark, L. (2016). Algorithmic labor and information asymmetries: A case study of Uber’s drivers. International journal of communication, 10, 27.

Santoso, B., Hitaningtyas, R. D. P., & Nugroho, S. S. P. (2023). Karakteristik Hubungan Hukum antara Pengemudi Ojek Online dan Perusahaan Aplikasi [Platform Ride-Hailing; Pengemudi Ojek Online; Status Pekerjaan]. 2023, 52(2), 13. https://doi.org/10.14710/mmh.52.2.2023.174-186

Woodcock, J. (2020). The algorithmic panopticon at Deliveroo: Measurement, precarity, and the illusion of control. Ephemera Journal, 20(3).

Yuana, S. L., Savirani, A., Izzati, N. R., Wiliyanto, W., Puspitasari, D., & Jaya, W. K. (2024). Refleksi Pengaturan Tata Kelola Taksi Daring di Indonesia: Siapa yang Harus Pegang Kendali.

How to Cite

“Regulating Platform Work in Indonesia: Exploring Legal Options for Workers’ Protection” (2025) Indonesia Forum on Labour and Productivity, 1. Available at: https://iflp.kemnaker.go.id/index.php/naker/article/view/105 (Accessed: 29 October 2026).