A Hybrid Regulatory Framework for Gig Workers in Indonesia: Conceptualizing a Staged KPI Scheme through Comparative Legal Analysis
Keywords:
gig economy freedom of contract staged KPI hybrid regulation comparative lawAbstract
The rapid expansion of Indonesia’s digital economy has created a new form of labor relationship known as gig work, in which platform-based workers occupy a precarious socio-economic position. Currently, these relationships rely solely on the principle of freedom of contract under Articles 1320 and 1338 of the Indonesian Civil Code, effectively transferring all operational and social risks to gig workers. The absence of a dedicated regulatory framework has led to legal ambiguity, weak worker protection, and uncertainty for both workers and platform companies. Although jurisdictions such as the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union, India, and the Philippines have experimented with partial or hybrid regulatory models, Indonesia has yet to develop a legal approach that balances digital flexibility with social justice principles. This gap forms the central research problem addressed in this study. Using a normative juridical method combined with comparative legal analysis and philosophical reasoning grounded in Rawlsian justice theory, this article conceptualizes a Staged Key Performance Indicator (KPI) framework as a hybrid regulatory instrument. The novelty of this research lies in proposing a performance-based hybrid regulation model in which KPI fulfillment progressively entitles gig workers to enhanced social protection and legal rights. Furthermore, the study introduces a normative proposal for a new branch of Indonesia’s national social security system BPJS Employment specifically designed for gig workers, allowing benefit distribution without imposing financial burdens on either workers or platform companies. The findings demonstrate that staged KPI framework could serve as the foundation for a lex specialis ensuring minimum social protection from the onset of the partnership, expanding proportionally with worker performance. This model offers an adaptive, progressive, and justice-oriented mechanism that reconciles flexibility in the digital economy with fundamental labor rights. Thus, the study contributes to the evolution of Indonesia’s digital labor law paradigm through an innovative and sustainable hybrid regulatory approach.
References
Badan Pusat Statistik. (2023). Statistik Ketenagakerjaan Indonesia 2023. Jakarta: BPS.
Collins, H. (2019). Employment Law. Oxford University Press.
European Parliament and the Council of the European Union. (2023). Directive (EU) 2023/970 on Improving Working Conditions in Platform Work. Official Journal of the European Union.
Government of India. (2020). Code on Social Security, 2020. Ministry of Labour and Employment.
House of Representatives of the Philippines. (2022). Digital Workforce Competitiveness Bill (HB No.6922). Manila: Congress of the Philippines.
Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Perdata [Burgerlijk Wetboek].
Notonagoro. (1975). Pancasila secara ilmiah populer. Jakarta: Pantjuran Tujuh.
Pound, R. (1954). Interpretations of Legal History. Harvard University Press.
Rahardjo, S. (2006). Hukum dalam jagat ketertiban. Jakarta: UKI Press.
Rahardjo, S. (2019). Ilmu hukum progresif. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Harvard University Press.
Setiawan, M. (2021). Transformasi hukum ketenagakerjaan di era digitalisasi: Tantangan dan peluang. Jurnal Hukum dan Pembangunan, 51(2), 233–255. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jhp.v51i2.233255
Sunggono, B. (2018). Metodologi penelitian hukum. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada. Uber BV v. Aslam, UK Supreme Court, [2021] UKSC 5.
Undang-Undang Nomor 13 Tahun 2003 tentang Ketenagakerjaan.
Surat Edaran Menteri Ketenagakerjaan Republik Indonesia Nomor M/1/HK.04/II/2022 tentang Perlindungan Pekerja Berbasis Platform Digital.
