Legal Implications of Delayed Industrial Relations Court (Phi) Decisions: Violation of The 50-Working-Day Deadline In Law No. 2 of 2004

Abstract

This study aims to examine and analyze the normative implications of industrial relations court decisions that are inconsistent with the provisions of Article 103 of Law Number 2 of 2004. The type of research used in this study is normative legal research, while the approach used in this legal research is the statute approach. In this study, all data obtained is analyzed qualitatively, namely the selected data is closely related to the problem being studied, connected and analyzed with the facts that occurred in the research object, so that a picture of the facts that occurred is obtained. The results of the discussion of this study, namely the validity or legitimacy of the law (legal validity) is a theory that teaches how and what the conditions are for a legal rule to be legitimate and valid in its application. Legal effectiveness is a legal ability to create and give birth to conditions or situations desired by law or expected by law. Based on the theory of legal validity and effectiveness, the legal implications of an industrial relations court ruling that exceeds the 50-day deadline from the first hearing will render Article 103 of the Industrial Relations Law invalid and ineffective. Industrial relations court rulings that do not comply with Article 103 of the Industrial Relations Law will undoubtedly foster a negative legal culture. Dispute resolution will take longer. Consequently, workers, as the weaker party, will never receive legal certainty. Therefore, the legal awareness of the panel of judges in implementing Article 103 of the Industrial Relations Law is crucial to maintaining the validity and effectiveness of the provision. This will ensure that the legal culture of the community/stakeholders does not deviate from the expeditious principle that underpins industrial relations dispute resolution.