Heaptalk, Jakarta — Regulation of public housing savings (Tapera) has triggered diverse opposing reactions from several parties, including workers and employers. The Indonesian Employers Association (Apindo) and the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (KSBSI) are urging the government to reconsider and review the implementation of the Tapera contributions.
Shinta W. Kamdani, Chairperson of the Indonesian Employers Association (Apindo), stated that the Tapera regulations duplicate an existing program, namely the Additional Service Benefits for Employee’s Housing under the BP Jamsostek Old Age Security (JHT) program.
“PP No. 21/2024, signed by President Jokowi on May 20, 2024, is, in our opinion, a duplication of the existing program, which is the Additional Service Benefits for Employee’s Housing under the BP Jamsostek Old Age Security program. Therefore, we believe that Tapera can be implemented voluntarily. Private sector workers should not be required to participate, as they can utilize the BP Jamsostek MLT program,” Shinta explained at a joint press conference of Apindo and KSBSI (05/31).
Revising the regulation to be voluntary
Furthermore, Apindo expects the government to optimize the BPJS Ketenagakerjaan funds, which, according to the regulation, can amount to a maximum of 30% and are worth Rp138 trillion. Shinta conveyed that the Old Age Security program assets, amounting to Rp460 trillion, could be used for the Additional Service Benefits program for Employee’s Housing, given their large availability and underutilization.
Aligned with Shinta Kamdani, Elly Rosita Silaban, President of the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (KSBSI), stated that the government could maximize the utilization of BPJS Ketenagakerjaan’s Additional Service Benefits funds designated for home ownership. She urged the government to revise Article 7 to make it voluntary rather than mandatory.
Elly explained, “The implementation of the Tapera Law does not guarantee that workers whose wages have been deducted from the age of 20 until retirement will be able to own a home. Moreover, with the flexible employment system (contract work), this is far from the expectation of improving workers’ welfare. We consider the Public Housing Savings Law not urgent and, therefore, should not be enforced at this time.”
No certainty for employees to own a home
Meanwhile, the Confederation of Indonesian Trade Unions (KSPI) outlined six reasons for the government to revoke Tapera. “KSPI urges the government to revoke Government Regulation No. 21 of 2024 on Public Housing Savings (PP Tapera),” said KSPI President Said Iqbal, as quoted by Liputan6 (06/01).
Firstly, Said expressed the same concern as Elly Rosita Silaban regarding the uncertainty of owning a home despite salary deductions of 2.5% and companies paying a 0.5% monthly contribution. Said explained, “With a 3% contribution deduction over ten to twenty years, workers will not be able to buy a house. Even for a down payment, it will not be sufficient.”
Secondly, KSPI believes the government is not taking responsibility for addressing the housing backlog problem. The Public Housing Savings Regulation does not include a clause stating that the government contributes to the provision of housing for workers and other Tapera participants.
Thirdly, this policy burdens workers’ living costs amidst the declining purchasing power trend due to very low minimum wages following the implementation of the Job Creation Law. KSPI considers the 2.5% Tapera contribution, which workers must pay, to add to the burden of daily living expenses. KSPI records that to date, deductions from workers’ wages have nearly reached 12%, including income tax of 5%, health insurance contributions of 1%, pension insurance contributions of 1%, old age security contributions of 2%, and the proposed 2.5% Tapera contribution.
Fourthly, KSPI believes the Tapera program is prone to corruption because its funding system is ambiguous and highly susceptible to misuse. Indonesia recognizes two models of social funds: the social security system and social assistance. Social security funds come from participant contributions, taxes, or a combination of both with an independent organizer, not the government. Social assistance funds come from the state and regional budgets with the government as the organizer. Meanwhile, Tapera does not fit into either model, as its funds come from public contributions but are managed by the government.
Fifthly, the government is seen as forcing the implementation of the Tapera program on workers with minimum wage salaries. The government refers to Tapera funds as Savings, which should be voluntary rather than mandatory.
Sixthly, the organization sees a lack of clarity and complexity in withdrawing Tapera funds for private employees. For instance, for private workers and the general public, especially contract and outsourcing workers, the potential for termination of employment is very high. Said added, “For civil servants, TNI, and Polri, the continuity of Tapera funds may be long-term as there is no termination of employment.”
Therefore, Said stated that his party would prepare a major action involving thousands of workers on Thursday, June 6, 2024, at the State Palace in Jakarta, demanding the revocation of PP No. 21 of 2024 concerning Tapera and the revision of the Tapera Law.
