REGIONAL MAT{POWER PLANI\IING Ah{D TRAINING PROJECT (RMPI) Bureau of Manporver, Natjonal Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS) (wcrld Bank Professional Human Resources Development Loan 3134-rND) Projert Office:
Jl. Trrman Suropati 2, Jakarta 10310 INDONESIA Tel.: 62 (21) 390 1279. Fax.: 62 (21) 390 l28l
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 47 EVALUATION OF ESTABLISTIN{ENT EARNINGS SURVEY OF PRODUCTION WORKERS IN EAST JAVA AND OTHER PROVINCES by
Alex Korns (RI\{PT Project Consultant) Jakarta, March 1995
LlOKtJtuiE;'J-i/\S.ii
&
ARSiP
BAi)rEN45 : Class : Acc. No.
clrecked
."-....../..... ................
, /.{.':..{.':'9 C'
Regional Manpower Planning and Training Project GniPT) Implementing Agency
Bureau of Manpower, National Development Planning Agency (BAPPENAS), Jakarta, INDONESIA
Funding Source
Professional Human Resource Development Project, World Bank Loan 3134-IND
Pilot Provinces
North Sumatra, West Sumatra West Java, Central Java, East Java North Sulawesi, Nusa Tenggara Timur
Main Project Outputs
Provincial Human Resource Development Profiles Provincial Manpower Development Strategies Provincial/Regional Labour Market Studies
Project Duration
Approximately three years (July 1992 - March 1995)
Project Director
Drs. Maman Setiawan Head Bureau of Manpower, BAPPENAS
Project Manager
Mr. Lucky Firnandy Bureau of Manpower, BAPPENAS
Consulting Firm
PT. Intercapitol-Mutual Consultants Kebayoran Baru Mall Block b No. 23 Jalan Kebayoran Baru, Jakarta 12120, INDONESIA Tel.720 6253,721 0231 Fax.72O 6276
Project Leader
Dr. Shafiq Dhanani Human Resource Economist
Project Administration
Mr. Syaherman Rasjid
Research Assistants
Mr. Adam Malik Ms. Erni Novalisa
Support Staff
Ms. Anita Sari Ms. Alina
June 14. 1995
SUB Coruultancy
Table of Contents I. Background A. Purpose: Prompt measure of weekly earnings B. Design
I 2 a
C. Implementation problems and delays D. Overview of consultancy E. Error rate for 1994 data
J
4 5
II. Data processing A. Validation B. Nonresponse adjustment C. Weighting: First stage D. Weighting: Second stage
5
6 7 8
III. Tools for managing the S{/B
8
I
A. Jan. 23-24 meeting B. Outline and philosophy of proposed system C. Control card for the KLP D. Control card for block IV of the questionnaire E. A system for editing F. A system for validation G. Editing procedures H. Communication with the provinces
l0
ll
l2 l4 15
t6 16
IV. Evaluation of the 1994 data
t7
A. Plausibility B. Median wages C. Format issues
V. Conclusions
l8 t9 l9
2l
and recommendations
A. Conclusions B. Recommendations
2l 2l
after
Tables and figures
Appendix
I. Questionnaire W-l
Appendix
tr. Tabulations
for the first three quarters of 1994 (with cBS report)
22
June 14, 1995
SUB Conrultrncy
List of tables
l. Codes for sorting validation failures 2.
Promptness of SLIB document flow by quarter, 1994 (on page 10)
3.
Average time lag for receiving questionnaires, by quarter and province
4. Control card for the Establishment Monitoring
Card (KLP)
5. Control card for Bloc IV of the questionnaire
List of figures Editing process for the Survei Upah Buruh
I.
Background A.
Purpose: Prompt measure of weekly earnings
Early work on labor market data by the Dwelopment Studies Project (DSp) team focused on the need for prompt indicators of labor market developments, also referred to as ,,an early warning system." A 1988 report by Martin Godfrey und ttrit consultant focused on the need for improved establishment wage data, given the relative insensitivity for Indonesia of standard household survey measures such as ihe rates for open unemployment and labor force participation.r A 1988 review of the available wage data by this consultant drew attention to several serious limitations of the quarterly earnings survey (Survei Upah Buruh or SUB;, a suruey of occupational wages in industry, mining, transportation and hotels.t Concerned about weaknesses of the old SUB design" the Central Bureau of Statistics (CBS) in 1988 asked DSP for_help designing a new SUB. In tqgg, Chris Manning and this consultant pioposed-a new de-sign focused on measuring average weekly earnings for pioduction workers in manufacturing.s CBS tested the design in several pilots,ihen i-ple*ented it nationally starting in 1992 for a sample of 2000 establishments coveringmanufacturing, mining and hotels. In the second quarter of 1993, CBS inroduced an improved sample, designed Uy Verma Verma of DSp Smaller than the 1992 sample, it involved only 1309 estabiishments. The questionnaire revisions introduced in 1993 and 1994 at Manning's suggestion were designed to minimize several observed patterns of response error.n
Broadly speaking, the new SUB is modelled on a monthly survey taken by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) for hours, earnings and employment at 300,000 estabiishments. Unfortunately' because Indonesian conditions differ sharply from those in America, the SUB questionnaire is more elaborate than the BLS one, whichlsindeed a model of simpiicity: An establishment need provide BLS only six numbers per month. BLS has for r"ny y"*, used a ,'shuttle form" which is mailed back and forth each month from the establishment to BLS and back. It has 6 columns for the 6 dataitems and 13 rows for 13 months of data (including one overlap month); this format tends to assure consistency in reporting from month to month. ihe six items reportei ytlu.d.: three employment measures. total employment, female employment, production workers. In additioq the establishment reports total production worker hours, proa.r.iion worker overtime hours, and production worker payroll for the pay period. The pay period is defined as the period t
M"rtio Godfrey and Alex Korus, ln Early llarning System for Monitoring Changes in the Labor Marlcet: A Preliminary Proposaf DSp Statistical paper #g, May l9gg. 2
AIex Korns ,\fi'ageData at cBS,DSp Statistical paper #5, April l9gg.
' chti" Manning, Design for a Quick Quarterty Surtey of Manufactuing Earnings,Dsp Statistical pap€r #23' August 1989' In this repor! Note +: "noposal for a new of average weekly earnings forproducction workers in Indonesian manufacturing" pp. l3-il, was contribuled
iley
uy tni" consultant.
n
Ch.i" Manning, The Suruei Upah Buruh: A Final Repoa DSP Statisticalpap q#50,May 1994.
Jlme 14.
1995
SUB
Consuftancy
pagel
including the 12th of the month. Once a year, the establishment reports the pay period for production workers.5 While following the overall BLS concept, the DSP team had to give up efforts to measure total production worker hours and overtime hours when it found that many iespondents lacked the data for conveniently reporting this. Even total production worker days and bvertime days turned out to be unacceptably burdensome for many respondents. A major difference between Indonesia and the US in this regard is that the processes of collective bargaining, ta:c and labor regulation, and management by cost accounting have gradually lead to a standardization of payroll accounting methods in the uS that has not yet taken place in Indonesia. The DSP team was forced to use a more elaborate questionaire than the BLS one for several reasons:
CBS staffwere not comfortable with the idea of a shuttle form. tf it was sent by mail, they feared it would be ignored or lost. If hand-delivered by enumerators, they still feared it might be occasionally lost. As a result, many questions that .ight have needed to have been asked only once a year on a shuttle form were instead asked every quarter. The advantage of instructing respondents to fill out data for a single pay period is that respondents do not need to go to the bother (with attendent risk of enorj of converting earnings to a common basis, such as weekly or monthly. US establishments normally use a uniform pay period for all production workers. However, many lndonesian establishments use more than one pay period for production workers. Hence, the questionnaire had to be designed in such a way as to allow respondents to fill out data foi as many as three periods on the same questionnaire. This was done by providing four columns: one for weekly, one for monthly, and two for periods defined by the establishment. To avoid misunderstanding by the respondent of the earnings concept, earnings components (basic wages, allowances, overtime) were specified, even though only their total was needed.
To avoid inconsistent interpretations, respondent were asked to compare this period's wages and employment with last period's (a comparson which could have been taken for granted on a shuttle fo.m). To avoid misunderstandings about which workers were covered, other questions were added concerning the number of production and nonproduction workert Uy p.y period.
B. Design This sestion sununarizes briefly some principle features ofthe survey, include reference periods, sample, the questionnairg and techniques for field editing. The r.f"r"o." period for the survey is the last full pay period of the survey month: March" lune, September, December.
5
calling IrP
Io BLS h^ b"g* to retrain many thousands ofrespondeirts to r?ort 'o*ty"ars' I conputer and entering the six data items for the month using touchtone diah;.
erren more
promptly by
.h.me 14, 1995
SUB Couultancy
page 3
The sample for industry includes 1009 establishments selected from the l99l industry directory based on probability proportional to size @PS) sampling 265 hotels selected from a hotel directory using a PPS method as well, and 35 purposively-selected mining establishments. The manufacturing and hotel samples were selected by Verma, and include weights that reflect the inverse probability of selection. The sample was limited to these three sectors for lack of up-todate establishment directories for other sectors. As an outgrowth of efforts to create a general business directory as part of the 1996 Economic Census, CBS hopes to be in a position to draw SUB samples for other sectors after the 1996 census. The latest version of the SUB questionnaire for manufacturing and mining (VU-l) is appended to this report. The heart of the questionnaire is in Block IV, which asks, for each pay period, about the length of the pay period, the number of production workers below supervisory level, and the earnings of these workers. To heighten respondent awareness of data plausibility, average earnings per workers are calculated by respondents, based on the previously mentioned data items. The questionnaire for hotels (VU-2) is broadly similar. Early experience showed that respondents often reported inconsistent data from one survey period to the next. To highten awareness of such inconsistency, the kabupaten statistical offices (KSP) were asked to copy key data items from the questionnaire to a Kartu Laporan Perusahaan (KLP), which contained columns for 5 quarters (one year plus an overlap quarter). It was hoped that the district statistical office would use this information to evaluate the consistency of thqdata and check back with the establishment about when they noticed puzilingdata. In this way, it was hoped that the data received by CBS would have already been vetted for plausibility at the local level.
C. Implementation problems and
delays
Although the new SUB design was first implemented in April lgg2,thesurvey failed in 1992 and 1993 to yield a flow of prompt, reliable data. Each questionnaire was edited by CBS stafi, but without much regard for between-period data consistency. No formal procedures existed for rgfening the most puzzJngdata to supervisors or for computerized evaluation ofthe quality of the data. A positive development in focusing more attention on wage data was the rptittlng of the Wage Statistics Division from the Labor Force Statistics Division as part of the CBS reorganization early in 1993. The new wage division did not succd in creating an effective validation program until August 1993. This program led to some alarming findings. Using ratler lenient validation criteria, the program turned up enor messages for about half of the individual establishment-pay period wage series for the four quarters of 1992. The division was zuddenly faced with a massive job of editing about 1200 error messages. Not only was the volume of work itself shocking; evenmore shocking was the need to create a consistent system assuring that the editing process itseFcould improve data quality. This traumatic experience led to three fundamental actions designed to improve future data quality:
Jurro 14. 1995
o
a o
SUB Coruulhncv
ptge 4
New stress was laid on the importance of local statistical of;fices filling out the KLP, which had prwiously been ignored more often than not. The cooperation of provincial officials was sought to enforce this rule, and if necessary to return a questionnaire to the kabupaten office unaccompanied by a KLP. The enforcement of this rule was expected to lead to a sharp decline in response error and inconsistency. At Manning's suggestio4 sweral changes were made to the 1994 questionnaire to minimize certain elror patterns. The definition of the number of production workers during the pay period was simplified. "In-kind" income, which had been a major source of wage inconsistencies, was excluded from the questionnaire.6 Editors were asked to pay attention to inter-period consistency when evaluating data plausibility. For this purpose, they were provided for the first time with a manual on editing procedures.
These decisions were not expected to bear fruit until late in 1994. Meanwhile, it was decided to publish the 1992 data on a restricted basis, due to its poor quality. Editing of the 1993 data was given a low priority, so the division could focus on preparing 1994 data (with the new questionnaire and KLP procedure) for publication as soon as possible. As of the start of this consultancy in early 1995, no SUB data had been published since the new design was first imple-
mented in 1992.
D. Overview
of consultancy
The consultant began this Bappenas-funded assignment on January 23,lgg5, at a two-day meeting at CBS to review the progress of the SUB. Attendees were from both CBS and from the Provincial Statistical Offices of the five provinces with the largest SLJB samples: North Sumatra, DK[, West, Central and East Java. From CBS, attendees were Pak Toto Sastra (the chief of the Bureau of Demographic and Labor Force Statistics), Pak Suharno (the d.ivision chief), chiefs of the tkee subdivisions and selected division staff. From the five provinces came the heads of the sections for Demographic and Social Statistics. The meeting was funded by DSp.
Most discussion at the meeting centered on management issues, particularly on achieving prompt document flow. In addition, preliminary tabulations by the division foi the first three quarters of 1994 were reviewed. Following the meeting the consultant reviewed questionnaires for the three quarters for about 50 establishments (particularly ones with puzzling data), to evaluate the division'i systems for editing and validation. Conclusions ofthe review were discussed with the division staffat two additional meetings. On Feb. 2, the consultanr met with the division to discuss the overall design of a system for editing and validatioq as depicted in the diagram included in this report. On Feb. 16, the consultant met \riith the division chie{ the zubdivision chiefs, and selected staffin order to edit a number of documents tbat had failed validation.
6
Chris
Maming Statistbal paper #50.
June 14, l99J
SUB Consultrncy
wws
E. Error rate for 1994 data The tabulations presented by the division on Jan. 23 were based on data from about 1200 establishments. The data had already been screened by a valildation progrrlm, which found 126 elTor message, each reflecting an out-of-tolerance condition for a time series for a single establishment and a single pay period. It has nex/er been calculated exactly how many estabtishment-pay
period combinations were examined, but the number was perhaps on the order of 1600-1800; since many establishments have two pay periods (for example, weekly and monthly). It can therefore be tentatively inferred that the ratio of the number of error messages to the number of cases validated was approximately 12611600, equal to about 7.4 percent, equivalent to 2.5 percent per quarter. These error rate for 1994 represents an enonnous improvement over the error rate for 1992 SUB data. Validation for four quarters of 1992 uncovered a total of about 1200 enor messages for an active sample size of about 1600 establishments, equivalent in turn to about Zl0O-2400 establishment-pay period combinations. Accordingly, the 1992 error rate may be estimated at l2oo/2250, or about 53.3 percent for the year, equivalent to 13.3 percent per quarter.T Thus the 1994 quarterly tate, 2.5 percent, can be roughly estimated to reflect an 8l percent decline over the 1992 rate, 13.3 percent. This is certainly dramatic evidence of improvement in data qualityl
II. Data processing This chapter explains the steps the division needed to take to complete SUB tabulations for the first three quarters of 1994. By April, the division had complet.d tubulations that incorporated all the following recommendations except those for second-stage weighting. These data are evaluated in section IV. While the following comments are specific to th; task faced by the division in early 1995, they also recapitulate the general methodology the division will have to follow in the future to prepare tabulations for each quarter.
A. Validation The first task faced by the division was to process the 126 error messages uncovered by the validation program. The Feb. 2 meeting, agreed to a simple, rapid rnethodJlory for pro".rrlg the errors in two steps. The first step was to have the various editors sort the erors into three batches, with a number of-auxiliary "reason" codes, using the coding scheme presented in table l. This scheme was designed to facilitate rapid decisions with extrernely cbncise documentatiorg providing short cuts
7
The present estinrle of 53%o difers sli$dy from the estimare in Chris Manningis repct (Sp #50),47 o/o. srsh estimates are m$ect to a wide margin of error in fu abseirce of a relieble deirominator, beceuse no one hss had the o'pportunity to calculste th average mrmber of pry periods per reporting establishent.
Howwer'
aU
Jrmc 14, 1995
SIJB Consultrncy
page 6
for handling many of the most common validation failures observed during the editing the 1992 data. The results of this sorting showed the following: About 51 cases were clear (J -- 'Jelas"), in the sense that an obvious reason could be found for the unusual behavior of earnings -- most often various in overtime or piece rate payments. About 35 cases were classified as small problems (K - "masalah kecil") for various reasons. One subset were the l8 cases that could simply be discarded because of one of the following reasons: The data was for only one quarter or concerned an establishment-pay period with fewer than 6 workers or a "non-dominant" pay period with fewer than25 percent of the production workers at the establishment. Another subset was the remaining l7 cases which were somewhat out of tolerance in relation to minimum/maximum wage rates but which did not show more than 20 percent fluctuation in weekly earnings. These were allowed to stand. Finally, about 38 cases were classified as large problems (B - "masalah besar"). Most of these, 29, were due to fluctuations of more than 20 percent in average weekly earnings, but some reflected earnings that were far outside the range of minimum-maximum wages. The second step was for the division chief to sit together with selected staffto edit the'B' cases. On Feb. 16, the consultant sat in on the first day of this work, during which about half the 38 'B' cases were disposed of The most cornmon disposition was to simply drop the establishment or the outlying quarter. This was very much at the urging of the consultant, to accelerate the validation process and avoided introducing error into the data.
B. Nonresponse adjustment Once data for each establishment have been validated, a further step was needed to assure comparability between quarters. This was to adjust for nonresponse, by imputing data for quarters for which establishments do not respond. In the absence of such an adjustment, average earnings for a given cell could be sharply influenced by the presence or absence of a given establishment in the data for a particular quarter, leading as a result to a spurious flucluation in earnings.
A nonresponse adjustment program was developed by the division in 1993 for the 1992 data. Howeveq the program assumed the availabilty of four quarters of data and thus could not be directly used to adjust the 1994 data" which at that time was only available for three qufiers. At the Feb. 2 meeting, it was agreed that the existing program would be adapted to the case of adjusting for just 3 quarters. This was done. The program adjusts for establishments for which data is available for more than one quarter; data available for only one quarter are discarded from the tabulations. For data missing for a quarter in between response quarters, the program merely interpolates average earnings between response quarters. For data missing for an initial or termiyl quarter, the program extrapolates average earnings by imputing a quarterly rate of increase that is the same as the rate of increase for responding estabtishments with similar characteristics. For this purpose, sample establishments were grouped together into about a dozen strata" based
llurl'e 14, 1995
SUB Consultancy
psgeT
on a combination of province group, industry group, and size group and formed in such a way as to aszure a large minimum number of establishments in each strafum. Because the adjustment was performed separately for each pay period -- weekly, biweekly, semimonthly, and monthly -- average rates of increase were initially calculated for each pay period. The number of establishments with biweekly and semimonthly periods being small, their estimated rate of increase was based on the rate of increase for the weekly or monthly pay periods in the same stratum.
C. Weighting: First
stage
The preliminary tabulations presented by the division on Jan. 23 were unweighted; that is, were a simple mean of the average earnings for sample establishments. The division was aware all along that weighting by the inverse of the probability of selection was required by the sampling scheme for the survey, devised by Vrjay Verma in early 1993. (The weights were includ.d UV Verma in the file he furnished to CBS.) For convenience, however, the weighting problern was postponed while the division grappled with the management of document flow, editing, etc.
At the Feb. 2 meeting, the division decided that weighting was essential before the 1994 data could be published. If the data were not promptly weighted, there was a clear risk that weighting at a subsequent date (for, example, starting with 1995 data) would cause a sharp break in the timl series. In fact, the weighted tabulations turned out to nearly identical with the unweighted ones for industry, but differred sharply for hotels.E The near identity for industry reflects two offsetting factors: the use of sampling weights increased the importance of the smaller establishments, while the use of the number of workers as a weight increased the importance of the larger ones. From the technical point of view, it was easy to modifr the tabulation program to take weights into account. The real difficulty, however, lay elsewhere. From Verma's original sampte, about 100 establishments had been replaced in the field, for various reasons: Closure, a move outside the kabupaten, chronic nonresponse, etc. To preserve the original weighting scheme, replacement establishments had to be paired up with Verma's original selections. This was done in two steps:
First, Verma's original sample was matched with the current sample, to identi$ (A) which establishments in Verma's sample are not in the existing one and (B) which establishments in the current sample are not in Verma's. For industry this was done by computer, using the unique identification number for each establishment. For hotels, this was done manually. Second, the two groups of unmatched establishments were compared, to identify which ones in group B can be paired with which ones in group In ahoJt every case, this could be done on the basis of written notes from the various provincial offices, which identify more than 50 zuch zubstitutions. Howeveq in many cases it was observed that the zubstitute establishment had been taken from an employment size group or industry goup that differred from
A.
t
Fo, 1994:tr , the overall average wage for industry increased from Rp. 33.2 to 33.4 thousand per week, while ftat for hotels increased frorn Rp. 3g.7 to 45.g thousand-
June 14, 1995
SUB Coruultancy
page 8
the original establishment. To adjust roughly for differences in employment size, the weight for the original establishment was judgmentally increased/decreased to make it roughly consistent with the weights of other establishments in the same size group. Tabulations of average earnings based on the above three adjustments were prepared by the division in April. They are discussed further in section IV.
D. Weighting: Second Stage
A final step, currently (early June) being processed by the division, will adjust for differences between the original sample selected by Verma and the current CBS sample. The differences, relatively small, can be traced to two factors: Nonresponse and substitution.
o
A certain, limited group of establishments rarely or never responds to the SUB. The distribution of these establishments by province, industry, and size group may differ somewhat from the distribution of establishments in the sample. The roughly 100 establishments that have been substituted by CBS field stafffor establishments that have closed, moved, or become chronic nonrespondents may differ somewhat in characteristics from the distribution of original establishments they replaced.
.
These differences are unlikely to have a major effect on measures of average earnings, but may have a small effect. They can affect average earnings for all establishments by distorting the relative shares of workers in high-wage and low-wage sectors. These differences can be adjusted for in a rough way by comparing two tabulations for a number of basic strata (such as the strata that were defined for non-response adjustment):
o o
The first tabulation will show 1991 employment for the original sample by stratunq after expanding by first-stage weights. The second tabulation will show 1991 employment for the present sample by stratum, after expanding by first-stage weights. For newly substituted establishments that did not exist in 1991, 1991 ernployment can be estimated by backwards extrapolation from 1994, using an average rate of annual employment growth for a fixed panel of establishments (such as is available from the CBS backcast).
Once the nvo tabulations are available, the quotient of the first divided by the second, can be used as a second-stage weight to adjust the current sample by stratum back to the Verma sample.
III.
Tools for managrng the SUB
A.
Jan.
zrU
meeting
The Jan. 23-24 meeting witnessed an interchange betwe€n two points of view with regard to document flow. From the division's point of view, the important thing was for provinces to accelerate flow so that the divsion could meet the CBS goal of having the SUB (together with all other
June 14,
l99J
SUll Coraultancy
pagp 9
quarterfy surveys) report by the end of the subsequent quarter at the latest. Because editing and tabulation take about a month, this would require that about 80 percent of documents be reieived by the end of the second month (equivalent to 60 days after the target date for beginning the survey), so that after editing and exclusion of outliers at least 75 percent would remain for tabulation. From the provincial officials'point of view, the important thing was to recount the various obstacles to prompt reporting. The most frequently mentioned of these was the noncooperative attitude of certain establishments. Next, was mentioned the low-priority status of the survey in the eyes of the CBS leadership, when compared to other surveys particularly to the quarterly and annual industry surveys. The consultant and Pak Suharno replied to the provincial concerns in two parts. First" they urged that too much attention not be paid to noncooperative establishments, which constitute a small minority -- less than 15 percent of respondents nationwide. The important thing was to accelerate document flow from the remaining 85 percent, while accepting nonresponse as a chronic but tolerable problem. Second, it was argued that the low-priority status of the SUB had to be accepted as a fact for the time being, as illustrated by the availability of special funds for revisits to tardy or difficult establishments for the quarterly and annual industry surveys and the absence of such funds for the SIIB. The low-priority status was obviously related to the fact that the SIIB had failed since l99l to produce publishable data. There was every reason to hope that the SUB would attract more attention from the CBS leadership once the 1994 data were published and regular quarterly updates followed.
A major goal of strearnlining the SUB (particularly, of simplifying the questionnaire) has always been to accelerate reporting. Pak Suharno presented measures of the promptness of SIIB reporting during 1994. Table 2 presents his findings for the second quarter in terms of the percent of documents (relative to the target number, 1309) received at CBS per month for each protin"".
Table 2.-Promptness
of SUB document flow by quarter,
Documents received at CBS as ao/o of total target, during month
lst month
2nd month
3rd month
Month 4+
1994
Cumulative total
Quarter
I
14.5yo
s.5%
18.5Yo
s5.8%
94.3%
Quarter
tr
14.6%
3s.s%
3l.jYo
ll.70h
92.8%
Quarter
Itr
8.6 %
48.0%
19.3%
2A%
78jYo
Quarter
IV
9.3%
4l.f/o
16.\Yo
6.6%
74.6%
The sharp improvement from quarter I to quarter tr in part reflected unusual delays in the first quarter, due to the use of a new questionnaire which was received in provinces at the last minute. Howwer, the continuing improveme'nt from the second quarter to the third is a clear mark of
Jtne 14, 1995
SUB Coruultancy
page
lCl
progress, not entirely undone by the fourth quarter setback. The latter was forseen by the section heads of the provincial offices in January, due in part to crowding out by field work on the general establishment directory in early 1995 in preparation for the 1996 Economic Census. Tables such as table 2, when broken down by province , play an important role by providin g clear feedback to provinces on their performance. Tables 3a-3d show average lags in sending documents from the establishment to the district office, from the district offfice to the provincial office, and from the provincial office to CBS, for each quarter of 1994. The table shows considerable progress in reducing the average lag each level. The long delays in some provinces (e.g., Riau) offer opportunities for sharp improvement in performance. The major element in sluggish reporting remains the delays at the establishment, a delay which was not tracked by the division before June 1995. Table 3 shows that the lag in the receipt of the questionnaire at the district office was 30-34 days in the second and third quarters of 1994, far more than the 7 days mentioned on the face of the questionnaire. Obviously the major challenge in future will be to coax establishments to respond more quickly.
As previously mentioned, the CBS requirement for publication within 3 months would require receipt of 80 percent of documents at the end of 2 months. Such atarget is obviously well beyond the performance achieved in the third quarter, when only 57 percent of documents had been received at the end of the second month according to table 2. While it would be a great achievement if receipts by the end of the second month could be immediately raised to 80 percent, such a sharp gain may not be feasible in one jump. Instead, the meeting agieed to set an interim target for the first quarter of 1995 that represented an incremental improvement over previous best performance, so that about 65 percent of documents from the five provinces in attendance at the meeting would be received by the end of the second month. Such a rate would allow preliminary tabulations by the end of the fourth month. (In the event, however, document flow slowed for the fourth quarter. By the end of the second month only 5l percent of questionnaires nationally, and a similar percent for the five provinces, had been received.). The other major conclusion of the meeting was that the division needed to provide feedback to provinces much more frequently and completely than before, as regards both the promptness of document flow and the quality of documents. For example, provinces wanted to know much more precisely how many documents were received without a KLP or with an improperly filled one, how many substitutions to the sample were made without proper documentatiorl etc. The meeting concluded that the division needed to develop a system enabling it to report to provinces on all these parameters every month or month and a half In early June, as of the writing of this report, the monitoring system had already been developed, but the division had not yet begun to use it to send periodic circular letters to the provinces.
B. Oufline end philosophy
of proposed system
ln the Feb. 2 meeting, the consultant outlined a system for processing documents in the division (depicted in the accompanying chart), designed to accomplish four objectives:
June 14,1995
SUB Conrultrncy
psge I I
l. Provide the quantitative feedback to provinces mentioned at the Jan. 23-24 meeting. 2. Structure the editing process within the divisiog so as to assure uniformity and transparency while minimizing the burden on editors. 3. Facilitate rapid validation. 4. Bring diffEcult cases to the attention of the division chief in a systematic way. As regards the first objective, the system builds in part on earlier experience in the creation of an updating system for the industry directory. A general conclusion from that earlier experience was that the implementation of any new system at CBS requires five stages. First and second, obviously, are the evaluation of the flaws of the old system and the creation of a new system designed to remedy these flaws Third is stafflraining inthe new system. Fourth is .scorirg staff performance to measure the extent to which they correctly carry out their part of the new system. Fifth is coaching individual staffto do a better job, by examining particular problems on a caseby-case basis. The proposed system for providing quantitative feedback to the provinces falls clearly into stage four of the implementation process. As regards objectives 2-4,the new system is designed to overcome existing limitations:
o An absence of tools for monitoring the work of editors, especially the extent to which they revise the documents that they edit.
o Lack of clear consistent guidelines for bringing difficult
o
cases to the attention of the division chief An unstructured validation process that unnecessarily delays final tabulations.
The first step in processing, receiving, already involved entering into a computer the date of receipt and the delays in transmission from the district office, this step remains part of the new system. The only additional recommendation is that systematic note be taken of substitutions to the sample. The next four subsections describe the four main new elements of the system in detail: Control cards for the KLP and questionnaire, and new coding systems for editing and validation.
C. Control card for the tr(Lp As has been mentioned, the KLP is a monitoring card for a single establishment. It is used at the district level to evaluate the consistency of wage data from quarter to quarter; copies fie sent to BPS with each questionnaire. In reviewing 50 or more sets of questionnaires, the consultant noted that the KLP was often filled out incorrectly or incompletely.
o
In some cases, the KLP was only filled out for the current quarter; columns for the
o 'o
previous quarters were blank. In other cases, none of the evaluative questions were filled out. Sometimes valildation failures were noted on the KLP without explanation. Even when an explanation was provided the next column, which indicates the source
of
June 14, 1995
SUB Consultancy
page 12
the explanation (a visit, telephone call, information contained in the questionnaire, etc.) was almost never filled out. In some cases, moreover, the explanation appeared contrived, so that one wondered whether any inquiry at allhad been made.
The control card for the KLP (table 4) is designed to score all of the aforesaid errors. The following comments may help in filling out the control card and understanding its meaning. Item 3 refers to various segments of the KLP. A single error in filling out one of the questions in the segment requires the editor to answer "No." Item 4 checks on whether validation failures are accompaniedby an explanation that appears "relevant" and whether its source is noted. Item 5 checks on whether the provincial and district offices have correctly noted the presence of the KLP, of whether a validation failure is mentioned, and of whether an explanation is provided. A "No" answer here means, for example, that the provincial office stated that an explanation was provided when in fact it was not. As of late May, the controlcard for the KLP had been used to evaluate datafor 616 establishments for 1994:IV. Tabulations of it showed that only 10 questionnaires lacked a KLP and only 10 of those with a KLP lacked data entries for the previous quarter. Several errors were detected in the filling out of the KLP. For 44Y\LP, average daily earnings were estimated incorrectly. Fully 65 KLP, or 1 1 percent, contained errors in the critical lines 24-28, which summarize the evaluation of data quahty. For these 65 erroneous KLP, it would be very useful to know how many represented cases where a questionnaire that should have failed validation was instead passed, and how many represented the opposite case where a questionnaire that should have passed validation instead failed.
Of the 149 KLP that showed a validation failure, 121 checked that an explanation was provided on the back. Among the 121 KLP with these promised explanations, 95 actually contained explanations that appeared relevant to the validation failure, and 4l of these were accompanied by a mention of the source for the explanation. For the other 26Y\LP, the promised explanation was either absent or irrelevant. (It would be more usefii if the data could be coded in such a way as to distinguish missing data from irrelevant data)
D. Control card for
block W of the questionnaire
In the course of reviewing 50 sets of questionnaires, many problematic, the conzultant noted certain error patterns.
o o o
Corrrections were sometimes entered in per/pencil by unidentified parties. The respondent changed the pay period from quarter to qua.rter, most often due to a change in interpretatiorq not a real change in the pay period. The total number of production workers below the 'mandor' level as shown in block
Jurte 14. 1995
SUB Coruultancy
page 13
IV
' o
was inconsistent with the total in block III. The total earnings or employment for the previous quarter (Rn IV.5) was inconsistent with the one reported on the questionnaire during the previous quarter. This discrepancy was usually not explained. The total earnings or employment for the present quarter changed more than l0 percent from the previous quarter, but the establishment provided no comment on why this occurred, despite prominent written instructions to this effect.
Most such errors could easily be detected by alert kabupaten stafl who could thereupon either correct the errors themselves or refer the matter back to the establishment. However, before this can happen, the division needs to "score" the occurrence of the errors and reprimand provinces and kabupaten with high error rates. Furthermore, the consultant noted some error patterns in editing at CBS that need to be controlled.
o
o
Most dangerous is the tendency of editors, when faced with a discrepancy between the number of production workers below mandor in blocks IV and III, to substitute the block III total for the block IV one. The obvious risk here is that the employment total in block IV will no longer be consistent with the earnings total in block IV. Another pattern was that editors neglected to draw conclusions from a revision in total employment or earnings for the previous quarter, implicit in the response to item IV-5.
The control card for block IV of the questionnaire (table 5) was designed to "score', questionnaires in regard to all common patterns of error in the questionnaire. At the same time, ifwill support a modicum of standardization in the editing of the questionnaire. More specifically, by classifying the common types of error, it will facilitate supervisor efforts to guide editors toward a uniform treatment of common erors. The following comments may help in the filling out of the control card and in understanding its meaning.
Item I checks for the presence of corrections to block fV data that were apparently made by CBS staffat either the district or provincial offices. Such corrections, when not-u..orpanied by explanatioq represent an uncontrolled form of editing that may actually degrade data quality. Item 2 tests for the consistency of employment data in blocks changes in pay periods.
III
and
fV. Item 3 tests for
Item 4 zummarizes the result of editing consistent with the codes uOKl,u nOK2,u "OK3" and as shown in the flow chart. The distinction between "51nall" and "big" changes (OK2 and OK3) is that big changes rezult in a change in average earnings, whereas i.ull on.r do not. Care is needed in explaining this distinction to editors, who .ay rubstitute their own subjective interpretations. nGu
Itern 5 tests the data in item 5 of Block W for consistency with the previous quartels report
June 14, 1995
SIJB Coneultarry
page 14
and for the presence of changes of more than I 0 o/o tithout explanation from the establishment. The latter point tests for whether establishments follow the prominent instruction on the questionnaire to explain such changes.
Item 6 tests for the most lenient and yet most critical test of all -- has there been a change in average earnings of more than 20Yo since the previous quarter, and, if so, can the change be explained? Actually, item 6 repeats questions 26 and 29 in the KLP, but the results here may differ from those in the KLP due to errors in the KLP or differences in editorial judgment. Item 7 asks whether, in the editor's judgment, the data for the same establishment from the previous quarter need to be reexamined. This question provides a tool for managers to track whether editors carry through on corrections to the previous quarter's data when revisions are reported by the establishment.
By late May, the control card for Block IV had been used to evaluate data quality for 616 questionnaires for 1994:IV. The data showed that only 8 questionnaires contained an inconsistency between the total number of production workers shown in blocs III and IV. The result is encouraging, but should be rechecked to ensure that it reflects raw data, not data that has already been edited at CBS. Changes in pay periods (which are technically very disturbing to data consistency) took place at 18 industrial establishments and no hotels. For 84 questionnaires, minor editorial changes were made, while big changes were made for only 6 questionnaires and 3 could not be satisfactorily edited. The small number of big changes should be rechecked to be sure editors correctly understand "big." If correct, it suggests that editors may be timid in editing dat4 particular in editing for consistency between questionnaires. If they are in fact timid, we must expect that most prrzzling cases will not be caught untilvalidation. Moreover, for 190 industrial establishments with a change in total earnings of more than l0 percent, only 42 provided an explanation consistent with instructions on the questionnaire. Another 241reported changes in total earnings of less than l0 percent. Presumably, the remaining 185 establishments did not fill in the blank for total earnings for the previous report; however, this was not stated in the printout. More critically, 56 out of 411 establishments in industry and mining and 5 out of 205 hotels showed a change in average earnings of more than 20 percent since the previous quarter. However, satisfactory explanation of the change was available for only 46 out of the 6l such establishments. Tabulations showing similar error rates for both control cards were distributed to earnings division staffwho travelled to provinces in early lday to train enumerators and supenrisors in the SUB. The tabulations were efective in raising awa.reness of data quality iszues.
E. A system for editing The system depicted in the flow chart is designed to guide and monitor the editing process in several respects. First, classification of documents into OKl, OK2, OK3 and G will provide previously unavailable measures which can be used to track both questionnaire quatity and the
June 14, 1995
SUB
Couultrncy
page 15
extent to which editorial changes have impacted the data. Second, the category OK3 signals a need for editors to document their most important correchas not heretofore been part of routine editing proceduies, although it was a part of the extraordinary editing of 1200 validation failures in 1993. Division staffseemto feel that it will not be too great a burden on editors to ask them to document the OK3 cases using a 5-column format similar to the one used for the 1993 validation process The format facilitates supervisory review of the editor's conclusions, thereby introducing an element of transparency into an otherwise opaque process. (However, one must recognize a risk that the such a documentation requirement will discourage editors from making "big" changes, thereby delaying major
tions. Such documentation
corrections until validation).
Third, the category "G" brings intractable cases to the attention of the division chief previously, no system existed for bringing such cases to his attention. Fourth, the various editing codes will provide a measure of the burden of editing. The measure will help in allocating work to individual editors and in setting deadlines for completion of data editing in subsequent quarters. F. A system for validation The system depicted in the flow chart is designed to guide and monitor the validation process in three respects.
First, as indicated in section II, the tripartite classification into "B,,' uKu and "J" groups will enable editors and supervisors rapidly to hand-sort the error list and identify the "B" cases that require close consideration. Second, close consideration of the "B" cases can lead to one of only two results: either the document is corrected through the uOK3u process, or it is discarded inio the nG" group. It is expected that many nB" cases will have to be discarded, as all obvious recourses for correcting the data will already have been exhausted during normal editing. In some cases, however, information from a subsequent quarter may help to resolve p,r"rles from a previous one after which the zuspect data may become valid.
Third, the discards in the "G" group, whether from editing or from validation, need to be sent back to the provinces, accompanied by a form letter, explaining that the data is unusable and asking the province to investigate. The apparent flaw in the dita may be stated in either the forrr letter or a bucksheet attached to the questionnaire. The e4planation will be based mainly on the various reason codes in the "B" group, as shown in table For "O" cases that do not fall neatly into a sandard explanation, a separate explanation will have to be written to fit the case hand. at
l.
of these procedures are especially designed to facilitate rapid validation, so that it need not delay tabulations ftore then a few davs.
SUB ConrultancY
Jtme 14, 1995
page 16
G. Editing procedures In addition to the editing system discussed in subsection E above, four zuggestions were
made
about the editing process. proceFirst, the division urgently needs to prepare a new editing manual based on the new manual was preparedin 1992 and isout of date- If dures dweloped during'ilsl-gs. ttre "*iriing regard to editing this is delaye-d for longl there is a risk that some of the newer "oral tradition" in could be lost if a key person leaves the division. earnings Second. it was noted that some establishments with bimonthly pay periods report requests)' data for the entire month, not just for the bimonthly pay period (as the questionnaire by two. dividing Heretofore most editors have converted the monthly data to bimonthly data by The conversion raises the risk of inconsistency if an editor occasionally forgets to convert.
A simpler procedure would be for editors to simply accept the original data and reclassify the pay period as monthly. This will minimize the risk of editing errors and will not affect tabulaby pay period. In discussions, the division decided to implement the iionr, which are not grouped 'First, d"tlng editing of fourth quarter dat4 a line was added to the "KK suggestion in fwo stJps period Block IV" to identify which establishments have a discrepancy between the nominal pay quarter offirst and the actual reporting period used by the respondent. Second, during editing such a diswith to go back and revise 1994 data for establishments data" editors may Ue ast "A crepancy. The ievision would return to the original data for all cases where the establishment lound only one consistently reports monthly data. However, a subsequent review by the division in coo
Thir4
a number of establishments (particularly hotels) had very few workers
large establishments.
Finally, as a convenience in tracing questionnaires when they are handed about the division or on the shown to-the division chief, it was recommended that a small block be rubber-stamped cover page, to be filled in with the initials of the editor and his supervisor. This has been done.
H. Communication with Provinces A circular letter to the provincial statisical offices was recommended, to call their attention to it was certain common error pattirns. First, to avoid confusion in tracing editorial changes,
'recommended that changes at the district office be made in pencil, while those at the provincial
June 14, l99J
SUB Conrulnency
officeuse blue ink and those to be made by division editors use red reserved for comments by the division chief
page 17
ink.
Green ink would be
Second, it was noted on many questionnaires that the "bulan pelaporan" was filled out by the establishment, sometimes inconsistently. For exurmple, while the proper survey month may have been June, it was not in fact printed on the questionnaire (it may have been conveyed orally by the enumerator). Instead, a blank space was provided, which enumerators often failed to fill out before delivering the questionnaire. In some cases, the establishment may have filled out July or August; it was not clear whether this meant that the wage data reportd by the establishment were for July or August. To avoid such misunderstandings, the enumerator should fill in the standard
month before delivering the questionnaire to the establishment. (Alternatively, when questionnaires are again printed, the four survey months can be shown on the front page. Enumerators would then need only to circle the current survey month.)
Third, a common elror pattern in questionnaires is that employment or total earnings have changed by more than 10 percent, but the establishment provides no comment or explanation. In fact, hardly any cases were found where the establishment did provide an explanation. Enumerators need to be rerninded to check this point in the field when they pick up the questionnaire. Fourttr, a common error pattern in the KLP is that, when an explanation is provided for an out-of-tolerance variable, no mention is made of the source of the information ('sumber penjelasan") in the adjacent column. District staffneed to be reminded to specify the source.
A letter along these lines was sent to provinces. In additio& some of the above points were mentioned during enumerator training conducted by CBS staffin 10 locations in May 1995.
IV.
Evaluation of the 1994 Data
The SUB data provide a unique data set that is not duplicated by other data sources. The annual industry survey provides a measure of total payroll costs per employee for a very large sample of establishments (about 18,000). However, this measure cannot take the place of the SUB measure because it is conceptually different, zuffers from more response error than the SUB, is available annually but not quarterly, and is available with a lag of more than a year since the end
ofthe survey year. The measure of weekly earnings from household sunreys (whether Sakernas, Susenas, or other household zunreys) covers over 20 rnillion wage and salary workers, not just the 34 million covered by SUB. Howev€r, the household meazure of weekly earnings is zubject to many limitations. (1) Production workers cannot be distinguished from nonproduction worken. (2) The various industrial subsectors cannot be identified in much detail. (3) The data is available with a considerable lag. (4) Respomes are not based on written records and are probably subject to more error than establishment data.
June 14, 1995
page I 8
SllB Consultancy
Weighted tabulations of mean weekly earnings for the first three quarters of 1994 for industry and hotels appear in table 1 of appendix II. Weighted tabulations for the mining sector are not available, because the mining sample was selected purposively.
A. Plausibilty On the whole, the implicit rates of change from quarter to quarter appear smooth and plausible in appendix II. For industry during the second quarter, average weekly earnings were Rp 33,400, up 4.7 percent from the previous quarter. During the third quarter, they were Rp. 34,300, up another 2.7 percent The larger increase in the second quarter may represent a seasonal pattern consistent with official changes in the minimum wage in April. For hotels, average weekly earnings in the second quarter were 46,000, up a trivial 0.4 percent over the previous quarter; in the third quarter the increase was 1 .3 percent With only three quarters of data it is difficult to interpret the variations in hotels earnings, which, due to the large role of bonus payments based on receipts from paying guests, are heavily influenced by variations in tourist visits. When data are available for two or three yeilrs, a seasonal pattern may become visible. In table 2, weekly earnings show smooth rates of change for all industrial sectors except basic metals, where weekly earnings in June, 69,600, climbed a sharp 16 percent from March then declined 3.7 percent in September. For the 6-month period March-September, the increase in average weekly earnings was roughly similar for several high-tech sectors: I 1.9 percent for basic metals, 10.5 percent for paper, i0.2 percent for chemicals. By contrast, industry as a whole registered an increase of only 7.5 percent over the 6-month period from March to September. Table 3, with more variation in industrial detail, shows a picture that is broadly similar to table 2.
In table 4, DK[ and Jawa Barat are seen to have experienced slightly slower earnings growth over the 6 month period -- 6.6 and 5.2 percent respectively -- than the 7 .5 percent reccorded for all Indonesia. Relatively rapid increases were observed in Central Java and Yogyakarta (10.0 percent), East Java (1 1.1 percent), and North Sumatra (19.6 percent). Unusually slow growth or decline was experienced in the Eastern areas: Bali (-2.0 percent), Kalimantan (0.5 percent), Sulawesi (1.0 percent), and other eastern provinces (-23.4 percent). The latter decline is an extraordinary one that may need to be checked by the division. The industry detail by province shown in table 5 helps to explain some of the pvzzlingvariations in table 4. The extraordinary decline in the other eastern provinces is entirely attributable to wood - perhaps even to just one or two establishments in that sector. Earnings increases in North Sumatra appear widespread, especially in wood (37 percent), textiles (25.5 percent), and paper and chemicals (26.2 percent). The slow gowth of earnings in West Java is especially noticeable in textiles (0.6 percent), and was partially offset by the sharp increase in earnhgs in ceramics and metals (16.7 percent). Most of the variations appear reasonable, but no effort has been made yet by the division or the conzultant to cross-check their accuracy. Moreover, seasonal patterns cannot yet be clearly seen.
Hotel earnings in tables 7 and 8 show patterns that are broadly plausible, with
a
few excep-
Jtute 14, 1995
tions. Earnings are nearly twice and Bali than in other provinces.
SUB Comultancy
as high
page 19
in star- as in non-star hotels and are much higher in DKI
Unlike household surveys, the SUB cannot readily provide a measure of female earnings, because employers do not normally subdivide their payroll records by sex and find it bothersome to be asked to do so. However, the SLIB does provide a measure of the proportion of production workers who are female; this measure can at least be used to distinguish establishments with higher and lower shares of female workers.
B. Median earnings The tabulation plan designed by Manning placed major reliance on measures of median earnings. Although mean earnings were included in the tabulation plan, median earnings were considered more reliable, because they are less influenced by extreme observations. Illustrative calculations for previous years have shown shown that median earnings tend for most cells to be 15-20 percent smaller than mean earnings. The tabulations discused here include only mean and no median earnings. The division has encountered difficulties in computing medians for many cells at a time, so that this work has been been delayed. However, the work is still ongoing and the division appears firrnly committed to publishing median earnings in the near future.
C. Format Some tables produced by the division share a problem common to many CBS publications: They present the data in a fragmented way that leaves a lot of white space on the page and hinders readers who want to compare and evaluate the data. Here are some suggested editorial changes to remedy these problems.
It would facilitate interpretation if the dMsion could also tabulate the number of establishments and workers in each of the cells in table 5c (that is, for the most recent month), to help users evaluate the robustness of the data (as is shown in table 6 for hotels). Table 5 is printed on three pages (q b, and c), one for each survey month. The data should instead be combined in such a way as to allow readers to compare the three months on a single page. This could be done by showing data for certain provinces on one page, and for other provinces on another page. Table 6 is printed on three pages (a" b, and c), one for each survey month. It shows the number of establishments and workers for the 10 provincial groups. The data should be combined into a single table, if necessary using landscape mode, in order to facilitate comparison and consistency checking. To save space, the weighted number of employees can be rounded offto tenths of a thousand. Showing the number of indMdual employees is a spurious form of precision. Tables 7 and 8 should be combined into a single table, because table 8 merely collapses the data for star and non-star hotels in table 7. This can be done by abbreviating the row tab "Yogya-
Jwe 14,
1995
SUB CoruullancY
page20
karta" and reducing the amount of space between columns or, if necessary, by printing sideways (landscape). Table 9 is printed on three pages (a,b, and c), one for each survey month. It shows the number of establishments and workers and their mean earnings for 9 industry groups in two size classes. Not surprisingly, earnings are considerably higher in large than in medium industry. The data should be combined into a single table, if n€cessary using landscape mode, in order to facilitate comparison and consistency checking. To save space, the weighted number of employees can be rounded offto tenths of a thousand.
Table 10 is also printed on three pages (a, b, and c), one for each survey month. It shows the number of establishments and workers, and their mean earnings, for 6 industry groups in four size classes. The variation in earnings for the four size groups is quite dramatic, from Rp. 24,300 fot all establishments with under 50 workers to 34,500 for ones with 500 or more workers, in March 1994. Moreover, the difference is even more dramatic for the capital-intensive ceramics-andmetals sectors. It would be more useful, however, if the table format could be revised to show three months of data in succession for each industry group. Table 11 is also printed on three pages (a, b, and c), one for each survey month. It shows the number of establishments and workers, and their mean earnings, for 6 industry groups in 3 cohorts: establishments that began production before 1980, during 1980-87, beginning in 1988. However, inasmuch as the variation in earnings among these three cohorts is trivial, it is recommended that this table be dropped from the tabulations. Table 12 is also printed on three pages (a, b, and c), one for each survey month. It shows the number of establishments and workers, and their mean earnings, for 6 industry groups in four ownership classes. PMDN, PMA Negar4 and other. The variation among these groups is interesting but the table should be reformatted to show three months of data in succession for each ownership goup, as was recommended for table 10. Table 13 is also printed on three pages (a, b, and c), one for each survey month. It shows the number of establishments and workers, and their mean earnings, for 6 industry groups in three classes according to the percent of female employees: Fewer than 25 percent, 25-49 percent, and 50 percent and more. The variation among these groups is quite significant and is the closest SIJB can come to providing an indicator for fernale earnings. Once again" the table should be reformatted to show three months of data in zuccession for each establishment group, as was recommended for table 10. By using smaller titles, and if necessary, a smaller font, tables 10,12, and 13 can each be reduced from three to two p€es. Overall, this package of 13 tables can be reduced from 25 to only 17 pages, without any loss of useful dat4 while making the data more concise and meaningful at the same time.
June 14,
1995
SUB Conrultrncy
page 2 I
V. Conclusions and recommendations A. Conclusions The methodologies for collecting the data, validating it in the field, editing it at CBS, validating it at CBS, and tabulating it, seem well established. The data for the first three quarters of 1993 look plausible. On this basis, CBS can safely publish the 1994 data now, and can with confidence publish it rapidly in the future.
District-level management now has the tools for validating the data in the field in a way that can greatly reduce the rate of response error. It remains only to apply these tools more consistently and energetically than has been done. The Division of Wage Statistics now has the tools for monitoring the promptness of document flow, the quality of the raw data, and the quality of field validation. It remains only to apply these tools consistently and energetically to spur the provincial and district offices to do a better job. The division has updated the manual for enumeration and field operations several times, and it now reflects many of the improvements that have been introduced into the survey. However, the division has not updated the editor's manual since 1992. This needs to be done soon, to protect and strengthen the gains that have been made in editing and validation procedures since 1992.
B. Recommendations
1. Publish the data for the first three quarters of 1994
as soon as possible (The appended
CBS report has already been sent to the printer).
2. Prepare second-stage weights as soon as possible, for use in adjusting the data for all four quarters of 1994.
3.
Complete the work of preparing median earnings, and include medians in the report for all four quarters of 1994. The division may wish to seek advice on this matter from a bureau of statistics in another country. If no oflthe-shelf solution is available, the problem can certainly be solved by SAS programming on the new pentium computers that BPS will soon receive.
4. Improve table format to make the data more concise
and more easily compared.
5. In future, try to publish as often and quickly as possible. It does little good to speed up document flow and editing if the data are not published right away. 6. Have
one of the division chiefs prepare a routine report each quarter evaluating data quality, with particularly attention to outliers in the tabulations. Keep an archive of these reports,
Jrme 14, 1995
SUB ConsultancY
for reference in case the data is questioned at a later
page22
date.
7.
Take steps to routinize the editing and validation process, while preserving the special role for the division and subdivision chiefs in that process.
8.
Prepare an up-to-date manual for editing and validation.
9.
Update the validation program for 4 quarters, to incorporate conceptual improvements introduced during April-May in the 3-quarter program.
10. Spot-check the filling out of the control cards to be sure that editors are correctly interpreting the criteria. Also, add codes for some items to distinguish between an irrelevant response and an empty cell.
l.
Prepare comprehensive measures of lags in document flow from the establishment to CBS. Consider as well using a combined "credit-point" measure that tracks both promptness and total response rates, as Kabsis uses. 1
12. Use the tabulation of the control card data and the average number of days for document flow to communicate effectively with provinces by means of circular letters every six weeks. 13. Re-examine the recommendation by Manning that establishments in agro-industries be excluded from tabulations. This can be done on the basis of a tabulation of clean data for average weekly earnings for those industry groups combined and seeing whether their behavior appears plausible. Manning based this recommendation on his observation that the data was particularly error-prone for these sectors and often included field workers combined together with factory workers. It remains to be seen whether the data is still relatively elror-prone after all improvements that have taken place in questionnaire design and field editing.
14. Continue to devote a substantial portion of the time of the division and subdMsion chiefs to managing the SUB and soMng the above problems until such time as the SUB is on an even firmer footing.
rabh
J (l|rsalah yang Sudah Jolas)
L =,'Leobur B
Upah
:
N
r Periode penbayaran
8,e Data hanya satu
lain
--->
P = Perubahan Periode Penbeyaran U = Perubahan upah >
20X
buang
(hanya yang bermasaleh)
X
Salah cntry
O = Kasus
nenpunyai
pckerj& non-dooinan
nininun naik, eesuai
dengan kenaikan
E
B (llaaalah Bcgar)
K : Junlah pekerj& < 6 ---> buant
: ,Variaei borongan
ll :
f, (llaoalah f,ecil)
I ]
,"t"ut"l":;;::li
=
i,
2 x upah tertinggi dan anter triwulan nasih nesuk batas 202 perubalran
(sebutkan)
ll = Upah nin,/max salah, tetepi perubahan antar trigulan ilasih nasuk batas 20 i B = Upah nininun = upah naxinun,
tetapi perubahan up&h antar triwulan oasih nasuk batas 20 X
X = n antara 1,5-2,0
tertinggi,
x upah
dan perubahan antar
Trw nasih ne6uk bata6 R=
O
:
f antara 0,5-0.75 x
20U
upah
terendah dan perubahan antar Trw oa.sih oasuk batas 20X Kasus lainnya
=
i t 5 kali
upah nininun dan
triwulan nasih nasuk batas 20 i4 peruba.han anta.r
O = Kasus
lain
R = i < 0.5 upah terendah, dan perubahan antar Trw nasih nasuk bstas 20x
Tsble 3a
Rata-rata Tenggang Waktu Penerimaan Dokumen Menurut Propinsi (Triwulan I Tahun t994) Persh. PROP I NS I
DI
Aceh
Sumu
t
Sumbar
Riau Jamb
i
ke
TK
II
TK
KSTKI
Lampung
Jabar Jat eng Yogyakar t a
Jat im Bal i NTB
NTT Ka I bar
Kalteng KalseI
Kaltim SuIut SulseI
Sultra Ma I uku Irian Jaya Indonesia Keadaan
TKI
Persh
ke
ke
BPS
BPS
6B
I4
10
92
7B 4B
13
34
t25
133 /J
26 20 z+
Sums e I
DKI Jakarta
II
ke
94 100 90
A
11
)i
15
1,7
15 2B
14
t+
18
30
22
I7
6 8
42 32
9 9 Jf 8
13
1995
84 11
10 19
66
r32 t34
9
t4 t2
t:
t26
127
31
11 8
9
65
166 106 119
B
13
1{ 27 19
s.d. tanggal I Juni
,7
t2
NA
54 34 40 62 B9 78 97 45 60 54
1a
1^
20
50 4B .5/
109 >/ 125 B9
93 101
99
Table 3b
Rata-rata Tenggang Waktu Penerimaan Dokumen Menurut Propinsi (Triwulan II Tahun t994) PROP INS
I
DI Aceh
Persh. ke
TK II
TK II
TKI
KSTKI
ke
ke
BPS
BPS
ke
G
Sumut Sumbar
L> ^;
Riau
B9
Jamb i Sumse I
35
t2
JI
11
I+
Lampung
DKI Jakarta Jabar Jateng Yogyakar t a Jat im
Bali NTB NTT
Ka bar Ka fpng Ka se I Ka tim Su ut Su se I Su tra
9
6
16
11
3B
to
to
20
I+
7
15
)
11 T4
7
13
B
B
9
32 29 46
7
9 9
U
18
30 118
)/
55 92 B4 70 B4 A't 32 J+ 28 26 48 55
9
al
41
lz IJ
7
OI
25 43
29 25
B
a: oz
:
:
10
I7
Indonesia
34
Keadaan
10 13 18
10
JJ
Ir an Jaya
20
65 69 44 35
uku
Ma
B2 LJ
1a
Persh.
s.d. tanggal I Juni
1995
5
73 o2
ol
Table 3c
Rata-rata Tenggang Waktu Penerimaan Dokumen Menurut Propinsi (Triwulan III Tahun L994) Persh. PROPINSI
DI
t
Jamb i Sumse I
Lampung
DKI Jakarta Jabar Jat eng
Yogyakar t a
Jat im Bai i NTB
NTT Ka I bar
Kalteng Kalsel KaItim Sulut Sulsel
Sultra uku
ian
Jaya
Indonesia Keadaan
TK II ke
KSTKI
TKI
Persh,
ke
ke
BPS
BPS
)
9
a
31
18
t2
t9 6l
5
37 29 26 39 57 36 27 2o 20 27 24
45 22
11 9
9l
6
10
43 25 1J
7
t7
Sumbar
Riau
Ir
TK Ii
Aceh
Sumu
Ma I
ke
1a
B
1)
t2
1B
5
ov 46 69
5
tt TI
1A l.t
10 12
10
20
52
9
1+
IJ
6 6
1'l
50
61
A1
6 I\,,
l7
11
10
23
t2
26 67 46 55
11
^;
JJ
JI
)1
2I
;
T2
8
4l
66
,:
1a
IJ
18
54
30
11
L2
53
s.d. tanggal I Juni
1995
,;:;'ntr
Table 3d
Rata-rata Tenggang Waktu Penerimaan Dokumen Menurut Propinsi (Triwulan IV Tahun L994') PROP I NS
I
Persh. ke
TK
II
TK II ke
KSTKI
TKI
ke
BPS
BPS
DI
Aceh t Sumbar
Sumu
Riau
Jamb i Sumse I
Lampung
DKI Jakarta
Jabar Jat eng Yogyakar t a Jat im BaI i NTB
NTT Ka I bar
Kalteng Kalsel Kaltim Sulut Sulsel
Sultra Ma I
uku
Irian
I
Keadaan
8;
26
15
44
t4
o
15
35
24
1
10
4T
2l
I9
23 23 20 22
6
AA
L+
19 18
zr i1 I2 39
t3
53
L7
4B
13
9
5
5
2l
L2
30 10
10
10
45 30 64 55 39 38
9
11
+u 6 9
aA
L9
L2
30 59 46 28 53
1A l.?
6
11 9
4I
JJ
16 10 13
23
t4 9
16 10
53
1B
:
:
45
1)
t5
49
21 11
30
Jaya
ndones i a
Persh.
ke
22
s.d. tanggal I Juni lgg5
7
7
I
a:i
Table
-
4
J
I
i
K.AR.T(J KEI\TI)AL I KLP (Isikan 1 jika Ya atau 2 jika Tidak pada tiap triwulan) Nama Perusahaan:
Kode Perusahaan: Tahun: TR IWULAN
RINCIAN I
1. KLP ada/terlampir bersama kuesioner? Jika tidak, langsung ke R. 5 2. Data triwulan yang lalu terisi? 3. a. R. 1-5 terisi dengan benar? b. R. 6-13 & atau R. 15-22 terisi dengan benar? c. R. 14 & atau R. 23 terisi dengan benar? d. R. 24-28 terisi dengan benar? 4. Jika R. 28'Ya', a. R. 29 terisi?'langsung J i ka t i dak, ke R. 5 b. Penjelasan pada halaman bela[
Editor:
Peme r
i ksa:
iI
IIi
IV
Table 5
KARTU KENDALI BLOK IV
RINCIAN
Ya->1 Tidak->2 t. Ada perbaikan oleh KS IIIKS I? Jika ada perbaikan, ada penjelasan? ) R. lv.2 sama dengan R. III.A.Zc kol ' 4 (VU-l) atau dengan R. III.A.4 kol. 4 (vU-2)? Jika berbeda, ada penjelasan? R. 1-4:
Ada perubahan .sistem pembayaran terhadap
triwuian
I
sebelumnya?
Apakah ada karyarltan dengan sistem pembayaran bukan bulanan di Blok III.B, tetapi upah di Biok IV untuk sebulan?
Isian R. IV 1-4 oieh editor: (lingkari no. yg sesu&i & pindahkan ke kotak) 1. Dianggap benar 2, Ada koreksi kecil 3. Ada koreksi yang membuat R. IV.a berbeda 4. Data beium bisa diolah Jika kode 3, koreksi diiakukan untuk: - Total Upah? _1 Ya Tidak Jumlah Pekerja? J -> 5. R. IV.5 Total Upah sama dengan triwulan sebe lumnya? 2 Ya-> Tidak 1
1
% Persentase perubahan: - Jika perubahan > 10 %, ada penjelasan? >2 Tidak Ya-> 1 Jumlah pekerja sama dengan triwulan > 1 - Tidak sebelumnya? Ya % Persentase perubahan: -> Jika perubahan > 10 %, ada penjelasan?
2
Ya->1 Tidak->2 7. Perubahan rata-rata upah- > 20 %? >2 Tidak Ya-> Jika Ya,. alasan cukup jelas? >2 Ya 1 Tidak 3. Data triwulan sebeiumnya masih masuk akal/benar? ya-> Ti dak -> 1
1
Figure
1
Process Editing untuk survei upah Buruh Laporan
LaWran Kedinian
Mutunya
KLP
Laporan Mutunya Kuesioner
i
i
Kuesioner
KK Block lV; kuesioner
Receiving
di+dit
I
/'\ "OKz" I Perbaikan \
{ kocil \ \I ,/
}
*oK1" Datanya
dlterlma
Perobahan
didokumentasikan oleh editor Datanya divalidasi
di computer
Gagal:
datanya tidak bisa dipakai
Kuesioner dikembalikan ke Propinsi clengan surat dari Kabid
Data yg bersih: Ditabulasikan
..8r.
Masalah be8ar,
dilihat
kab4
'
r.Kr.
Masalah
kecil, datanya dipakai
Alasannya jelas, datanya
dlterima
Appendix I
-
Questionnaire VU-l
DATTAR I/U-
AKAII DIATBIT Tsl Bln Thn
RBPUBLIK INDOXBSIA BIRO PUSAT STATISTIK
1
SANGAT RAHASIA 8ATU
ASLI UTTuI' IP8
8A1U AISIP P8mtAflrlJf
SURIIEI UPAH KIO I ATAII USAHA I }IDUSTR I DAII PERTAIIBA}IOAII BULAN PBLAPORAH
KODB PERUSAflAAN
Prop. Kab.
Kec.
Sektor
' Bulan
No. urut
mmnrl mrnr]Tn
BLOK
I.
Tahun
KETERANCAN IDENTITAS PERUSAHAAN
Nama Perusahaan
:
Alamat Perusahaan/Unit Produksi
3. (a) Produk/KeSietan
Utama
:
o;is'[T-[-I:[f
:
: I i:;::1,,:T:l*1,:.?T"n?nuh?1"
i" j 3fu3*H"atiul3r'ur'r"
(d) Status nodal usaha : 3. Negara (BUMN' Persero, dsb. ) 1. PMDN 2. PMA Z. Gabungan PMA (sebutkan) 4. Gab 5. Lainnya produksilang"ie:f"ryr tahun Ialu? 4'
+l"I"l,ada
ffi n
rn
PBREATIAN
untuk menberikan keterangan statisti$.dan.kerahasiaai data vanc dikumpulkan dalan survei ini dijemin oleh Undang-Undanl xo=, 7 Tehun 1960 tentang stat istik. 2. Agar Fenyaji.En hasil, survci tep9t wEEip, un-tuk bahan sidang perencanaai Ai Jakarta,: perusahaan diharapkan dapat 4enyelesa!kg,n pengisian kuesioner pal ing lambat 1 ( setu) ninggu setelah tangEal penerinaen. 1. Kewajiban
DITERIXA
II KSTK I KS TK
BPS
DI:
5tl3Y L**fL i'*g8*ffl"l#Il Terlanpir Ada 'Y8'? Jelas?
PENGE.E*AN
Tgl Bln Thn
fffff'n
Ks rK
II f,
'9
KSTK I
9
BPS
n
l
n T
I
n n
I
BLOK II.
1.
KETERANGAN UMUM PERUSAHAAN TIANYA UNTUK KARYAWAN PRODUKSI
TI NGKAT PENGAWAS/MANDOR
HARI DAN JAI'{ KERJA BIA,SA TAIPA
Hari Kerja
2.
lliNJAI'ICr,AN YArG
Jam
Kerja
3.
Shift/Plug Sehari (3)
n
iam
DIMYARI$I{ gEcARA TERATUR DAIAI,{
lLlngF&rr nqntor yang sesual)
kali
BENTUK MTURA
(]ebut*an)
?:
*3f;bYl3n/remputan
saia
UPAH TERENDAII/IEKII}.JGGI (IERI{ASTJK TI]I.IJAI€AI.| TERATUB) KARYAWAN PRODUKSI Di BAWAH TII'I(XAT PEI.I3I,AWA^SNANF* tE5Og*t/MIlrcG{J/BUL.q}l
(a) (b
BLOK
A.
Jumlah
Seninggu
(.,\
m
hari
1: Ne[ft?"'?i?""r;
BAWAH
LEMBLIR
Seminggu
(1)
f,
DI
rerendah Rp fT]I]-n
per per
) rert
ingei
III.
KETERANGAN KARYAWAN PERUSAHAAN.
Rp
t-T-n-fT-n
Kode 1 = Hari 2 = Minggu 3 = Bulan
I
t
JIJMI,AH KARYAWAN
JENIS
PEKERJAAN
Laki-laki
1.
/,r\
(.t,
Bukan Tenaga Kerja Produksi a. Manajer
b. c.
2.
Laki-laki + Perempuan
Perernpuan
(1\
'I
IGTERA}G-
Adminis tras i/Kantor
AN UPAII TIDAK PER
Lainnya Tenaga Kerja Produksi a. Ten4ga Kerja Ahli/Teknisi/ahli Mes rn b. Tenaga Kerja Pengawas/Mandor
c.
LU DIMASUKIGN Di BLOK r.v
Karyawan Produksi Lainnva di Bawbh Tingkat Pensawas,/[,landor JIJMI..AI{ SELURUHI{YA
B.
JUMI^AH IGRYAWAT
PRODUI$I.) OT OATIEN C,.{.II
HENL]RUT
STATUS SISTIM
PEMBAYARAI.I
(1)
Harian Lepas/ Kontrbk
Borongan
(3)
QI
SISTIM PEI{BAYARA}T DA.I STATUS KAXSAWAI{
KARYAWAN Harian Tetap (4)
Bulanan
(s)
JUMI*ATI
Data uPah 4i-
lsl dl Blok IV pada
t6)
1.
Ming8san.
kolon
2
2.
Bulanan
Kolon
3
kolon
4
Kolor
5
'' i:llfi.lf;f,9a*.)oiisi
&.f, b!
JUHLAN
r)
Hanva untuk k
(sesuai nror ?iIux"fli8:?*Hkil,di
tt) ilii;t;:-2-iiiniguan;-I-bfiafiii
tingkat pensawas/nandor dan untuk sem'E shift to trarl sekali, atau periode lain (sebutkan) bawah
BLoK
IV.
KETERANGAN KARYAWAN
SELAMA SATU
KALI
PRoDUKSIt)
MENURUT
SISTIM PEMBAYARAN UPAHNYA
PERIODE PEMBAYARAN
P8llBAyaIAx")
IIITIr
8I8TII
RII{CIAT l)
I.
PSNIODB PETTBAYA.IAI{ DAN ILT.RI TAIJA UHTUX PENIODB PEUAATANAX TEBATSIB
I
BUIJJI P8I.I\FOIAX
Z.
(
s6butk$) (s)
(4)
(J,,
a, Pcriodc pcobayaren upoh dari t6nggal bcrapa eaopai bcrapa b. Junloh h.trri kcrjo biaea peda, pctiodc pcobayaran upah leb, c, Juolah hari kcrja leobur pada hari libur selBDa perlodc pe8bayarBn upoh lsb.
I.AIXI{YA
BI'I,IIXAI{
ITI}IOGUAT
I
Drrsr
Eil DPs
{l
t,g,L',,,,s/6,
t81.,,,,e/d,
t91,...,e/6',,'.
o
(A[YA'AJ{ PNODOTAI DI DAT'|]DILAH TAT GAJI 688UAI JUI'LAX YA}IO DI-
ISIIJ|N PADA 8LOr. tII B f,Or,Orr (6) (Laki-lak.i + pcreopuan)
3.
JUXLAR UFNI/GA'L OaX TUNJAT{GAI{ YANG DIBAY^Rf,AN IXPA,DA
rANYA'A}I PBODUTSI
6flUA
DI BA'IX
(Dolorl ribuon
RP,
)
(Dalan ribuan
RP. )
(Drlar ribuan
Rp
(oalaa ribuan
(Dalaa ribuan b, Tunjangen lainnye yBnt dibayar d&la! set,irp periode peobayaran 6ecar& dalan ben_ uan8, atrLeratur I (Dalao ribuan luK c, Upah lembur pada hari kerja bia6a dan pada hari libur
RP.
)
(Dalar ribusn
Rp.
)
(Dalan ribuan
Rp
(Dalar ribuBn Rp.)
RP.
)
(Dalao ribusn
Rp.
)
(DBIa! ribun
Rp
(Dal8! ribuen Rp.)
(Dalar ribuan Rp' )
(Dalae ribusn
Rp.
)
(Dalao ribuan
Rp
(Delaa ribua$ Rp' )
TIXGf,AT PBNCA'A8/IIilTMN a, Upah,/gej i pokok at&u upa,h
Rp. )
Rotor kaleu tunjangan tetep
tidak dapat dipieahkan
d. Jrnlah 4.
X.ATA-TATA UPAX
PBN
.TRYA'AT{ {II|TIIT
SISTIII pPrrAAyAIAj{ upur yal{c 6atr (Sincien 3d dibagi [;] Rincian 2
dikelikan 5.
(B+b+c)
(Delar Rupiah)
(Dalao Rupieh)
(Dals^o Rupiah)
1000)
KBTEI.ANGAN YAHG
K]ESIOI{BR
(Dalrn Rupiah)
DISAIIN DIII
yu-I TRITUII}I
SE-
BALUTNYA
Jika terjadi pcrubalrant > l0 t. terhsd&p periode pcrbayaran teralhir trivulan ini, harsp dicet apakah data konsisten a'ntBr lrirulen dan jeleskan ati Blok V (di haralan berikutnya).
a, JuDlah karyenan (Blok IV Rincian X, triwulan sebeluonya) b. Junlah upah/gaji dan tunjantan (Dalar ribuan (Blok IV Rincien 3d, trirulan. scbe 1 uonya
CatBtsn:
Rp.
) | (Dalar ribuant
Rp
(Dalsr ribuanr Bp.) l(Dalar ribuan RD.)
)
.) Di Berah Tinrlnt Penganes/len&r, sesuai dengan Blok III B fotol (6). t.) Diisi hanya untuk sietil pcobaya'ran ymg adr di pcruelfiratr andr. .tt) Ti.ra\ terr86uk THR, bonue/ineenLif ta,honan, ac.cdtararr, tuartalan dan tunjattlgr d8l6r bcntul natura.
BLOK
V.
CATATAN
KETERANGAN LEGALISASI
Daftar ini
diterima oleh perusahaan pada tgl'. ..... jam. Dikembalikan kepada petugas tanggal
19,...
Diselesaikan selama 1,9. .
.
Pemberi keterangan,
Jabatan,
...
(Bubuhi Cap Perusahaan)
Petugas
NIP
:
Pencacah,
NIP
34
PENJELASAN
Petugas Pemeriksa'
:
34.
UMUI,I
l(aryawan Produksi adalah karyawan yang terlibat secara langsung dalan proses produksi , diantaranya: operator, Peltrcl iharaan, - pgltgoJahgnt ierakitan, pengepakan, penSgudangal, laboratorium, pesuruh di bagian produksi, dan sebagainya.
Catatan: tlpah untuk pengawas/nandor, teknisi/atrli resin dan tinekatan di Ctasnya tidsk dicakup dalar pengisian upah dan jullah karyaran paAa
btot rv daftsr ini.
Tidak termasuk karyawan produksi antara lain: eksekutif, trucking, kredit, maintenance, pembelanjaan/penjualan, kantin, instalasi' keuangan, urusan pegawai, pembukuan, pemasaran, keamanan, klinik, product developmentr dan sebagainya yang tidak berkaitan langsung dengan proses produksi. C.ATATAN: Untuk perusahaan perkebrman jumlah pekerja yang dicakup hqlyl untuk bekerja di sektor industrinya saja (pekerja pabrik) tidak ' termasuk pekerja lapangan.
PENJELASAN
BLOK II.
Daftar VU-l
KETERANGAN UMUM PERUSAHAAN (TIANYA UNTUK KARYAWAN PRODUKST BAVAH TINGKAT PENGAWAS/MANDOR)
DI
1'a' Hari kerja biasa adalah hari-hari yang ada kegiatan kerja biasa selain hari untuk lembur. Hari minggu yang umumnya dipakai untuk .libur.yalr bekerja shif_dipakai t,zplug dimasukkan sebagai hari kefja biasa.' b' Jan kerja seninggu adalah banyaknya jam kerja biasa,/normal dalam satu minggu yangbiasadigunakanuntukbekerjatidaktermasukjamistirahat/lembur. 2. J,
Isikan tunjangan yang dibayarkan secara teratur dalan bentuk natura. Lingkari salah satu kode yang sesuai dan tuliskan dalam kotak. Isikan gpah terendah/tertinggi (termasuk tunjangan teratur) dari karyawan produksi di.bawah tingkat pengawas/nandor yang dibayirkan sec&ra teratur. Isikan kode satuan waktu di kotak paling kanan. Per hari berkode 1, per minggu berkode 2, per bulan berkode 3.
BLOK I I I.
KETERANGAN KARYAIYAN PERUSAHAAN
A. JUMLAH KARYAWAN PERUSAIIAAN 1. Bukan Tenaga Kerja Produksi adalah karyawan yang tidak secara langsung me lakukan kegiatan produksi . a. Manajer.adalah yang merencanakan, mengorganisasikan, mengkoordinasikan dan memimpin perusahaan.
b. Adninistrasi/Tantor adalah yang menjalankan semua kegiatan tata usaha/administrasi di kantor (seperti urusan pegawai, pembukuan, dll.). c. Lainnyq adalah karyawan bukan tenaga kerja produksi yang tidak termasuk dalam kategori a dan b (misalnya supir, penjaga kantin, dan lain-lain). 2. Tenaga Kerja Produksi adalah karyawan yang secara langsung bekerja dalam proses produksi.
a. Tenaga - Ke5 ja Ahli/Teknisi/Ahl i tr{esin adalah karyawan yang merawat memperbaiki alat-alat produksi
b'
c.
B.
dan
.
Tenaga Ke-rja Pengawasf'landor adalah karyawan yang bertugas mengawasi dan mengkoordinasikan kegiatan para karyawan pada unit/settor prod'uksi atau sektor yang bertal ian dengan penambangan, penggal ian,- pengolahan, pembuatan barang atau pekerjaan produksi. Tenaga Kerja di Bawah Tingkat pengawasfl,{andor adalah karyawan produksi yang tidak termasuk a dan b meliputi: kepala regu,.penerimaan, operator mesin, fabrikasi, clan lain-lain.
JUMLAH KARYAWAN PRODUKSI DI BAWAH TINGKAT PENGAWAS/MANDOR, MENURUT SISTIM PEMBAYARAN DAN STATUS KARYAWAN Isikan jurnlah karyawan produksi sesuai daftar karyawan menurut status karyawan dan sistin (periode) pembayaran, termasuk yang sedang cuti, sakit dsb.
Status Karyawarr 1. Harian Lepas adalah status karyawan yang dibayar berdasarkan jumlah hari kerjanya. Umunnya, upah mereka tidak dapat dipisahkan antara upaVgaji pokok dan- tunjangan lainnya. Kontrak adalah status karyawan yanE -dilayar berdasarkan kontrak kerja yang kurang dari 6 bulan 2. Borongan adalah status karyawan yang dibayar langsung oleh perusahaan berdasarkan hasil kerja yang dihitung per satuan hasil, tidak termasuk pekerja borongan yang bekerja di rumah sendiri secara makloon. 3. Harian Tetap adalah status karyawan yang dibayar berdasarkan jumiah hari kerjanya.. liasanya upah mereka terdiri dari upah pokok dan tunjingan tetap yang mungkin dapat dipisahkan, sehingga kalau karyawan/pekerja abien, bisa dihitung potongan upahnya, sesuai aturan yang berlaku.
4. Bulanan.adalah status karyawan yang menerima upah,/gaji pokok sec&ra tetap setiap periode pembayaran, umumnya bulanan, kecuali tunjangan-tunjangan dan pera.ngsang lainnya yang tergantung jumlah hari kerjanya/jam kerja karyawan yang bersangkutan. Bila karyawan bulanan dibayar 2 kali atau lebih dalao
sebulan tetap dimasukkan sebagai karyawan bulanan. S ist in perbayaran/pay-rol I Sistim pembayaran didasarkan periode/jangka waktu pembayaran upah/gajir dan tunjangan te.ratur yang biasanya berlaku untuk berbagai' kelompok karyawan produksi. Misalnya pekerja harian lepas atau harian tetap atau borongan dibayar mingguan atau dua minggu sekali, pekerja bulanan dibayar bulanan BLOK
IV.
KETERANGAN KARYAWAN PROD(XST DI MANDOR, MENUR-UT SISTIM PEMBAYARAN
BAYAH TINGKAT
PENGAYAS/
Diisi hanya untuk periode pembayaran yang ada di perusahaan, misalnya hanya ada karyawan mingguan, maka hanya Kolom (2) yang perlu diisi. l.a. T\rliskan periode pembayaran upah sesuai dengan sistim pembayaran pada Kolom 2,3,4 dan 5. Semua keterangan yang diisikan hanya untuk 1 (satu) Wriode penbayaran pada bulan pelaporan yaitu yang terakhir pada bulan tersebut. Contohnya:. bila sistim pembayaran mingguan periode pembayaran upah dari tanggal 23 s/d 29, dua mingguan tanggal 16 s/d 29, dua kali sebulan tanggal 15 s/d 30, dan bulanan tanggal 1 s/d 30, sesuai bulan yang bersangkutan. 1.c. Hari kerja lembur pada hari libur adalah benyaknya hari kerja pada hari Minggu, hari Besar dan hari Sabtu bagi perusahaan yang libur, y&ng dibayar dengan
tarif
2. 3.
lembur pada periode pembayaran diatas. T\-tl iskan pada Rincian 2 jumlah seluruh karyawan produksi di furalr tingkat pengawas/mandor yang tercantum dalam daf tar upa.Vgaj i menurut periode pembayaran untuk masing-masing kolon yang sesuai. Banyalcnya karyaran yang dinaksud bukan untuk setiap shift, tetapi untuk seluruh shift. Jumlah upah yang dibayar kepada seluruh karyawan produksi di baralr tingkat pengawas/mandor hanya pada 1 (satu) periode penbayaran yang bersangkutan saja (misalnya: 1 minggu, 10 hari, 2 minggu, I bulan, sebulan), jadi bukan selalu sebulan. Yang dimaksud upah disini adalah bukan rata-rata upah. Isikanlbesernya
dalas ribuan rupiah, 3.a. ttpah/gaji pokok adalah upah/saji dasar sebelum ditarnbah dengan berbagai tunjangan dan perangsang tetap lainnya. Termasuk bila ada upah kotor yang tidak dapat dipisahkan antara upah pokok dan tunjangan teratur lainnya. Tidar ternasuk upah/gaji antara lain: bonus yang dibayarkan tidak secara teratur,
tunjangan
lebaran/perkawinan/khitanan/perumahan/pakaian kerja, uEnB ian biaya saki t. 3.b. Tunjangan adalah penerimaan karyawan yang sifatnya rutin/teratur, seperti nakan, transpor, dan beras. Tidalc terrasuk TI'IR, bonus tahunan, kuartalan, seutesteran, perlengkapan kerja dan tunjangan dalam bentuk natura (makanan, transpor, dl I ), 3.c. tlpah lenbur adalah tanbahan upah berupa uang yang dibayarkan perusahaan karena karyawan melakukan kegiatan kerja lembur. 4. Rata-rata tlpah adalah junlah upah yang dilaporkan pada Rincian 3d dibagi junlah karyawan yang dilaporkan pada Rincian 2. 5.a. & 5.b. Jumlah karyawan, dan upah/gaji dan tunjangan yang disalin dari kuesioner triwulan s*beluurnya. Bandingkan isian Rincian 5a dan 5b tersebut dengan isian Blok IV Rincian 2 dan Rincian 3d kuesioner triwulan ini. Jika isian berubah > lM, harap dijelaskan pada Blok V. penggant
BLOK
V.
CATATAN.
Isikan keterangan yang ada hubungannya terhadap isian, khususnya terhadap perubahan sejak triwulan sebelumrya, nisalnya adanya kenaikan./penurunan upah, penanbahan/pengurangan junlah pegawai, upah pokok yang tidak dapat dipisahkan dengan tunjangan, kenaikan/penurunan tunjEngan insentif/pembayaran borongan berhubungsn dengan kenaikan/penurunEn produksi, dan sebagainya.
Appendir tr
-
Draft publication with tabuletions for first three quarterr oI1994
STATISTIK UPAH TRII{ULANAN Triwr-r1a,n. fII
Ta,hun L9g4
No. Katalog: 33t.2 ISBN: 979-598-184-5 No. Publikasi: 05430.9504 Naskah:
Statistik
Upah
Kulit: Bagian Statistik
Upah
Bagian Gambar
Diterbitkan Oleh: Biro Pusat Statistik Dicetak Oleh:
Boleh
dikutip dengan menyebut sumbernya
KATA PENGANTAR
Penerbitan Statistik Upah Triwulanan ini merupakan kelanjutan publ ikasi yang sama, !eag menyajikan tabel-tabel pokok hasil Surrei Upah triwulan I (angka diperbaiki), triwulan II (angka diperbaiki ) dan triwulan III (angkd sementara) tgg+,
Data yang disajikan dalam publ ikasi ini adalah rata-rata upah karyawan produksi di bawah mandor/su'pervisor di sektor pertambangan non migas, industri pengolahan dan perhotelan, yang merupakan has i I Survei Upah 199.t triwulan I (keadaan bulan Nlaret ), triwulan II (keadaan bulan Juni) dan triwulan I I I (keadaan bulan Septernber) .
Disadari bahrva data yang disaj ikan dalam publ ikasi ini dat a sangat diharapkan guna menunjang usaha-usaha penyempurnaan yang senant iasa terus di lakukan. Publ ikasi ini dapat terwujud terutama berkat kerjasama dan peran aktif pihak perusahaan dalam memberikan data yang diperlukan. Untuk itu diucapkan terimakasih kepada para pengusaha disertai harapan agar pada periode seianjutnya, ketepatan data dan waktu dapat lebih ditingkatkan. masih terbatas. oleh karenany&r Saran dan krit ik dari pemakai
Jakarta, l(opember 1994 . Kepala Biro Pusat Statistik,
SUGITO,
MA
NiP.340000452
ii DAT'TAR I S I Ha I aman
KATA
DAFTAR
I.
I
PENGANTAR
ii-iv
ISI
PENDAIIULUAN
I
1. Umum 2. Tujuan dan Sasaran 3. Metode Survei . . 1, Konsep dan Definis i .
II.
I
1 J
+
... 1. Rata-rata Upah Sektor Industri
ULASAN SINGKAT HASIL SURVEI
2. 3, 4.
Menurut Sub Sektor dan Wi la:rah Rata-rata Upah Sektor Industri Menurut Persent ase Karyawan Wan i ta Rata-rata Upah Sektor Industri Menurut Tahun mulai Produksi dan Status Modal Usaha Rata-rata Upah Perusahaan Perhotelan dan Pertambangan
r0
t2 L4
Tabel-Tabel: Tabe
I
1
Tabel 2 Tabel 3 Tabe
I 4
Tabel 5.a.
Rata-rata Upah Tert imbang. per lrtinggu Karyawan Produksi/Pelaksana di Bawah
Mandor,/Supervisor Menurut Sektor (0OO Rp) Tahun 1994 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor Irlenurut .Jenis Industri 1994 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor Menurut Jenis Industri 1994 Rata-rata Upah .Tert imbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah lrlandor di Sektor Industri Menurut Wilayah, 199+ Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per trtinggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri Menurut Wilayah dan
Jenis Industri. Maret 1994
19
19
20
2l
1''
111
Ha I aman
Tabel 5.b. Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri. Menurut Wi layah dan Jenis Industri, Juni L994 Tabe
I
Tabe
I
Tabe
I
Rata-rata Upah Tert imbang per fvtinggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri Menurut Wi layah dan Jenis Industri, Septembet L994 6. a. Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah lllandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tert imbang per )tinggu di Sektor Perhote lan .Venurut Wi layah, Mare t Lggl 6. b. Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah iltandor ddn Rata-rata Upah Tert imbang per llinggu di Sektor 5. c.
Perhotelan }lenurut
Tabe
I
6. c
Tabe
I
8.
1994
26
Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi Bawah i{andor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per illinggu di Sektor 1
7.
layah, Juni
VIi
)q
di
Perhotelan lfenurut
Tabel
.,7
994
lVi
layah,
September 27
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per
Minggu
(000 Rp) Karyawan Produks i/Pelaksana di Bawah l{andor/Supervisor di Sektor Perhotelan Menurut Wilayah 1994 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi/Pelaksana di Bawah lrtandor/Supervisor di Sektor Perhotelan
Menurut Wi layah , 1994 Tabe L 9.a. Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut
Jenis Industri, Maret
1994
Tabel 9.b. Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah lrlandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri, Juni lg94 Tabe I 9. c. Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri, September 1994
28
28
29
30
31
Ha I aman
l0.a.
Jumlah Perusahaanr Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Jumlah Karyawan Maret 1994 ...........,. 10.b. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per llinggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Jumlah
32
Produksi di Bawah ltandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) . Menurut Jenis Industri dan Jumlah Karyalan September 1994.. . Tabe I I I . a. Juml ah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produks i d i Bawah trlandor dan Rat a-rat a Upah Tert imbang per lltinggu (000 Rp )
34
Tabe I
Tabe I
Karyawan Juni 199+ Tabe I 10.c. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rrtta-rata Kar_vawan
I AOE I
Tabe I
Tabe I
Tabe I
Tabe I
i[enurut Jenis Industri dan Tahun ]tulai Procluks i Maret 199,+ 11.b. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produks i di Bawah Mandor clan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per lrtinggu (000 Rp) ivlenurut Jenis Industri dan Tahun lrtulai Produksi Juni 1994 1 1. c. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per lrtinggu (OOO Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Tahun trtulai Produksi September 199-l 12,a. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Status Modal Usaha Maret 1991 ... 12.b. JumIah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Status lrlodal Usaha Jun i 199,t 12.c. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Status ltodal Usaha September 199{ ...
35
36
JI
38
39
40
Tabe I
a.
Ha I aman
ah Perusahaan, Rat a-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan persentase Karyawan Wanita Maret Lgg4 Tabel 13.b. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor'dan Rata-rata Llpah Ter t imbang per lrt inggu (000 Rp ) lUenurut Jenis Industri dan persentase Karyawan Wanita Juni L9g4 Tabel 13.c. Jumlah perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah lrfandor dan Rata-rata Upah Terrimbang per Ntinggu (OOO Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan persentase Karyawan Wanita September 1994 1
3.
Juml
4l
+z
43
I.
PENDAHULUAN
Umirm
Kegiatan survei upah yang dimulei sejak tahun r979/1980 dalam pelaksanaannya telah mengalami beberapa ka I i perubahan . Pada per i ode awa! pe I aksan aannya, surve i ini mengumpulkan berbagai informasi tentang upah secara rinci baik perkembangan maupun struktur upah di lapangan usaha pertambangan non migas, industri pengolahan, perho t e I an dan angku t an Carat
.
Berdasarkan evaluasi pelaksanaan survei upah pada tahun-tahun sebe lumni'a dan has i t pi lot Studi Survei Upah di beberapa propinsi, mulai tahun tgg2 BpS melaksanakan survei upah dengan metode dan kuesioner yang disempurnakan sesuai dengan kebuLuhan Beberapa perbedaan survei upah 199? dibanding denga.n survei upah sebelumnya anr,ara lain sejak tahun lggz subsektor angkutan dara+, t idak dicakup lagi, iumlah perusahaan sampel diperkeci I dan kuesioner dised.erhanakan,
yaitu dengan tidak merinci tagi data upah menurut jenis pekerjaan. Hal ini di.lakukan untuk memudahkan pihak perusahaan dalam pengisian kuesioner, sehingga diharapkan pelaporan data ke Bps bisa sesuai jadwal dan pada akhirnya menghasilkan data yang tepat waktu dan akurat. Ituiai tahun 1994, pengolahan survei upah juga telah mengalami perubahan dengan menggunakan prosedur yang lebih s istematik dari pada sebe lumnya, sehingga mutu clata f inal diharapkan menjadi tebih baik. Se lain itu, sejak tahun i.ni pula konsistensi rata-rata upah antar triwulan mulai dipantau di lapangan untuk setiap perusahaan, sehingga
data mentah dari lapangan diharapkan menjadi lebih baik dan penghitungan rata-rata upah dengan menggunakan non response adjusment juga baru pertama kali ditakukan pada tahun ini.
-2
2. Tujuan dan Sasaran Tujuan survei ini adalah untuk mendapatkan data statistik upah di beberapa sektor yang akan digunakan untuk penyempurnaan kebijaks anaan pemerintah dalam pengaturan serta anal isa pengupahan. Sedangkan tujuan utama pelaksanaan survei upah adalah untuk dapat memantau dengan cepat perkembangan upah dari triwulan ke triwulan. Sasaran yang di cakup dalam surve i ini adalah petusahaan yang bergerak di lapangan usaha pertambangan non migas, industri pengolahan dan perhotelan di wi layah Republik Indonesia kecuali Bengkulu, Timor Timur dan Sulawesi Tengah. Banyaknya perusahaan yang terpi I ih dalam sebagai berikut:
sampe I
ada I ah
a. Perusahaan Pertambangan Non Migas Perusahaan yang dipi I ih sebanyak 35 perusahaan, mencakup perusahaan pertambangan emas, batu bara, nikel, t imah, aspal, bauksit, 'tembaga dan pasir besi.
b.
Perusahaan
Industri
Pengolahan
Jumlah perusahaan yang dipi I ih dalam sektor ini sebanyak 1009 perusahaan, dibagi dalam 2 (dua) telompok -vakni perusahaan industri besar 667 perusahaan dan perusahaan industr i sedang sebanyek 342 perusahaan. Perusahaan industri kecil (jumlah pekerja kurang dari 20 orang) tidak dicakup dalam survei ini.
c.
Perusahaan Perhote Ian,/Losmen
Perusahaan yang dicakup sebanyak 265 hotel/losmen yang
terdiri dari 133 hotel berbintang dan t3Z hotel bintang.
non
U
Metode Survei
3.
Metode sampling yang digunakan .untuk pemilihan perusahaan
industri pengolahan dan perhotelan adalah stratified sampl ing dengan sampl ing fract ion yang berbeda untuk setiap propinsi. Sedangkan untuk perusahaan pertambangan non migas pada pr'insipnya dilakukan pencacahan seluruhnya dengan kriteria tertentu, berdasarkan direktori perusahaan pertambangan non migas 1992. Alokasi perusahaan dalam pelaksanaan survei upah selengkapnya 'dapat di I ihat pada
tabel berikut ini. ALOKASI SAMPEL PERUSAHAAN SURVEI UPAH PER TRIWULAN MENURUT LAPANGAN USAHA 1994/1995 JINTLAH SAMPEL PROPIIiS
I
HOTE
I
I NDUSTR
KET: JI'ULAH JUMIAII
TK II
PERT.{V. EESAR
DI
ACEH
JUU!.{H
SEDA.YG
B
I TTAIiG
,:
46
SI]}'IATERA BARAT
I
RIAU
I
JA.VBI
tt
SIJI,T{TERA SEIATAJ{ LAMPUNG
l0 l0
{
I.l
DKI JAIqRTA
86
ta
lt4
tl
JA}VA 8A8AT
l5?
6?
214
l9
JAYA
ll7
s6
l?3
6
6
t3l
'l
DI
YOGYA[AR?.{
JATA TIMUR BALI NIJSA TENGGARA BAMT
6E
KALI}IA"\TAN SELATAN KALIUAN?AI{ TI$'R SULAgESI UTARA
)
J
l:
20
0
2
l3
0
6
.t
l4
.l
.t
I
l9 l4
38
3
l2
{
4
s
t02
233
t1
ll
tl
l0
'r1
26
a1
4E.
0
)
0
0
0 rl
l7
1
J
29
J .,
4
26
6
I
:0
J
t39
(
3
265
l
19t
21 ',1
l9
)
I
5
t
I
20
l4
,
0
1
I
7
s
I
1
29
3
t
.l
7
0
.t
2
6
6
l0
l6
4
9
I
0
l3 I
2
2
6
0
667
312
t
009
1 ,|
{ t33
132
(
1
1
SUt^f,ESI
32
75
)
.t
4
20 258
5
l0 ,,1
I IO
I
l7
I
I 94 5
6
s 25
2
Jl,ullrll
tu
4
;
lIAunu IRIA.\ JAYA
tu
.t
SUIAPESI SELATAil TENGGAiA
to
I
I{USA TENGGARA TII,IT'R
&ILTUATTAT 8A&17 KAL I I{A"{TAI{ TEI{GA'I
JUMIAH BANGAY
I
rt
SIJMATERA UTARA
TENGATI
BUILIN BINTANG
265
I I 35
25
3
l6
J
l6
3
40
5
6
I
t{
6
l5
I
E
3
I
t
I 309
154
Sedangkan periode hunjukan survei upah adalah bulan Maret (triwulan I), Juni (tiiwulan II), September (triwulan III) dan Desember (triwulan IV). 4.
Konsep dan
Definisi
a. Pekerja yang dicakup dalam publikasi ini adalah Produks ilPe laksana di 'Pekerja Bawah Tingkat Mandor/Pengawas'
.
Pekerja produks i pada lapangan usaha "pertambangan" adalah karyawan /peker ja yang bekerja secara langsung dalam proses produksi termasuk karyawan,/pekerja produksi yang bekerja dalam kegiatan eksplorasi dan eksploitasi/pengolahan barang tambang dan gal. ian.
Termasuk pekerja
"industri"
ada I ah
produks o
pada lapangan
i
rang-orang
bekerja
mengolah,/memproses, membuat/merakit, mensortir/ memisahkan, memi I ih, merapikan, membungkus, memberi label, mengepak, mengangkut/menyimpan ke tempat penyimpanan barang, baik mengumpu I kan
,
mem-be rs i hkan
yanS
usaha
,
dikerjakan secara manual tanpa alat atau dengan bantuan alat./mesin atau sebagai pengamat bekerjanya mesin dan pekerja lain yang bersangkutan dengan itu. Pekerja pe laksana pada lapangan usaha "perhote lan" adalah karyawan,/pekerja yang langsung berhubungan dengan atau bekerja untuk keperluan dan kenyamanan para tamu sepert i:
concierge, room boy, resepsionis, kasir, bartender, juru masak, pekerja lain seperti laundry, petugas kolam renang, pemel iharar/perawat kebunr op€rator musik, dan penjaga keamanan
Gaji/Upah, adalah suatu penerimaan sebagai imbalan dari pengusaha kepada karyawan,/pekerja untuk pekerjaan atau jasa yang telah atau akan dilakukan, dinyatakan atau
)
dinilai dalam bentuk uang yang ditetapkan menurut suatu persetujuan, atau peraturan perundang-undangan dan dibayarkan atas dasar suatu perjanj ian kerja antara pengusaha dengan karyawan /peker ja termasuk tunjangan, baik untuk karyawan/pekerja sendiri maupun keluarganya. Komponen upah/gaj
i
yang di tanyakan dalam
kues
ioner
ada I ah:
Upah/eaji dasar yaitu upah pokok sebelum ditambah dengan berbagai tunjangan dan perangsang lainnya,
Upah/gaji atau tunjangan lain, yaitu penerimaan karyawan yang sifatnya.rutin dan biasanya diterirna lebih s ingkat atau bersamaan dengan pembayaran upah/gaj i sepert i , tunjangan .j.abatan, tunjangan kemahalan, uang transport, uang makan, uang hadir, dan sebagainya yang d iber i kan secara te t ap dan teratur dalam bentuk uang. Upah Lembur, adalah tambahan upah yang dibayarkan perusahaan terhadap pekerja, karena pekerja melakukan perpanjangan jam kerja dari jam kerja normal yang ditentukan.
c. Pengeluaran
perusahaan
lainnya
yai tu
se I uruh
tidak rutin untuk kesejahteraan karyawan, baik secara langsung maupun tidak langsung seperti: bonus /gratifikasi, tunjangan hari raya (fHR;, jaminan sosial dan tunjangan kesejahteraan lainnya. Pengeluaran perusahaan lainnya dan upah dalam bentuk natura t idak termasuk dalam publ ikasi ini. pengeluaran yang biasanya dibayarkan secara
Berbeda dengan sebelumnya, konsep rata-rata upah yang digunakan dalam publikasi ini adalah rata-rata upah per
miriggu termasuk lembur. Jadi t idak dibedakan lagi rata-rata upah dengan lembur dan tanpa lembur. Hal ini dilakukan dengan alasan tidak semua perusahaan dapat
.t
membedakan
upah lembur, dan kalaupun dapat dibedakan
ternyata perbedaan antara rata-rata upah dengan dan tanpa lembur tidaklah berart i .
lembur
II,
ULASAN SINGKAT HASIL SURVEI
Berbeda dengan publ ikasi sebelumnya, publ ikasi ini menyajikan data rata-rata upah tertimbang per minggu dan telah dilakukan non response adjustment yang mulai dilakukan sejak triwulan III tahun 1994. Setihp perusahaan sampel sektor industri dan hote I mempunyai penimbang yang berbeda berdasarkan jumlah pekerja di perusahaan tersebut, sedangkan untuk sektor pertambangan belum dapat dihitung penimbangny&t sehir:gga penghi tungan rata-rata upahnya mas ih sama sepert i t r iwu I an sebe I umnya. Meskipun demikian, karena untuk mendapatkan data median dari rata-rata upah tert imbang memerlukan waktu pengolahan yang lebih panj&oBr dalam publ ikasi ini belum dapat dikeluarkan ni lai median sepert i publikasi sebelumnya. 1. Rata-rata Upah Sektor Wi
layah
Industri
Menurut
Sub Sektor
dan
Pada grafik 1 ditampi lkan data rata-rata upah per rninggu karyawan produksi di bawah mandor menurut sub sektor industri. Dari graf ik tersebut dapat dilihat.bahwa pekerja pada perusahaan industri logam dasar mempunyai rata-rata upah tert inggi dibandingkan perusahaan industri lainnya, Sedangkan rata-rata upah tirendah tercatat pada perusahaan industri makanan dan tekstil yang umumnya padat karya.
la di I ihat perkembangannyar f&ta-rata upah sektor industri terus mengalami kenaikan. Rata-rata upah per Bi
minggu pada bulan Maret sebesar Rp 31.900 menjadi Rp 33.400
pada bulan Juni dan Rp 34.300 pada bulan September. Kenaikan ini sejalan dengan kenaikan rata-rata upah di
sub sektor industri, kecual i industri logam dasar terjadi sedikit penurunan pada bulan September, yaitu dari
semua
Rp 59.900 pada bulan Maret menjadi Rp 69.600 pada bulan Juni kemudian turun menjadi Rp 67.000 pada bulan September. Meskipun demikian, penurunan ini tidaklah berarti karena masih di bawah 4 persen.
Grafik I
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor Menurut Jen'is Industri ' l4atet, Juni dan September 1994 (oaIan ribuan rupiah)
Keromik
ffi ttoret $l Wl sePterrt,ur
uuni
Menurut wi layahnya, Kal imantan nempunyai rata-rata upah tertinggi Oibandingkan wilayah lainnya di Indonesia, sedangkan rata-rata upah terendah ada di wi I ayah Jawa Tengah/Yogyakarta. Tingginya rata-rata upah di Kalimantan sebagian besar disebabkan sampel perusahaan lebih banyak di Kal imantan Timur yang mempunyai Upah Minimun Regional (UttR) tertinggi dibandingkan UMR di wilayah Kalimantan lainnya, selain juga karena sampdl di wilayah ini adalah industri berat seperti kayu, kimia dan logam yang memang dominan di wi layah tersebut. Sedangkan rendahnya rata-rata upah di wi layah Jawa Tengah,/Yogyakarta sebagian besar disebabkan
")
UltlR
di Yogyakarta merupakan salah satu yang terendah di
Indonesia. Sampai dengan keadaan bulan September, tata-rata upah di semua wi layah sampel mengalami kenaikan. Kenaikan tertinggi sebesar 19,7 persen terjadi di Propinsi Sumatera
Utara, di ikut i Propinsi Jawa Timur Ll,2 persen dan Jawa Tengah/Yogyakarta 9,9 persen. Hal ini disebabkan adanya kenaikan UMR di beberapa propinsi di Indonesia yang terjadi dua kal i, yaitu pada bulan Apri I dan Agustus L991 dan kenaikan UIIR di ketiga wilayah itu juga cukup tinggi. Dari grafik 2 terlihat ra ta-rata upah pekerja sektor industri di wilayah Botabek (Bogor, Tangerang, Bekasi) Iebih t inggi dengan persentase kenaikan yang lebih cepat dibandingkan wilayah lainnya di Jawa Barat. Hal yang sama juga terjadi di wi layah Sugresid (Surabaya, Gresik, Sidoarjo) di Jawa Timur. Keadaan ini disebabkan kedua wilayah tersebut mempunyai UMR tertinggi dibanding wilayah Iain di masing-masing propinsinyal selain juga karena keduanya merupakan sentra industri di propinsi masingmas
i ng.
LO
Grafik 2 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri Wilayah Jawa Barat dan Jawa Timur Maret, Juni dan September L994 (Dalan ribuan rupiah) 45 40
J5
20 15
Jowo Eorot
Sugresid
Seloin Jowo Tirrur
Botobek
E8&
no'u
m
tNI
Seloin 9rgresid
Jmi
Septerrber
2. Rata-rata
Upah Sektor Industri Menurut Junlah Karyawan dan Persentase Karyawan Wani ta
1a di I ihat menurut jumlah karyawan di suatu perusahaan, ada keceirderungan semakin besar jumlah karyawannya semakin besar pula rata-rata upah pekerjanya. Hal ini dapat terlihat dari grafik 3. Meskipun demikian, perusahaan dengan jumlah karyawan kurang dari 50 orang (yang mempunyai rata-rata upah terendah) ternyata nempunyai Bi
11
A,.L
persentqse kenaikan tert inggi,
yai
tu
L0
,7 persen samPai
dengan September 1994,
Grafik
3
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri ' Menurut Jumlah KarYawan Maret, Juni dan SePtenber 1994 (DaIan ribuan ruPiah)
50-99 Jumloh Korlrcwon
B88l
Horet $l
m
septerrter
Keadaan yang berlawanan
rata-rata upah Semakin besar
.lwri
terjadi bila kita
bandingkan menurut persentase karyawan wani tanya. persentase karyawan wanita di suatu
perusahaan, semakin kecil rata-rata upah pekerjanya. Hal ini nemperkuat dugaan bahwa upah karyawan wanita lebih rendah dibandingkan upah karyawan Laki-laki (Iihat grafik 4).
'
.L?.
Grafik
4
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri Menurut Persentase Karyawan Wanita Tahun L994 (Dalan ribuan rupiah)
50
B I n"r"t
50-99
100-499
NSI u,-i V7Z septerto*
3. Rata-rata
Upah Sektor Industri Menurut Tahun Mutai produksi dan Status Modal Usaha
Tahun mulai produksi suatu perusahaan ternyata tidak menunjukkan adanya korelasi yang kuat dengan rata-rata upah yang dibayarkan perusahaan kepada karyawannya. Dapat dikatakan demikian, karena rata-rata upah pekerja untuk perusahaan yang sudah mulai berproduksi sebelum 1980 maupun sesudahnya tidak menunjukkan adanya perbedaan yang berarti.
L3
Grafik
5
Rata-rata Upah Tert imbang per Minggu Karyawan Produks
Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri Menurut Status Modal Usaha Tahun 1994 (Dalan ribuan rupiah)
i di
Loinnyo
PT1A
Stohrs Flrdol Usoho
Bl iloret $l m September
;uni
Tidak demikian halnya bila kita bandingkan rata-rata upah menurut status modal usaha perusahaan. perusahaan dengan status modal usaha milik negara (BUMN, persero) dan Penanaman Modal Asing (pUn) mempunyai rata-rata upah pekerja yang lebih tinggi dibandingkan status modal usaha Penanaman Modal Dalam Negeri (pfUOU) dan lainnya. Persentase kenaikan rata-rata upah perusahaan dengan kedua status modal usaha tersebut juga jauh lebih tinggi, yaitu 2Qr4 persen untuk P,uA dan 17,0 persen untuk status modal usaha mi I ik negara, sedangkan untuk perusahaan dengan
'lA
status modal usaha PMDN hanya 5, 1 persen dan 3,3 persen untuk status modal usaha lainnya.
4. Rata-rata
Upah Perusahaan Perhotelan dan Pertambangan
Secara umum perusahaan perhotelan mempunyai rata-rata upah per minggu lebih tinggi dibandingkan rata-rata upah di sektor industri, yaitu Rp 15 800 pada bulan Maret menjadi Rp 46 000 pada bulan Juni dan Rp 46 600 untuk bulan September. Eila dibandingkan menurut kelas hotelnya, ratarata upah pekerja hotel berbintang jauh lebih t inggi
(hampir dua kali lipat) dibandingkan'pekerja hotel tidak berbintang.
Grafik
6
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi,/ Pelaksana di Bawah Mandor,/Supervisor di Sektor Perhotelan Menurut Wilayah Tahun t994 (Dalan ribuan tupiah)
70
9rnotro
Utoro
S.rnotro
'FEI ru'"t Nl m Septernber
..rni
:t,
Ia di I ihat rnenurut rvi layahn-va, DKI Jakarta dan Bal i mempun)'ai rata-rata upah pekerja perhotelan tert inggi, yaitu lebih dari Rp 60 000 per minggu. Hal ini sebagian besar disebab'kan karena kelas hotel )'ang masuk di kedua propins i tersebut lebih banyak hote I berbintangn.va (sesuai alokasi sampel ), selain karena keduan]'a merupakan pusat parirvisata di Indonesia. Dibandingkan se!:tor industri
Graf
ik
7
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produks i/Pelaksana di Bawah Mandor/Supervisor Menurut Sektor Tahun 1994 (Dalan ribuan rupiah)
EBI
N
t
ndustri Hotel
TABEL
TABEL
.
L!
Tabel 1 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi/Pelaksana di Bawah Mandor/Supervisor Menurut Sektor (000 Rp) Tahun L994
Industri
Tr iwu I an
Hotel
Triivulan I/199+
11
A
45,3
Trirvulan IIl1994
JJ r +
46,0
34,3
46 ,6
Tr iwu
lan Lll / 1991
Tabe
I
2
Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor Menurut Jenis Industri ' t994 (nalan Ribuan Rupiah)
Industri
31 i,'lakanan 32 Tekstil 33 Kayu
t
28.3 23.5
Jun
i
September 1r
6,
?9. s
29 .9
33. s 37.1 3+.2 32. t
33.5 40. I
J+.
69.6
Logam
59.9 38.9
{1.8
41.0 37 .7 35.1 5?.0 42. 3
Lainnya
27 .5
29.8
1l
'l
Total
31 .9
33 .4
34.
3
3,1 Kertas
35 36 37 38 39
Mare
Kimia Keramik Logam Dasar
1( 11
6 n
+
:^ Tabel 3 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor Menurut Jenis Industri, 1994 (Dalan Ribuan Rupiah)
Industri 3ll 31I 3 l -l
iil 322 331
i32 i+l
Bahan llakanan llakanan JaC i Tembakau/Rol:ok
l{akanan Lainnl,'a Bahan Perkaian Pakaian Jadi Tekst i I Lainn-va Kayu Olahan
Furniture Percetakan KerIas Lainnya Karet
i55 355 Plastik
Mare
11 .:a
Jun
Ja t J
.< 16 1Q
t
o
3S,,1
+
14
1
a
r(
a
I
ln
^,
29 ,4 10 (
,,Q
1
-o, t(
n
?n
10
-l
'l
a
31 ,4
35,0
J
30,9 34,7
?,'
1 10
?1 I
46,8 32,0
s? 'Jr!
J:tL
29 ,1
?n
Lainn.u*a
40 ,8
43
363 Semen/Kapur 3 6-t Tanah L i at Non Logam ltineral Lainnya 3i / l8 Logam 39 Industri Lainnya
35,6
35
Kimia
Total
September
r J
n ''
i
1
'
3
29 ,3 A
37 ,3
50,3 36,8 30,8 4t5
31 ,2
,2 75 ,6 34,7
40,9
44 ,3
44,5
1'f
29,
31,9
33,4
11
A
g
JO,
/
1A
n
38,
S
JlrJ
34,3
.,-'
Tabe I 4 Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor di Sektor Industri Menurut Wilayah' 1994
(Dalan Ribuan Rupiah) Mare t
Wi I ayah
Sumatra Utara Sumat ra I ainnya DKI Jakarta Jawa Barat Botabek
lain
labek Jateng & Yogyakarta Jawa Timur Sugresid Se lain Sugres id Se
Bo
Bali Kal imantan Sulawesi
Propins i lainnya Indonesia
,o
n
35.3 39. 1 35.9
Jun
i
September
31.3 35. 1 40.6
31 .7
J | .+
37.8
40,5 36,? 25. 1
12 .3 1K
30.9 32 .4 29 .2 27 .7 13 .7
Jd. aA J+.
>
,1 11
1
a
')o
?
rQ
a
11
7
a/
37 .5 nr 1 .tr.l
1
r(
s
26 .6
27 .3
28.3 12.9 27 .3 48.3
23. 1 13.8 28.3 47 .8
37.5
.9
33.4
34.3
31
,,9
1
?2 fabol 5.a
tertitant tlor llintto rrryaranr psodutri di borah xlnabr di settor lndrrtri lrcnnrut tilarcr &n Jcnir rnduatrl , lrrret 1994 (&.la.r tibtnt lWith)
Sata-rata upeh
filayab
llqt-n.n Tetrtil
Suoarra Utara
2E,2
Sutaatfa lainnya
39, 0
DKI Jakarta
5:,
Jana Earat
3l ,4
lafrr
Sorabel
27
Selain Botabek
32..1
29,0 25.7 22,8 3r.7 31.3 30.2 31.3 29.9 3t.3 2S.7 32.5 3l.l
Jatcnt l, Yogyakarta
lt,{
tt
Jawa Tiour
ao t
!3.9
Sugres i d
36,5
25
Selain Sugrcsid
27 ,O
.2 22,t'
:{.
5
30.
30.
l
Bal
i
lial ioantan Sulases
i
1
,6
31.5
Propinei lainnya
Indonceia
28.
t
f.ttsa/ liria
Ieralit./
Iainnya
Lotar
tat
3.1. 3
.lt,r
53.6
39. I
19.5
11.0
11
.9
50..1
1S
,7
33.3
50.3
2r.
25.0
Total
lnduatri
9 _
6
15.8
26
4?.0
55.5
74.5
23.0 2''t .9 30. E 29, l 38.5 27.1 l{.9 12,9 17. 0 -
-
t9,5
13.6
10. 2
-
a1
-
43.3
-
48.3
2E.5
32,6
21.5
31.9
<
r(
1
25.6 :.1
.6
3
32.5
21
36.
6
27,0
,3
3?.3
21,1
21
2s.
34.t
,8
.1
3E,7
29,0 35.3
t
39 , 35
.9
38. 9
34,? 23,2 1?.
S
23.E 26. 6
t8.3 12,9 0
4Z
?abcl 5.b psr Tertibeag lltqgu flrtstan Prodnlsi di bsrah ll.ndor tata-reta Ugeb tilay.h dan Jcoir Indu.tri, Jwri 1994 di Scttor Industri llcnutut (Do.tal libnttr Btptzh)
tilayalr
llafanan Telctil
Suoatra Utara
t9.6
SuBatra lainnya
31
30.
5
fays
:3,
!'etlacl f,ilia
f,crarll'./ Ipgar
$
3?.0
35
.4 't
.'l
22,8
3t.6
4?.0
'DKI Jalstta
53.2
3?.6
30,0
43.5
4E.6
Jasa Earat
32, I
33.6
25,7
38.
7
54. I
27 ,E
JI.J
t3.1
43,
7
il.s
sclain Botabck Jareng I Yotyalarta
33. I
3{.0
:t.
3r.5
56.6
,2
14..1
26.9
21
,0
:6.5
Jara Tiaur
29,{
2+.
l'.
33
.9
31.3
Sugres i d
37 .5
r5.0
Sclain Sugreeid
11
1
13.3
17.
E
t9 .0
30.
7
Botabel
Eal
i
Kal ioantan Sulawcs
i
21
5
3:. I
E
:3. I
7
3l .0
23.3
al
t
1'1
16..t
!5.9
12,9
53.
rn
13.6
I
39,
:
74.
L
Induatri
2t,6 !'i .1 35,5 33. I 46.3 ls. I l8.l l5.l :t.0 _
40.3
r;.3
Propinsi lainnya
Indoaeaia
9
Iairurya Total
29.1
29.
E
33
.5
36.5
4l .4
29.
E
31.3 35.1 40.6 37
,1
40.5 36,7
ls. I 19,3
31,: 2?.3
l3.l +3.E
-
1s.3
-
J7.S
33.4
Tabcl 5,c Rata-rata Ogah ?crtibant ger Yint9u f8.ta*an Produtci di barah Xandor di Scktor Induetri laenurut filelah dan Jenig Industri, ScAteeber 1994 (Dalu &.ibuan lu.pish)
tilayab
Iafanan Tekstil
fanr
Eettae/ Ecralit./ f,ioia Logal
Lainntr
Total Indretr i
Su&arra Ulara
36.1
1< t
Suoalra lainnya
:3.5
3r.
DKI Jakarra
i{,
33.0
J3,6
{9. I
29
Java Earat
31.5
1i
t
{3,6
55,9
3S.:
3?.3
29.5
33.6
s9.3
51.3
33.
11.
,9
79,2
60.
56.3
36. I
8o
rabck
Sclain
Borabek
32
5
Jateng & Yotyalasga
.l{.
Jan'a Tiaur
26
,0
ugles i d
1'
r
S
5
Selain Sugresid 8al i
16. I
Xal ioanran
?
3;.
S
,7
S
3
,9
:5.5
1
3l,s
22,0
30.9
19,6
.r0.9
31.5
lE. I
3:.
,ln
n
30.0
JJ.
J
21 ,6
ao t
26
.1
:1 .0
25.
S
1l .5
58.2
E0.0
{3.
13.
40.3
:s. I
..9.
36,
3?.
29.9
2
3*.
11
Propinsi Iainnya
31.6
(
t'l
:s.1
,3
27
20
Indonccia
J+. J
s5.5
s
16.9
i
Su lacres
35.6
E
,4
6
7
37.5
5
34,4
+
3E.4
42.3
31.3
34.3
2t;t
rumtah perusahaan, *.T;:;lr,u"lou,rn", di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rala Upah Tertimbang per Minggu di Sektor Perhotelan Menurut Vilayah, Maret L994 (DaIan Ribuan Rupiah) Hote Wi I ayah
I Berbintang
Hotel Tak Berbintang
Perusahaan Karyawan Perusahaan
Karyawan
ra Utara
3'i
.,
a 12t
533
3 59?
Sumatra lainnya DKI Jakar ta Jawa Barat Jateng & Yogyakarta Jawa Timur
7?
3 597
417
49
0
033
2t4
65
6 670
681
2 995 6 006 8 757
31
2
964
4
9t7
42
I
507
a
lta
Bali
61
2
921
Kal imantan
Li
398
279
Sumat
i
46
Propinsi lainnya
58
1 2 1
478
49
Sulawes
Indones i a
389
440
J
IIJ
968
252 623
7 626 2 110 s 895
9_58
2t9
7t3
I
5
048
424
45
734
Tabel 5.b
Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu
di Sektor Perhotelan Menurut Wilayah, Juni 1994 (Dalan Ribuan Rupiah)
Wi I ayah
Hotel Berbintang Perusahaan
Sumatra Utara Sumatra lainnya
37
DKI Jakarta
49
Jawa Barat Jateng & Yogyakarta Jawa Timur Bal i Kal imantan
65
i Propins i lainnya Su I awes
Indones ia
1"
Hotel Tak Berbintang Karyawan Perusahaan Karyawan
2 gtr 3 618 10
(11 A
An
214 684
174
42
6 665 2 639 4 583
410
6l
12 972
1 048
31
961
? {ot
2 951 6 006
I
716
4 880 ? 999 7 599
L7
|
496
?s1
1
1',,
46
3
019
623
6
035
|
976
219
478
49
983
5
424
1
1<)
45
651
/-I .
Tabel 6.c'
Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rala Upah Tertimbang per Minggu di Sektor Perhotelan Menurut Wilayah, September I994 (Dalan Ribuan Rupiah)
Wi
layah
Sumatra Utara Sumatra lainnya DKI Jakarta J awa Bara t Ja t eng & Yogyakar t, a Jawa Timur
Bali Kalimantan
Ilotel Berbintang Perusahaan
Karyawan Perusahaan Karyawan r q11
533
? 7?{
t't t1 I
318
2t1
3 611 2 907 6 006
684
I
4?
6 5S1 ? 729 1 659
964 140
6t
L2 88?
I 018
+ 811 3 052 7 667
1?
72 49 55 31
l!
Sulawes
i
46
Propins
i lainnya
(Q
Indones ia
Hotel Tak Berbintang
478
10
t
4
162
25?
3 008 1 97S
6?3 t10
50
273
5424
455
2 165 6 202 792
45
668
Tabel 7. Rata-rata Upah Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Karyawan Produks i/Pelaksana di Bawah Mandor/Supervisor di Sektor Perhotelan Menurut Wilayah 1994
Hotel Tidak
Hotel Berbintang Wi I ayah
Ilare
t
Jun
i
Berb in t ang
)laret
Sep t em-
ber
40,9 ++.0 +3. +s.6 i0.3 s:.2
Jala Barat
i9.l ii,: 50.3 ;9.1 5".: 33.5 i5.6
:0.5 13.3 ji.1 i6.9 55.0 51.9 :+.6 7.,2 +5.3 13.6 t6.0 +1.3 3+.5 +2.2
1a ( 2l ,1
58,7
58,0
Jrro
rO.*
Jat eng & Yogl'akar Jarva Timur Bal i Kal irnanian Suiarvesi
Propinsi lainn]'a lnoonesla
ra
1'l
?8.
1
.J
l.O
+ 1
26 ,2
35,9 3?,0
10 0 IO.I
60,3
TabeI
o
1r
1
1t
iQ it 10 ir.+ 2S,
?
14
C
JD.
+
tn
I
<
')
ra
a
lg) 11
a-rat
- r-,.:t
Vl 1 : d ! i.-
*:
:'"iri.
',
3-
:; i. i a-;ah , 1.99-l i hu;ln Rup i ah )
R
lllare i
:e i
rn
66.S
66
-tJ._
-)+
lr.:j I
t<
Suialesi
Indones
n
tt JI.I J\J.
ia
i
Sept embe 'l
Jl.-r
Jawa Timur Bal i SaL imancan
Jun
t
t
45,8
1
t1 iii
1
1F. a
;; a?
,l.t r -r-t r I
61
62, I
11 tL JI
1
3
a
Me!:'rr
t
)i
Upah Tert imbang pe'' .'i-r:*ieu -{a.r!'awan Produks i / Pe laksana di Bawah l(anct',i.,:-i-:',-isor di Sektor Perhi.rtelan Rat
:rr-
ber
Sumatra Utara Sumat ra I ainnya
DKI Jakarta
Conf
Trrn.i
tn
4
31.1
29
1(
46,0
46,6
1
r
Tabe
I
9. a
Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp)
Jenis Industri 'Itenurut Maret t994
Industri
Jum I ah Pe
rusahaan
Jum I ah Karyawan
Industri Sedang 3I Ilakanan i: Teksril iJ Kayu i+ Xertas i5 Kimia 36 Keramik 3i Logam Dasar 38 Logam 39 Lainnya
s33 366 865 068
Total
811
32r
940
299 875 647 358 316 828 65 738 ?59 345
b+j n.''1
10
726 2'7 3
Industri Besar 31 lvlakanan 32 Tekst i t 33 Kayu 3+ Kertas 35 Kimia 35 Keramik 37 Logam Dasar 38 Logam 39 Lainnya
815 303 796
Total
t82
JJ I
165 35
609 l3'7
9? 808 85 742
)o ) ? 5
I
31
909 840
31 46t 618
27 371 5 018 002
56 443 26 r19
230 476 39 9?6
1 939
108
Rat a-rat a Upah
23.3
)\
1
28. I 1'
1
26.9 24.8 ta ( 24 .6
25.9
?n
s
28. 9
34.0
31 .7 1( 36 ,9 1
60.7 39.6
28 .0
33
;0
7/\ '')t
')
Tabel 9.b. Junlah Perusahaan, Kgryawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-tata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri
Juni
Industri
Industri Sedang 31 llakanan 32 Tekst i I 33 Kayu 3't Kertas i,r Klmra 36 Keramik 37 Logam Dasar 38 Logam 39 Lainnya Total
,|
Juml ah
Perusahaan
Jf,
36 3i 33 39
KlM1A
Kerami k Logam Dasar Logam
Lainnya
Total
Juml ah Karyawan
95 643 88 3?? 29 681
698 023 841 366 819 057
I
25 37
10
848 248 978 618
Rata-rata ' Upah
)< 1 ?6.0 to 1{ 1<
?
1 1
26.s
846
28. s 'lt a 23.9
18 005
26.9
25
?0+ ,, 17
5
79r
3
3S4
317 654 319
Industr i Besar
31 l{akanan 32 Tekst i I 33 Kayu 34 Kertas
1994
S21
066 410 7 66 937 758
31.0 30.3 33.9 40 .7
334 817 303 813 176 85 631
??{ 54?
137
4t
440
70.5 42.8 30.6
202
I 980 953
34.4
65
262
60 151 25 511
JO. 71
O 1
'!
:'
Tabel 9. c
Jumlah Perusahaan, Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp)
Menurut Jenis Industri September 1994
Industri
Industri Sedang 31 l,lakanan 32 Teksril 33 Kayu 34 Ker t as 35 Kimia 36 Keramik 37 Logam Dasar 38 Logam 39 Lainnya Total
Industri Besar 31 l\takanan 32 Tekst i I 33 Kayu 34 Ker tas 35 Kirnia 36 Kerarni k 37 Logam Dasar 38 Logam 39 Lainnya Total
Juml ah
Juml ah
Perusahaan
Karyawan
2 2
7i3 0?3 836 ,ttt
867 057
101 941
87 67 | 28 521 15 277 30 587 37 283
Rat
a-rat Upah
26.9 ?6 .4
30.5 33.0 27 .4
'r1 )
970
28.5 33,2 24 .4
027
336 054
28.0
80.1
319 093 664 702
10
739 213
29
4
618 181
595
233 445
137
40
33. 1 30. 3 34.7 43.0 38.9 40.6 68 .0 43 .4
396
1','
1
965
1 983
081
35.4
JJ+
8i4 225 791
t76 85
314 131 59 223 267 718
58 602 25 77 |
a
a::
Tabel 10.a. Junlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah l{andor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertinbang per Minggrr (000 Rp) ' Itlenurut Jenis Industri'dan Junlatr l(aryawan Maret 1994 Junlah Karyawan
Industri <50
100-499
500+
Total
Makanan
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata.Upah Tekst i I Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1
789
853
734
?3
61
150
?10 906
2t.6
24.7
26.8
32.7
1341
686
902
JI
61
196
429 1096
21.7
25.7
26.2
535 ?2
298
591
5g
24.9
30.2
t79 26.4
812
420
919
I(ayu Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karlrawan Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logan Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
22
))
26.5
29.4
1
145
33.
1
3
110 28 .8
3
225
36.
5
358 219
,ta
,oo
ot<
532
|
<
649 208 33
.6
180 1064
2 33t
31.4
31.8
157
?
68s
641
2t9
f/ 29.5
t74 36.9
9?0
t42
43. I
38.7
255
18
410
36
100 145
31
2L
687
I
20.6
.5
28.3
5 851
3 960
3 883
60
168
300 990
13 994
24
29.6
34. 5
31.9
119 24
26.1
661
Lainnya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
Total Industri Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
Kar3rawan
Upah
"5
24.3
27
.t
27
1
1r2
)1 \
t62
'
Tabel 10.b. Junlatr Perusahaan, Rata-rata tbryawan Produksi di Bawah llandor dan Rata-rata (hah Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Junlah Karyawan
Juni
1994
Junlatr Karyawan
Industri <50
50-99
100-499
500+
Total
3
l'{akanan
1
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Teksti I Rata-rata Rata-rata
Kar.vawan Upah
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia
Perusahaan
Lainrrya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
Total Industri Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
19t 1 060
4
26.1
27.0
33.4
298
725
909
31
67
,o1
.3
I
425
583 115
29.1
3
357
109
22t
26.2
31 .9
29.8
1
234
1
650
535
306
23
57
Li9
919
')
26.6
J I .+
9?7 ?4
259 46
964
181
140
1069
zt.o
28.5
33.6
088
683
701
191
23
57
19.1
1005
145
26.4
30.7
1
49.2
41.4
37
410
26.6
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
165
25
Kayu Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keraoik dan Logan
691
6L
r1
t1
1
Perusahaan
908
?90
11
36.
40.
1
111
11
<
2 33t 156
36.
2
5
663
255
18
2L
34
100 148
1?Q
115
A
28.0
32.0
29.8
899
3 943
60
t72
24.0
5 893 1\
25.8
)1
?
27.8
29.
B
t
259 1033
36.8
13 994 164 33
.4
'/'l
Tabel 10.c. Junlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Y,aryaw,an Froduksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) l,lernrrut Jenis Industri dan Junlatr Karyawan September 1994
Junlah Karyawan
Industri <50
100-499
Total
Makanan
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1
240
1 (Qt
938
118 31 .6
7S5 22
992
21.I
28.2
14 1
36.0
201
82?
918
416
30
63
2tL
564
63
167
Teksti I Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1
,s
1
3
131
357 224
a
?{s
26?
593
)7q
58
188
893
650 208
1
28.9
37 .9
34.4
837
474
844
22
58
151
29.4
37.8
65?
645
II.J
32.
29.9
3
Ibfnr Perusahaan
571 23 28 .6
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logan Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
toI
I
151 2+
27.3
I^ainrrya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata .Upah
'lr
61 31
.5
Perusahaan
175 141
40.8
2tl
t79 38 .4
2
330 160
38.4
2
662
958
115
48.6
42.3 410
255
18
11 I'
100
37
33
710
111
24.8
2t.4
141
.4
31.3
29.9
Total Industri Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1
1
5
807
3
220
24
61
26.9
28.7
3
656
t79 30.9
33
I
308 1015
37.6
13
991 166
34.3
Tabel 71.a. Jr:nlatr Perusahaan, Rata-rata lbryawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upatr Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menuntt Jenis Industri dan Tatlm lltulai Produksi Maret 1994 Tahun
Industri Sebelun
1980
Makanan
1
Perusahaan
Raia-rata KarYawan Rata-rata Upah Teksti I Perusahaan Rata-rata Karyawan
Rata-rata
Upah
357 126
lfulai
1980-1987
|
Total 1988+
?24
501 119
81
28.?
t
Produksi
?1 .L
JI.Ii
I
185
7tL
202 30.4
258
)1 \
315
751
584
225
229
17t
28.6
36.0
46r )11 11 <
I(ant Penrsahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata Kertas dan Kimia
Karyawan Upah
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logan Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1
056 11A
35
1
.4
10.1
L
43.3
B
346
110
,ae 3
357
2t9 28.
1
5
650 208
33.6
2
928 90
1?C
157
.0
34 .9
34.8
33
117
29.
1
137
423
151
103
34.
5
2
330
664
t42
I
38.7
74
409 112
38.
Lainnya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
Total Industri Perusahaan
REta-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
t62
t73
4T
135
215
20.9
29.4
27.6
s qs{
5
398
t72
t46
32.1
32.9
2
t?<
639
13 992
r69 29.7
31.-9
l6?
7t ,,)t J
Tabel 11.b. Junlatr Perusatraan, Rata-rata lbryawan Produksi di Bawah !,landor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) llenurut Jenis Industri dan Tatrwr l'tulai Produksi
Juni
Tahun
Industri Sebelun 1980 Makanan
1
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyalvan Rata-rata Upah
Tekstil Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1994
}tulai Produksi 1980-1987
1988+
857
1 11t
394
131
77
154
,ao L
t6tal
497
11
1
1
ro1
722 262
139
Perusahaan
I
358
79t
582
245
169
30.3
JO. J
29.9
33.
025 235
876 87
430 106
2 33t
38.2
30.5
1
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
3
276 ?01
Perusahaan
Perusahaan
115
)qi
30.5
27.8
IGyu
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan'Logan
583
)1) 31 .8
?08
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia
3
192 1+1
I
048
37
.6
424
22t 29.8
r
619 zLT 5
156
36.
2
5
664
1
1S',)
t"a +?.6
158
177
74
56
t29 29.8
2t2
116
30.5
29.8
47.
155
145
41 .tl..t
A
Lainnya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
Total Industri Perusahaan Rata-rata Karyawan
Rata-rata
Upah
ta.)
6 005
11')
33.8
5
363 149
33
.4
2
6?6 177
1??
409
13 994 164
33.+
.Tabel 11.c, Jrrnlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah l,landor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Tahun l,lulai Produksi Septenber 1994 Tahun
Industri Sebelun !,lakanan
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
1980
1
1
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
Perusahaan Rata-rata Karyawan
Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logan Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
498 ?16
?i
-I(ayu Perusahaan Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia
1980-1987
I Q
Tekst i I Perusahaan
l,tulai Produksi
.i
183 79
536
32.9
31.1
L LI?
718 262
?LO
11
28+ ?01
1?5
1
I
30.4
794
571 166
?41
1A)
877
?27
93
120 148
r1i
<
101
39.2
Total 1988+
31
.9
353
It7
3
531 118
?1
3
A
358 221
29.9
I
649 208
34. +
2
331 150
40.. g
3S.4
034
509
2 66)
t57 36.7
Llz
145
42.3
42.3 409
34.4
1
Lainnya t6?
173
t.t
40
141
196
111
28.5
31.7
.9
31.3
173
?79r
13 991
t52
L7l
166
33.2
3.1.3
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
Total Industri Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
6
427
t75 34.7
5
34.
5
31
.),."
.Tabel 12.a. Junlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Froduksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Status It{odal Usaha
llaret
1994
Status l'lodal Usaha
Industri
Total PfqDN
P!,IA
695
11Q
105 JJ,U
ea
Negara
Lainnya
lvla"kanan
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyalvan Rata-rata Upah Tekstil Perusahaan
(
.!t
11? 11
35.1
5'/
Kayu Perusahaan Rata-rata Karyawan
102
1?{
371
11
Perusahaan
e
720
rn
A1
11
1
,t< n t
IJ
aaa
11
36.0
tl a at. -
1
1?9
43.7
034
3
5S3 11n
,)QQ
3
357
110
rQs 1
650
r32 roQ
.na 33.6
I JJ I 1nr
L JJ L 157
.6
31.8
r
tn.t
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logan
SqO
L
-163
Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kimia
25.6 I
lJJ
RaLa-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Lpah
oa
1
25
Perusahaan
- ta
Rata-rata Rata-rata
191
>J
1 638
119
295
169
r03
49.3
t12
11.2
59.9
23.0
38. 7 410
Karya',van Upah
Lainnya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyarvan Rata-rata Upah
69
341
29"1
t)
29.7
25.8
2
664
11., L LL
71 \
Total Industri Perusahaan. Rata-rata Karyawan
Rata-rata
Upah
J
J IO
?65 JJ.I,
666 3?4 J,5. /
ta1 1,i t tt.l II?
11.2
9
586
103 a', 1
13 995 161
31.9
3')
Tabel 12.b.
Junlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Ytaryaw,an Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Mingeu (000 Rp) l'lenurut Jenis Industri dan Status llodal Usaha
Juni
1994
Status lt{odal
Industri PMA
PI\'IDN
Makanan
<ar
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karl'awan Raca-rata Upah
116 41
:74
Rata-rata Karyalan Rata-rata {Jpah Karu Perusahaan
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logam
Karyal';an
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karl'arvan Rata-rata Upah Lairnya
068
3S. 2
Kar.v*awan
Upah
34-s
151 a4n tn , rL +>
Total Industri Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata L'pah
195 JJO
104
59.2
,:1
7
255
1 383
.0
21 .0
3 12S 2'i0 JJ.
I
laTa tl
583 115
3
357
IV
ic. I
|
135
"ln
<
392
1613
J
29. 3
+
V-\J
1
22r
/
168
i:t 4ia
102 .rQ o
619
:11 33.5
Z JJ
2
356
16. I
9
1
s8? tnl
661 145
.t! .t +1.+
nra
Tlv
1t
23.
L
156 JO. l
3?9
491
1
195
102 21 .9
493 I
2
Jt> +i.t-,
,l 1n .la .t>.
3
95
JO.U 22
o++ 111
1a<
11 4a1
iuo
59.2
33
2 7t3 539
l1
JJ. J
Perusahaan
Rata-rala Rata-rata
r
Total Lainnya
1
65
566
Rata-rata Karl'alvan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia
Negara
59
rtt
Tekst i I Perusahaan
Usaha
115
29.8
l3
99-t
164 JJ.+
'a',
Tabel 72.c. Junlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertinbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Status lvtodal Usaha September 1994
Status Modal Usaha
Industri PMDN
Negara
pHA
Total Lainnya
Makanan A1
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyalan Rata-rata Upah Tekst i I Perusahaan
111
35.1 ovu
Ra!a-rata Karyalan Rata-rata tipah Kayu Perusahaan
533
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keranik dan Logan
|
2
120
<
25
ili
?'!a
J+.
O
11n' 1A1 ,11 -l
2
5?2 110
1
A
068
t29
1
1 1
1 6+9 ana
oJ.:
42.1
lna
1
11'
I J+J
i+o sn?
J>L
105 lQO
33.+
552
2 .561
Perusahaan
Qna
10<
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
ll'
JIO
+U. J
t< ?r
1. qQ1
1
11
1<
>++
715
t+ 14
563
4<
J\J. +
5+1
Rara-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia
r <1 Jt1
130
qo?
43.0 109 +JV
68.9
I
99
2S .l
J+. +
rtl J, '?'t +J.J
Lainnya Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
'i'tn 11t
AO
Kar.u-awan
Upah
lq
n
JI.J
Total Industri Perusahaan
Rata-rata Raia-rala
Karyarvan Upah
3 t3S
5-rs
+uo
v out
LJ >>J
?53
395
!-
tn I I \J-|
3+.3
.16.6
<1
?s .0
roo J+.J
t
Tabel 13.a. Jumlah Perusahaan, Rat a-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upqh Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Persentase Karyawan Wanita Maret
Persentas
Industri
<25
Makanan
Prtrrr<:h::n
Rata-ra!a Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Tekstil Pe r u sahaan Rafa-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kayu Pe
rus ahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kimia Pe r us
295
rusahaan
Rata-rata Karyarvan Rata-rata Upah
e Katyawan
35.
I
333 158
115 Jl.+
31.8
030
405
1nt 30.0
L i +o t?3
3
1
3
J;>
943 2't5
11
>vl r on
tl
3.r.6
2S.5
583
610
119
t21
13.6
3l.i
rus ahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
Total Industr Pe
103
12
12 .6
r3.5
2l
Kar!'awan Upah L
rusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata.-rata Upah
-{
23+ 107
10.6
t9
1 111 159 32 .2
s
6+9 ,tnQ
2
330 15?
34.3
A1^
t12
279
25.9
1Q ?
295 148
.l 10 11?
La i nnya Pe
35?
2t9
23.
211 479
631 155
582 110
23.3
1
35.9
11 t;.7
Total
50+
32.?
n,la
1
ta
25.?
+
511
Wani
25-49
S2
Karyawan Upah
Keramik dan Logan Pe
I
ahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
1994
11 {
26.9
5
575 ?15 27 .6
IJ
991 162
3r.9
AA .a .l-
Tabel 13.b.
Jumlah Perusahaan, Rata-rata Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rata-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Persentase Karyawan Yanita
Juni
Persentase Karyawan Wani ta
Industri Makanan Pe ru s ahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata Tekstil Pe
1994
<25
25-49
1 207
537
Karyarvan Upah
101
L2l
21 ,6
5?5 139
964 142
1 873
3+.0
31.0
28 .9
994
404
31.5
373 359 35. I
845
516
39 .6
Karyawan Upah
1 839
a
rus ahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
127
?a
?.4 c
Kayu Pe
rus ahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Kertas dan Kinia Pe rusahaan Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Keramik dan Pe
Logarn
rusahaan
Rata-rata Rata'rata
101
r22 45.4
Total Industri Perus ahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
33.4 969 179
3
358 ))1 29 .8
t
649 ',
11
33.5
2
330 155
28.9
440 274
2 663
131
623 89
51.1
32.9
2s.5
41.1
2l
216
379 28 .9
149 29 .6
410 115 29 .8
5 649
13 993
I
600
Lainnya Pe rusahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah
282
1 (al 115 29 .7
4t.2
Karyawan Upah
r65
Tota I
50+
143 19
15 I
5
3r1
3
030
115
161
2t3
42.5
33.8
2S.5
36.
5
115
164
33.+
fr , 4|/
i''^-;
)
Tabel 13.c. Junlah Perusahaan, Rata-rat a Karyawan Produksi di Bawah Mandor dan Rat a-rata Upah Tertimbang per Minggu (000 Rp) Menurut Jenis Industri dan Persentase Karyawan Wanita September L994
Persentase Karyawan Wanita
Industri
<25
Makanan Pe rus ahaan
Rata-rata Karyawan Rata-rata Upah Tekstil Pe
rusahaan
Rata-rata RataKayu Pe
KarYawan
rata Upah
Rata-rata Rata-rata Kertas dan Kinia
|
43.1 481 118
882 144
I
35.0
32.0
28,9
992
378 331
280 429
1 550
009 173
2
449 278 29 .8
2
256 103
98
31.7
qs,
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata Keramik dan
Karyawan Upah
Logam
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
Karyawan Upah
114
15.5
1
34.
562
653
t2L
106
l2r ,( )
994 28s
36.9
1
370 242 43 .0
842,
I
31.5
53.0
32.0
143
28 156
239
18
30.9
32.0
31.3
Lainnya
Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
Karyawan Upah
Total Industri Perusahaan
Rata-rata Rata-rata
Karyawan Upah
Total
50+
481 143 29 .6
I
rus ahaan
KarYawan Upah
25-49
5 477
t09 11.3
2
704
t76
34.3
161
5
813 215 .29 .6
3
582 118
31.6
3
357 224 29 .9
208 34 .4
331 160
38.4 664
t44
42 .3
410 111
31.3
13
994 L56 34. 3
