Impoverishment of Workers Painting

Impoverishment of Labor Poverty has become a classic problem that is always interesting to discuss both on theoretical and practical level. Remuneration of far-off workers is often regarded as one of the problems that perpetuate poverty for marginalized people. Discourses have often only focused on legal aspects and institutional approaches that emphasize the need for adequate labor law and formal institutional arrangements. It is further examined that formal legal foundations and institutional aspects are important, but that naivete of such an approach must be understood for the process of the transformation of the workers from structural poverty traps. In the context of such methodological anxieties, structuralist approaches should be put in place to deconstruct labor reality over the years. Methodologically, structuralist concern lies in structural construction that determines agency preferences and actions. More specifically the structuralist approach seeks to deconstruct and change the actual conditions that are indeed exploitative. In this context, poverty is not seen as the problem of individuals who do not want to be free from the shackles of poverty, but a structural snare that blocks the process of transforming the poor. Nevertheless, the tendency of the structuralist thinking model to underestimate the preferences and actions of the agency needs to be wary of not being trapped in a blind metaphorical tendency. Reviewing the wage policy which basically reflects the dialectical relation between laborers and investors. So far the mechanism of determining the Regional Minimum Wage (UMR) is often regarded as the culprit of structural inequality for the workers. If it is the reality, then it is necessary to question the abnormality of the existing system. The description of the structural factors considered as poverty trap will be a crucial part of this paper to justify the existence of an exploitative structure in the context of wages. This paper is about to close by urging the discourse of opportunities for structural changes to the building of an exploitative system. Historically, wages occupy a central issue in industrial relations between laborers and investors. At the beginning of its existence, capitalism has produced and reproduced the inherent contradictions within it. In this context, the wage of labor becomes one of the products of the inherent contradictions in the exploitative relation between the capitalist class and the laborers. So too in the context of its presence in the peripheral capitalist state, the wage of labor becomes a central issue reflecting the conflict and dialectical relations between the capitalist class and working class. The emerging social resilience is often unable to change the exploitative and imbalanced industrial relations of all time. Workers' movements demanding the feasibility and improvement of their ultimate fate end in negotiations between the tripartite state-labor-capital whose estuaries reinforce the 'domination pact' between the state and the capitalist. During the exploitation and persecution of the workers remain, the activism and the organizational capacity of the workers becomes significant in changing the exploitative structure. Coupled with the reality of labor in post-reform Indonesia that has a tendency of sporadic, fragmental, and organizational weak movement of polarization. Thus, the focus and locus of changes in labor conditions in Indonesia should be done by identifying the structural factors that ensnare the workers into the vicious circle of poverty. Then, starting from these factors, the agenda for the change of the fate of the workers must be formulated further. The necessity of changing the structural order becomes a crucial factor for the improvement of labor conditions so far, structural factors that are inherently inherent in the wage policy so that inevitably the workers must accept the fact that they are in the process of alienation and structural poverty. that there are three structural factors that constitute the base of poverty and exploitation of the workers in Indonesia; first, the existence of unequal exchange, secondly, the exploitative relationship between capitalist and labor, and third, the relative autonomy of the state which contributes to the preservation of the exploitation of the workers. One of the factors that cause poverty sometimes seems inherent to the working class is the unfair exchange in the production process. Following the mind of capitalist thought which simply attempts to pursue the surplus of profits as much as possible, wages must be placed as one of the production burden that must be minimized in such a way. This of course is negatively correlated with the fate of the workers who are always in the subsistence of the system. Placing the laborer in reason thinks this is what started the process of alienation and oppression of the workers in its historical context. The above argument is supported by the current reality in which transnational corporations run their business operations in developing countries on the basis of the abundance of cheap paid labor. In the context of Indonesia, cheap labor wages actually become one of the comparative advantages to attract investment passion. Instead of investing in a framework of globalization and a free market that promises economic improvement, Third World countries are simply made into a manufacturing business operating area that ultimately diverts a surplus of profits to the central capitalist state. The most severe party to bear this exploitation is of course the workers who are marginalized and alienated in the production process. The rate of wages as payment for labor factors has already formed far below the productivity value under this labor factor In addition to the inequalities of exchange in which labor actually serves as a support for capitalists through the surplus of value it produces, exploitative relations are also key factors causing the low welfare of the workers. In this context, the worker is in an uncompensated position, while the entrepreneur is in an overcompensated position for two things; first, consciously or unconsciously regarded as a pariah class or a coolie class by a dominant class so that they are not likely to have a strong bargaining position in the production process. Secondly, the situation of the surplus laborers in the economy as a whole has resulted in the large number of people willing to pay cheaply as long as it gets a job. This institu- tionally encourages an impartial provision of wages to the workers. In the current situation of inequality, the institutional wage levels are formed at such a low level and this level is the basis for the capitalist in determining the wage rate paid to the laborer in the production process. In addition, the increasing bargaining power of capital clearly undermines the bargaining power of workers in excessive labor such as Indonesia, which is facing major difficulties in establishing an effective labor movement. Strengthening the organizational and ideological capacity of the workers in a strong union container is difficult to achieve the significance of the goal for the improvement of the fate of the workers in Indonesia. The path of capitalism adopted by the post-colonial state like Indonesia does not allow the establishment of an ideologically established labor movement, the liberalization of the organization of labor leads to the birth of unstructured and even institutional disability and the possibility of labor transformation seems to be far more potent in terms of structural eyewear . Changes to exploitative relationships must begin with the overhaul of structural factors that have been ensnare the workers in the process of alienation and exploitation of the production process. An unequal exchange macroeconomic review is the beginning of resource exploitation and the transfer of economic surplus by the central capitalist countries of peripheral countries. In addition, exploitative industrial relations between capitalists and workers increasingly positioned the workers as merely production factors with wages that must be minimized for optimal profit. In addition to the relations between labor and capitalists, the role of the state in the context of its relative autonomy also contributes to the status quo of the oppression of the workers. Structural transformation efforts should be directed to the process of deconstruction of existing inequality factors. The government's approaches have only focused on providing short-term economic incentives and economic stimuli or-borrowing-for-help Santa that will not succeed in increasing the economic position of the more resilient workers. This is due to the short-term efforts that are not accompanied by efforts to unravel structural shackles in exploitative dialectical relationships.