POEMPIDA’S CRASH

POEMPIDA’S CRASH

Benturan di Tepian Nafas

Oleh : radius anwar

Seperti sebuah rongga dada yang menyesakkan, menekan segala sisi sehingga tak mampu untuk menghela nafas,  penuh sudah dengan udara bertekanan sangat tinggi…

tinggal menunggu waktu saja..
Boom…!!!
hancur membuncah tak berantakan 💥

Seperti itulah gejala Fisika bekerja dengan sangat indah menjadi tontonan menarik bagi para peminat dunia keilmuan.

Tekan yang dihasilkan dari beda suhu, mendesak partikel partikel untuk berkumpul menyatu menghimpun menjadi daya desakan yang alami, bekerja dalam ruangan terbuka. Mencari jalannya untuk sampai ke luar bebas untuk menyatu kembali ke alam semesta yang mana penuh dengan misteri dan decak kagum..itu.
Dari sini kembalinya udara bebas terus kembali mencari jalannya kembali.

Ada Celoteh Sang Pembunuh Tuhan,
Zaratustra yang kembali turun dari gunung, yang ia memproklamirkan
“Tuhan Telah Mati”
dan Kembalinya sang Manusia Super
Yang ingin kembali dari pertapaannya menjalani kehidupan ini dengan satu syarat yaitu Abadi, bila tak abadi, malah mengingkari segala peristiwa dan penciptaan di muka bumi, termasuk jagad rayanya..

Itulah jalan hidup yang dia pilih menjadi tidak kekal..!!

Because there is No Return of eternality in this world.
Ia ingin menjadi kekal dengan membunuh sang Abadi..

The Return (sang kembali) adalah sang pendulum mengembalikan tekanan, daya, dan hantaman ke posisi awal.. Sepintas terlihat seperti Tai Chi..( energi bandul) yang tersebar di segala semesta termasuk di dalam diri manusia. Ada gaya, massa dan gerak ini bisa kembali menjadi energi..

Rahasia energi ini perlahan lahan mulai tersingkap dan bahkan didemostrasikan diruang ruang kelas terbuka oleh para pengajar dari zaman Yunani sampai zaman modern sekarang ini.
Apakah ilmu alam ini adalah jalan bagi manusia untuk mengetahui kehancurannya sendiri, seperti halnya mati dan hidup kembali alam semesta..ini

Kelahiran dan peremajaan dalam siklus kehidupan, seperti yang sudah disebutkan di awal tadi terus berlanjut dan karena itu, kumpulan sesak dal am rongga dada menciptakan rajanya sendiri dari daya energi (pressure), Raja Tekanan inilah tak bisa dikendalilak kecuali oleh Vedas (pengetahuan), dan pengetahuan dengan segala hal..
yang pada hakikatnya hanyalah sebuah Reinkarnasi (lahir kembali menyatu dengan senyawa, sejiwa, dan sehati) yang wujudnya kemudian menjadi cinta dan kasih sayang.

Kembali ketika ruang ditekan, ekspresi ditekan, kebebasan ditekan
.ada gejala normal menjadi tidak normal dan sebaliknya. Tekanan ibarat sebuah Benturan dahsyat yang mampu menciptakan alam semesta ini. Benturan adalah entitas aktif bekerja ke semua sisi tanpa mencari celah celah seperti gas gas yg terperangkap pada sedimen batuan di dasar laut yang sudah berumur jutaan tahun lamanya.

Perangkap perangkap inilah  yang sekarang di hadapi oleh seorang Poempida’s Crash (PC) untuk keluar dari Jebakan jebakan yang mengitarinya.

Fenomena PC ini adalah sebuah Hantaman atau benturan yang terus menerus mencari jalannya untuk bertemu kembali kepada Kebebasan yang memerangkapnya jenuh sangat.

PC adalah senjata untuk memukul barrier (tanggul) atau penghalang untuk kembali ke alam bebas, bila ini dibawa ke rasa sosial, akan semakin terasa pukulannya bagi sang penguasa..

PC terlihat semacam mendesak kembali untuk keluar /lahir  ( vatus) dalam (in) kembali bergabung menjadi sebuah kata menjadi (inovasi), metode cara gagasan gagasan diungkapkan ,dilahirkan bermanfaat bagi lingkungan dan sesama makhluk ciptaan (vatus)

Poempida’ Crash akan bermuara pada suatu kemajuan, kemapanan, dan kemamuran..
Perlu dibaca kembali dari risalah tekanan tadi membentur ke sana kemari tanpa belas kasihan atas kemandekan kemunduran potensinya sebagaia manusia yang tak kan kembali Kekal

Darinyaa Poempida’s Crash mencari jalan. Jalan estetika, yang syahdu dan penuh keriangan di dalam dada, jalan itu sangat mengasyikkan bagi mereka yang suka menekan dan ditekan dari berbagai sisi dengan  dan menemukan takdirnya sendiri di labirin yang fana ini

image

.

Share this

Uber loses appeal in UK employment rights case

This article is taken from The Guardian

Ride-hailing app had appealed against ruling that drivers were workers with minimum-wage rights and not self-employed

Rob Davies @ByRobDavies
Friday 10 November 2017 17.28 GMT First published on Friday 10 November 2017 10.55 GMT

The ride-hailing firm Uber has lost its appeal against a ruling that its drivers should be classed as workers with minimum-wage rights, in a case that could have major ramifications for labour rights in the growing gig economy.

The US company, which claims that drivers are self-employed, said it would launch a further appeal against the Employment Appeal Tribunal decision, meaning the case could end up in thesupreme court next year.

Drivers James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam won an employment tribunal case last year after arguing they should be classified as workers, citing Uber’s control over their working conditions.

Uber challenged the ruling at the tribunal in central London, warning that it could deprive riders of the “personal flexibility they value”. It claims that the majority of its drivers prefer their existing employment status.

The Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain (IWGB), which backed the appeal, said drivers will still be able to enjoy the freedoms of self-employment – such as flexibility in choosing shifts – even if they have worker status.

The union said the decision showed companies in the gig economy – which involves people on flexible working patterns with irregular shifts and minimal employment rights – have been choosing to “deprive workers of their rights”.

Farrar said: “It is time for the mayor of London, Transport for London and the transport secretary to step up and use their leverage to defend worker rights rather than turn a blind eye to sweatshop conditions.”

Farrar said he was willing to fight the case all the way to the supreme court if necessary but called on Uber’s new chief executive, Dara Khosrowshahi, to intervene instead.

“If Uber are successful in having this business model, obliterating industrial relations as we know them in the UK, then I can guarantee you on every high street, in retail, fast food, any industry you like, the same thing will go on.”

“We’ve asked to meet him when he came to London and Uber declined to do that, which tells you everything.”

Aslam said: “Today is a good day for workers, we made history. The judge confirmed that Uber is unlawfully denying our rights.”

“It’s about making sure workers across the UK are protected. Companies are hiding behind technology, bogusly classifying people as self-employed so they can get away from paying minimum wage. That can’t be allowed to happen.”

Uber said it would continue to challenge the decision through the courts but had yet to decide whether to apply to leapfrog the court of appeal and go straight to the supreme court.

It could theoretically hitch its case to the supreme court labour rights battles involving courier firm CitySprint and Pimlico Plumbers, due to be heard next year.

The legal tussle could also be superceded by political events, as the government considers tweaking employment law following a review by former Tony Blair adviser Matthew Taylor.

Tom Elvidge, Uber UK’s acting general manager, said: “Almost all taxi and private hire drivers have been self-employed for decades, long before our app existed.

“The tribunal relies on the assertion that drivers are required to take 80% of trips sent to them when logged into the app. As drivers who use Uber know, this has never been the case in the UK.

“Over the last year we have made a number of changes to our app to give drivers even more control. We’ve also invested in things like access to illness and injury cover and we’ll keep introducing changes to make driving with Uber even better.”

The tribunal ruling is the latest in a series of legal challenges affecting the “gig economy”, with implications for the future of labour rights in the UK.

The Labour MP Jack Dromey said: “No British worker should be denied basic employment rights which we have worked so hard to secure.

“Uber is a 21st-century company behaving like a 19th-century mill owner, when workers had no rights. It is now up to Uber to change its employment practices and grant its drivers the rights they deserve and are entitled to in law.”

Frances O’Grady, the TUC general secretary, said: “This ruling should put gig economy employers on notice. Unions will expose nasty schemes that try and cheat workers out of the minimum wage and holiday pay. Sham self-employment exploits people and scams the taxman.”

image

Share this

Uber loses right to classify UK drivers as self-employed

image

This article is taken from The Guardian

Hilary Osborne
Friday 28 October 2016 18.55 BST

Landmark employment tribunal ruling states firm must also pay drivers national living wage and holiday pay with huge implications for gig economy

Uber drivers are not self-employed and should be paid the “national living wage”, a UK employment court has ruled in a landmark case which could affect tens of thousands of workers in the gig economy.

The ride-hailing app could now be open to claims from all of its 40,000 drivers in the UK, who are currently not entitled to holiday pay, pensions or other workers’ rights. Uber immediately said it would appeal against the ruling.

Employment experts said other firms with large self-employed workforces could now face scrutiny of their working practices and the UK’s biggest union, Unite, announced it was setting up a new unit to pursue cases of bogus self-employment.

Research by Citizens Advice has suggested that as many as 460,000 people could be falsely classified as self-employed, costing up to £314m a year in lost tax and employer national insurance contributions. Four courier firms are already facing legal action from cyclists who want similar recognition as staff employees and the rights that go with that status, while delivery firm Hermes is under investigation by HM Revenue & Customs.

The Uber ruling could force a rethink of the gig economy business model, where companies use apps and the internet to match customers with workers. The firms do not employ the workers, but take commission from their earnings, and many have become huge global enterprises. Uber now operates around the world, with the company valued at more than £50bn.

The decision of the employment tribunal comes amid mounting concern within government about the growing trend towards self-employed workforces. The government has recently announced a six-month review of modern working practices and HMRC is setting up a new unit, the employment status and intermediaries team, to investigate firms.

MPs launched an inquiry last week into pay and working conditions in the UK which will look at the status and rights of agency and casual workers and the self-employed for the purposes of tax, benefits and employment law, and how to protect them.

Friday’s ruling by a London employment tribunal involves a case taken by two drivers, James Farrar and Yaseen Aslam, on behalf of a group 19 Uber workers who argued that they were employed by the San Francisco-based firm, rather than working for themselves.

At a hearing in July, Farrar told how he was put under “tremendous pressure” to work long hours and accept jobs and said that there were “repercussions” from the company if he cancelled a pickup. He said some months he earned as little as £5 an hour – far below the £7.20 that employers are obliged to pay workers aged over 25.

Uber argued that it was a technology firm not a transport business and that its drivers were independent self-employed contractors who could choose where and when they worked.

The judges were scathing about Uber’s arguments, however, accusing the firm of “resorting in its documentation to fictions, twisted language and even brand new terminology” and even quoting Hamlet to suggest that the group’s UK boss was protesting too much about its position.

“The notion that Uber in London is a mosaic of 30,000 small businesses linked by a common ‘platform’ is to our minds faintly ridiculous,” the judges said. “Drivers do not and cannot negotiate with passengers … They are offered and accept trips strictly on Uber’s terms.”

Nigel Mackay from the employment team at law firm Leigh Day, which represented the drivers, said: “We are pleased that the employment tribunal has agreed with our arguments that drivers are entitled to the most basic workers’ rights, including to be paid the [national living wage] and to receive paid holiday, which were previously denied to them.

“This is a ground-breaking decision. It will impact not just on the thousands of Uber drivers working in this country, but on all workers in the so-called gig economy whose employers wrongly classify them as self-employed and deny them the rights to which they are entitled.”

The GMB union, which took up the case for the drivers, said that it was a “monumental victory” which would have an impact on thousands of workers in other industries “where bogus self-employment is rife”.

Maria Ludkin, GMB’s legal director, said: “Uber drivers and thousands of others caught in the bogus self-employment trap will now enjoy the same rights as employees. This outcome will be good for passengers, too. Properly rewarded drivers are the same side of the coin as drivers who are properly licensed and driving well-maintained and insured vehicles.”

Farrar said he was thrilled with the “emphatic” ruling. He said his industry had seen the deterioration in workers’ rights since Uber entered the market. “We’ve brought that to a halt,” he said.

Employment experts said that other firms with large self-employed workforces could now face similar action. “This judgment is likely to have massive implications, as we see an increasing number of start-up businesses effectively adopting Uber’s model,” said Tim Goodwin of law firm Winckworth Sherwood. “The effect of this judgment is that those kinds of business may owe a lot more to their workers, such as paid holiday and minimum wage, than they had bargained for.”

The ruling should be regarded as “ a salutary lesson by businesses who try to arbitrarily ‘classify’ workers as contractors to avoid affording them their full rights as workers,” Goodwin said.

The GMB’s Ludkin said employers should be “on notice” that it was reviewing similar contracts. “This is old-fashioned exploitation under new-fangled jargon, but the law will force you to pay GMB members what they are rightfully due,” she said.

There were calls for more clarity over employment status, with Citizens Advice pointing out that many people were locked out of employment tribunals by fees of up to £1,200.

“The fact it takes an employment tribunal to decide whether these drivers are self-employed shows that proving employment status is an extremely complicated and costly process,” said its chief executive, Gillian Guy. “For many people struggling at the sharp end of insecure work, such as in false self-employment, taking such a case is simply not an option.”

The ruling is not the end of the process for Uber. The firm will take the case to the employment appeal tribunal, and following its decision there could be further hearings in the court of appeal and then the supreme court. Any payments due to drivers will not be calculated until that process is over.

Other drivers with the firm will not automatically receive payouts but, if the firm accepts the ruling, it will have to change its contracts to avoid more cases being taken by drivers. Lawyers say that its terms and conditions are similar for all of its UK employees.

Jo Bertram, the regional general manager of Uber in the UK, said many of the firm’s drivers did not want to be classified as workers: “Tens of thousands of people in London drive with Uber precisely because they want to be self-employed and their own boss.

“The overwhelming majority of drivers who use the Uber app want to keep the freedom and flexibility of being able to drive when and where they want.”

Uber in numbers
40,000 The number of Uber drivers in the UK

£5 The hourly wage received in some months by one of the drivers who took the case.

$62.5bn Uber’s valuation based on its last round of funding.

Seven The years that Uber has been in operation.

460,000 The number of people who could be falsely classified as self-employed in the UK

£314m The yearly estimated cost in lost tax and employer national insurance contributions from falsely classified employees, according to Citizens Advice

Share this

Kasus Iuran BPJS Ketenagakerjaan PT. Natatex Sumedang

Kasus PT. Natatex Sumedang dimana Pihak SP KSPN melaporkan pengusaha atas penggelapan iuran karyawan yang sudah dipungut dan tidak disetorkan ke BPJS Ketenagakerjaan, kepada polisi dan sekarang sudah masuk persidangan. Wasrik BPJS Ketenagakerjaan di sumedang dan Kanwil Jawa Barat menjadi saksi ahli terkait perannya sebagai badan penyelenggara. Alhamdulillah semua SOP pembinaan telah dilaksanakan termasuk Surat Penagihan piutang iuran dan kunjungan ke perusahaan untuk memperkuat tuntutan SP di persidangan. Saat ini persidangan sudah masuk pada tuntutan jaksa 4 tahun penjara kepada pengusahanya. Mudah mudahan vonis hakim sesuai tuntutan atau melebihi tuntutan 4 tahun. Dan bisa menjadi efek jera serta preseden positif meningkatkan kepatuhan pemberi kerja pada pelaksanaan program Jaminan Sosial. Bravo Wasrik Bravo BPJS Ketenagakerjaan.

image

image

image

image

image

Share this

Selamat Hari Sumpah Pemuda

image

Sumpah Pemuda adalah satu tonggak utama dalam sejarah pergerakan kemerdekaan Indonesia. Ikrar ini dianggap sebagai kristalisasi semangat untuk menegaskan cita-cita berdirinya negara Indonesia.

Yang dimaksud dengan “Sumpah Pemuda” adalah keputusan Kongres Pemuda Kedua[1] yang diselenggarakan dua hari, 27-28 Oktober 1928 di Batavia (Jakarta). Keputusan ini menegaskan cita-cita akan ada “tanah air Indonesia”, “bangsa Indonesia”, dan “bahasa Indonesia”. Keputusan ini juga diharapkan menjadi asas bagi setiap “perkumpulan kebangsaan Indonesia” dan agar “disiarkan dalam segala surat kabar dan dibacakan di muka rapat perkumpulan-perkumpulan”.

Istilah “Sumpah Pemuda” sendiri tidak muncul dalam putusan kongres tersebut, melainkan diberikan setelahnya.[2] Berikut ini adalah bunyi tiga keputusan kongres tersebut sebagaimana tercantum pada prasasti di dinding Museum Sumpah Pemuda[3]. Penulisan menggunakan ejaan van Ophuysen.

Pertama:
Kami poetra dan poetri Indonesia, mengakoe bertoempah darah jang satoe, tanah Indonesia.
Kedoea:
Kami poetra dan poetri Indonesia mengakoe berbangsa jang satoe, bangsa Indonesia.
Ketiga:
Kami poetra dan poetri Indonesia mendjoendjoeng bahasa persatoean, bahasa Indonesia.

Share this

Powered by WordPress.com.

Up ↑

%d blogger menyukai ini:
Lewat ke baris perkakas