Education has always been positioned as the heart of national development in Indonesia. Within this framework, teachers are recognized as the central actors who determine the quality of future generations. The Indonesian government, through various laws and public policies, has repeatedly affirmed that teachers are professionals who must be respected, protected, and made prosperous. One of the most frequently cited policy instruments used to demonstrate the state’s commitment to teacher welfare is the teacher certification program. Normatively, this certification was designed not only to improve teachers’ professional competence but also to provide financial incentives as a form of recognition for their responsibilities and expertise. However, in practice, the reality faced by teachers—especially part-time ASN PPPK teachers in Indonesia—reveals a deep and troubling paradox. When basic salaries funded by the State Budget (APBN) or Regional Budget (APBD) are eliminated or not properly provided, teacher certification loses its fundamental purpose as a welfare mechanism and instead becomes a symbol of contradictory policy.
Part-time ASN PPPK teachers in Indonesia occupy a unique yet highly vulnerable position. On the one hand, they have been formally recognized as part of the state civil apparatus through the PPPK scheme, which legally implies that they should receive protection and fundamental employment rights from the government. On the other hand, their part-time status places them in a gray area of public policy that often works against their interests. They are required to carry out educational duties with the same professional standards as permanent teachers, yet they do not receive adequate income security. When APBD or APBN funding is removed as a source of their basic salary, the state implicitly shifts the burden of teacher welfare to alternative mechanisms that are neither fair nor sustainable.
Teacher certification in Indonesia was originally introduced as a response to two major challenges in education: quality and welfare. The underlying assumption was both simple and powerful—that competent teachers deserve financial recognition so that they can work with dignity and focus. Within this policy logic, certification allowances were never intended to replace salaries; they were meant to function as professional incentives. However, this logic collapses when certification allowances stand alone without being supported by a stable and adequate base salary. In such conditions, certification ceases to function as an additional benefit and instead becomes a substitute for wages, or even the only relatively stable source of income for some teachers.
The removal or reduction of APBD/APBN involvement in paying the salaries of part-time ASN PPPK teachers reflects a problematic shift in Indonesia’s policy paradigm. The state appears eager to maintain the narrative of commitment to teacher welfare through certification, while simultaneously reducing its fiscal responsibility. This inconsistency has direct consequences for teachers’ lives. When salaries are uncertain, delayed, or entirely absent, certification allowances lose their original meaning. Rather than improving welfare, they merely fill the void left by the state’s withdrawal from its fundamental obligations.
Teacher welfare cannot be reduced to the mere existence of certification allowances. Welfare is a holistic condition that includes income stability, economic security, and recognition of professional dignity. Part-time ASN PPPK teachers in Indonesia who do not receive regular salaries funded by public budgets face severe uncertainty. They are still expected to teach, prepare administrative reports, attend training programs, and meet performance targets, yet they lack a guaranteed livelihood. This situation creates psychological stress and social insecurity, which ultimately affect the quality of education itself.
From a constitutional perspective, the elimination of APBD/APBN-funded salaries raises serious ethical questions about the role of the Indonesian state. The 1945 Constitution mandates the government to educate the life of the nation. This obligation cannot be separated from the responsibility to ensure that teachers, as the primary agents of education, are able to live decently. When the state withdraws from salary responsibilities through public budgets, it undermines its own constitutional mandate. In this context, teacher certification becomes a superficial policy instrument that fails to address the root of the problem.
Part-time ASN PPPK teachers in Indonesia also face unfair social perceptions. In the public imagination, the status of ASN is often associated with stability and prosperity. In reality, many of these teachers experience the opposite. They are forced to take on additional jobs, teach in multiple schools, or work outside the education sector simply to survive. This reality not only exhausts them physically and mentally but also erodes the dignity of the teaching profession. Certification, which should symbolize professional recognition, feels hollow when basic living needs remain unmet.
From the standpoint of public policy, removing APBD/APBN-funded salaries for teachers reflects weak long-term planning. Education should be viewed as an investment, not a fiscal burden. When the state reduces investment in teacher welfare, the impact may not immediately appear in budget reports, but it will inevitably surface in declining educational quality. Teachers who struggle economically cannot fully dedicate their energy to pedagogical innovation or student development.
Teacher certification in Indonesia also risks losing its moral legitimacy among educators themselves. When certification no longer improves welfare, teachers may begin to see it merely as an administrative requirement rather than a meaningful professional process. Motivation to improve competence may weaken, replaced by economic necessity. Teachers may still pursue certification, but not out of professional commitment—rather, out of survival. This undermines the very objective that certification was designed to achieve.
Inequality among teachers becomes increasingly visible under this system. When some teachers receive clear and stable salaries from APBN or APBD while part-time ASN PPPK teachers do not, a sense of injustice emerges within the education system. This inequality affects not only individual teachers but also the professional climate in schools, potentially weakening collaboration and solidarity among educators.
In such circumstances, the claim that teacher certification in Indonesia aims to improve teacher welfare becomes difficult to defend. Welfare cannot be built on unstable foundations. Certification without a proper base salary is like a roof without pillars—it may appear impressive on paper, but it offers no real protection against the harsh realities of life. The state must recognize that teacher welfare is an integrated system, not a fragmented collection of policies.
Criticism of the elimination of APBD/APBN-funded salaries is not merely a financial demand; it is a call for policy consistency and social justice. If the Indonesian government recognizes part-time ASN PPPK teachers as state civil servants, then their fundamental rights must be guaranteed. Certification should never be used as a justification to reduce the state’s responsibility for paying salaries. Instead, it should serve as an additional mechanism to strengthen teacher welfare.
Moreover, the removal of public budget responsibility for teacher salaries risks shifting education from a public service to a quasi-market commodity. When the state retreats, the burden is transferred to schools, communities, or even the teachers themselves. This contradicts the principle that education is a constitutional right of every Indonesian citizen. Teachers should not become victims of budgetary policies that fail to prioritize education.
This essay argues that the issue of part-time ASN PPPK teachers and certification in Indonesia is not merely a technical administrative problem, but a matter of social justice and state responsibility. Teacher certification, which was originally intended to promote welfare, loses its meaning when salaries funded by APBD/APBN are eliminated. Under such conditions, certification no longer represents appreciation but instead reflects the state’s failure to ensure decent living conditions for educators.
Ultimately, the future of education in Indonesia depends on how the state treats its teachers today. Teacher welfare is not a luxury; it is a prerequisite for quality education. If the Indonesian government truly seeks to fulfill its constitutional mandate to educate the nation, it must seriously reevaluate policies concerning part-time ASN PPPK teachers. Certification must be restored to its original purpose as a welfare-enhancing instrument, not used as a justification to eliminate salary obligations from APBD/APBN. Without such commitment, discourse on teacher welfare in Indonesia will remain empty rhetoric, detached from the lived realities of educators across the country.
0 Komentar