Film Casts and Employment Status in Indonesia: What Actors and Production Houses Need to Know
Authors
In Indonesia’s film industry, the legal classification of cast members has significant practical consequences. Whether a film cast is treated as an employee determines the applicability of statutory labour protections, social security obligations, and potential termination liabilities.
Indonesian law does not provide industry specific rules for actors or film productions. As a result, classification must be assessed under Law Number 13 of 2003 concerning Manpower, as lastly amended by Law Number 6 of 2023, which enacted Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation, and the Constitutional Court Decision Number 168/PUU-XXI/2023 (“Manpower Law”). Importantly, status is determined by how the relationship operates in practice, not merely by how the contract is labelled.
Why Classification Matters
Under Article 1 point 15 of the Manpower Law, an employment relationship exists where there is work performed, remuneration, and an element of orders or direction from the employer. If these elements are present, statutory obligations arise by operation of law.
If the relationship does not qualify as employment, statutory protections do not automatically apply. Instead, the relationship is governed primarily by contract law under the Indonesian Civil Code. In such cases, the rights and obligations of the parties depend largely on what has been contractually agreed. For production houses and talent managers, the distinction therefore has direct financial and compliance implications, particularly where a relationship is later reclassified by a manpower authority or court.
Common Engagement Structures in Film Productions
For most feature films, actors are engaged under a talent services agreement for a specific production, with a defined filming schedule and negotiated fee. Once filming and contractual obligations are completed, the relationship ends, without long-term exclusivity or ongoing commitment beyond the project. Where genuinely limited to a single production, such arrangements are generally treated as services relationships rather than employment.
In practice, this model is commonly used in single-project film productions, provided there is no exclusivity or ongoing continuity. By contrast, where an actor is contractually tied to a production house for a defined period, subject to structured control, and potentially assigned across multiple titles within that period, the arrangement is more likely to fall within the scope of employment under the Manpower Law and should be structured as a fixed-term employment agreement (Perjanjian Kerja Waktu Tertentu or “PKWT”).
A different dynamic may arise in television formats such as sinetron or stripping programmes. In these cases, actors may be engaged for a defined period, potentially across multiple titles, with structured and ongoing control exercised by the production house. Where the actor’s availability is contractually tied to the production house for a specific term and the engagement reflects continuity, a PKWT under the Manpower Law may be more appropriate.
Under Article 56 paragraph 1 of the Manpower Law, employment agreements may be structured as either indefinite term or fixed term arrangements. Article 59 of the Manpower Law permits PKWT for temporary or project based work. However, if the statutory requirements for PKWT are not satisfied, the agreement may convert into an indefinite-term employment agreement pursuant to Article 59 paragraph 7 of the Manpower Law.
When a Services Arrangement May Be Reclassified
Even where a talent services agreement is used, classification ultimately depends on substance rather than contractual form. Indonesian authorities apply a substance over form approach in assessing employment status. If, in practice, the relationship reflects the elements of employment, statutory obligations under the Manpower Law will apply regardless of the contractual label.
Reclassification risk may arise where an actor is engaged on an exclusive or long-term basis, where there is structured managerial control beyond normal creative direction, or where successive projects create effective continuity resembling a permanent working relationship. In such circumstances, a services arrangement may be recharacterised as employment under the Manpower Law. Where commercial reality reflects continuity and subordination, structuring the relationship as a PKWT from the outset is generally the safer and more compliant approach.
Legal Consequences of Each Structure
Where an engagement qualifies as employment under a PKWT, the production house must comply with the Manpower Law. This includes enrolling the actor in BPJS Ketenagakerjaan and BPJS Kesehatan, paying compensation upon expiry of the fixed term agreement pursuant to Article 62 of the Manpower Law, and adherence to statutory termination procedures under Article 61 of the Manpower Law.
Conversely, where the engagement is genuinely structured and implemented as a services arrangement and does not meet the elements of employment, statutory compensation under Article 62 of the Manpower Law does not automatically apply and social security obligations do not arise by default. Rights and remedies depend on the contractual terms and the general principles of the Indonesian Civil Code.
The key consideration is alignment between documentation and commercial reality. Where the structure does not reflect how the relationship operates in practice, reclassification risk arises.
In summary, talent services agreements are commonly used for single-project film productions. However, where exclusivity, continuity, or structured long-term control exists, the arrangement is more likely to constitute employment and should be structured as a PKWT under the Manpower Law.
For production houses and talent managers, the objective is not to avoid employment classification, but to ensure alignment between contractual structure and commercial reality of the project. Proper structuring reduces reclassification risk and ensures regulatory compliance.
Disclaimer:
This client update is the property of ARMA Law and intended for providing general information and should not be treated as legal advice, nor shall it be relied upon by any party for any circumstance. ARMA Law has no intention to provide a specific legal advice with regard to this client update.
Related Updates
Latest Updates
