PERLINDUNGAN HUKUM TERHADAP DRIVER GOJEK YANG MENGALAMI KERUGIAN AKIBAT TINDAKAN KONSUMEN MEMBATALKAN PESANAN - Indradewi, Anak Agung Sagung Ngurah; Putra, I Wayan Partama; Umbu Kadubu, Andri (Kertha Semaya : Journal Ilmu Hukum, 2025)
Penelitian ini bertujuan, menganalisis perlindungan hukum terhadap driver gojek atas tindakan konsumen yang membatalkan pesanan di kota Denpasar, serta mengidenfikasi pertanggung jawaban perusahan gojek terhadap driver atas tindakan konsumen yang membatalkan pesanan di kota Denpasar. Penelitian ini menggunakan metode empiris, dengan pendekatan langsung di lapangan. Data diperoleh melalui studi pustaka dan wawancara langsung dengan driver gojek yang pernah mengalami kerugian akibat pembatalan pesanan oleh konsumen. Selain itu, perjanjian kemitraan antara driver dan PT Gojek, serta ketentuan hukum yang relevan. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa PT Gojek tidak memiliki kewajiban hukum secara langsung untuk mengganti kerugian driver akibat pembatalan pesanan, karena hubungan yang terjalin adalah hubungan kemitraan, bukan hubungan kerja. Namun, secara moral dan etika bisnis, perusahaan seharusnya bertanggung jawab untuk memberikan perlindungan dan kebijakan kompensasi bagi driver. Kesimpulannya yaitu driver gojek belum optimal hal ini di sebabkan hubungan hukum antara driver dan konsumen bersifat tidak langsung sehinga celah hukum ini menyebabkan ketidak jelasan tanggung jawab dalam praktiknya. This study aims to analyze the legal protection available to Gojek drivers against consumer-initiated cancellations in the city of Denpasar, as well as to identify the accountability of Gojek as a company toward its drivers in such cases. The research employs an empirical method, with a direct field approach. Data was collected through literature studies and direct interviews with Gojek drivers who have experienced losses due to order cancellations by consumers. In addition, the study examines the partnership agreement between drivers and PT Gojek, as well as relevant legal provisions. The findings show that PT Gojek does not hold direct legal responsibility to compensate drivers for losses resulting from order cancellations, as the relationship established is a partnership rather than an employment relationship. However, from a moral and business ethics perspective, the company is expected to be responsible by providing protection and compensation policies for its drivers. In conclusion, the legal protection for Gojek drivers remains suboptimal. This is due to the indirect legal relationship between drivers and consumers, which creates a legal gap and leads to ambiguity in accountability in practice.