EPISODE 7 : Lika liku menjadi Pekerja Migran Indonesia di Malaysia

Main ideas and concepts conveyed

• Purpose of the video/podcast: Share findings from a research trip to Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia (Oct 27–Nov 1) about the cognitive framework of Indonesian migrant workers.

• What “cognitive framework” means in this context:

  • It refers to a person’s way/pattern of thinking and views or perceptions that shape decisions and actions.
  • The video connects it to a sociological idea (credited to Jans Ber / described as “jans ber a sociologist scientist”): in markets/society, three influential elements interact:
    1. Networks
    2. Institutions/agencies
    3. Cognitive framework
  • For migrant workers, the key question presented is: why they decide to work in Malaysia and how they choose between possibilities.

• Two worker categories compared:

  1. Blue-collar workers (manual workers; often with wages based on work length/hours)
  2. White-collar workers (office/professional workers such as banks, logistics business, etc.; higher education levels; higher/in-stable income ranges)

---

Methodology / research approach (as presented)

• Framework of study:

  • Examine how migrant workers’ cognitive frameworks differ between blue-collar and white-collar groups.

• Data collection methods mentioned:

  • Interviews with migrant domestic workers (blue-collar), including a member of PERTIMIK.
  • FGD (Focus Group Discussion) with white-collar workers (professional/office workers).

• Field site / community entry:

  • Researchers first visited PERTIMIK in Malaysia.
  • PERTIMIK is described as the Indonesian migrant domestic workers association.
  • Many participants are mothers, and during the visit there was a workshop/event related to writing.

---

Key findings: cognitive framework differences

A) Blue-collar workers (manual/domestic work)

• Why they choose Malaysia (main drivers):

  • Salary and job opportunities abroad compared to limited local opportunities in their hometown.
  • Desire for better welfare through the “lure” of wages.

• Perceptions about work conditions:

  • Age limit is perceived as flexible: Unlike certain local recruitment rules in Indonesia (example given: “S1 maximum 25 years old” / age constraints), domestic work in Malaysia is described as possible as long as workers are healthy and able to work.

  • Even workers around 50–60 years old are considered able to work (as stated in the discussion).

• Wage information provided (illustrative ranges):

  • Wages mentioned ranged from 1,500 up to 5,000–6,000 Malaysia currency (Ringgit).
  • The amounts vary based on length of work and duration/relationship with employer.

• Tone of stories (narrative style):

  • Stories are largely about “struggle”—hard conditions and providing for family.

B) White-collar workers (professional/office work)

• What the work looks like:

  • Often in banks or logistics/business professional roles.

• Education level mentioned:

  • Typically S1 to S3 (bachelor to doctoral-level range referenced as S1–S3).

• Why they choose Malaysia (main drivers):

  • Malaysia is seen as a regional hub in Southeast Asia with many opportunities, including chances to move to other countries.
  • Migration is viewed as a “stepping stone” for growth and more options.

• Malaysia vs Singapore comparison:

  • Salary is viewed as comparable to Singapore, but the work culture is more relaxed in Malaysia.
  • This makes them feel more comfortable while maintaining high earnings.

• Additional benefits and family considerations:

  • Some are motivated not only by salary/opportunity, but also by benefits and support systems (e.g., child support being “okay”).
  • As a result, they may choose to stay longer in Malaysia, not immediately move onward.

• Tone of stories (narrative style):

  • Narratives are described as more opportunity-focused (seeking advancement and growth) rather than primarily hardship.

---

Social stigma / labeling issue (mentioned)

• The video discusses whether workers feel labeled as “TKI” (a common term for Indonesian migrant workers).
• Findings described:
  • Stigma exists based on their stories (e.g., Malaysians may group people and attach stigma to “TKI workers”).
  • However, white-collar workers appear less troubled by the label—more uncomfortable, rather than strongly rejecting it.

---

Overall conclusion stated

• The cognitive framework differs significantly between blue-collar and white-collar migrant workers.
• These different perceptions shape their actions/decisions and can also influence people around them.

---

Speakers / sources featured (identified from the subtitles)

• Iras (UI / Social Welfare Science student; presenter)
• Ardi Manalu (UI / Social Welfare Science; presenter)
• Fitriani Fazrin (Moderator)
• Rasya Ananda Gania (Speaker)
• Fzwa (Speaker; name appears as “sfzwa” in subtitles)
• Diva / Abi (referenced as sources of viewpoints; not clearly separate speakers shown on-camera)
• Mrs. C / Mrs. I (domestic worker interviewee; PERTIMIK member)
• PERTIMIK members (group/community source mentioned)
• UN and Indonesian Embassy (institutions mentioned as being addressed by PERTIMIK; not direct speakers)