Minutes of the bipartite negotiation of 3 June 2026 between PT Nomnie Technologies Indonesia and Rahmat Wibowo, where the company rejected all four of his demands and he agreed that his employment had ended during probation, not by dismissal

What this document is

Minutes of a bipartite negotiation (Berita Acara Perundingan Bipartit), three pages, without a letterhead or number. The PDF is titled “Berita Acara Perundingan Bipartit - Rah…”. Pages 1 and 2 are stitched from the 5-second frames of Rahmat’s YouTube video of 31 October 2026 (at about 2:35–3:50), where he scrolls through them next to his own article about the dispute. Page 3 comes from a separate screenshot of the same document; the company representative’s signature is covered by a solid black box. The blue highlights from his screen have been removed.

What it says

• When and where. Wednesday, 3 June 2026, at the manpower office (Dinas Tenaga Kerja) in Tangerang, as a bipartite negotiation to settle an industrial relations dispute between employer and worker.
• The parties. First party: PT Nomnie Technologies Indonesia, represented by Randy Gunawan, General Manager of Indonesia, and Salsabila Meidiana Putri, HR Business Partner. Second party: Rahmat Wibowo, “acting for himself, as a former worker in his probation period”.
• I. Background. He was employed under an open-ended contract (PKWTT); the employment ended because he was declared not to have passed probation (failed probation), as set out in the probation termination letter. The negotiation addresses his objections and claims about his rights after the employment ended.
• II. The four points.
  1. Remaining wages. He claims two days’ pay, counting 7 working days. The company rejects it: paying the balance on 7 calendar days is valid, conclusive and in line with the contract and the termination letter, which he signed without coercion.
  2. How the employment ended. He wanted it qualified in writing as a dismissal (PHK); the company holds that by law it is a termination during probation under the pre-employment agreement. Agreement: “in this forum the second party consciously admits his mistake and confirms that the termination that occurred was a termination within the probation period, not a formal dismissal (PHK).”
  3. Employee referral programme. He claims a reward for searching for candidates, more than 50 CVs submitted to recruitment. The company rejects it: the work was outside his job description and without written instruction, and under company rules a referral reward is paid only for candidates who are recommended and hired; none of his candidates met the minimum qualifications.
  4. Pre-contract wages. He claims pay for work done before the effective date of his contract; the company firmly rejects it, since its obligations start on the date in the contract both signed.
• III. Results. “After an in-depth discussion of the points above”, the negotiation is declared to have reached no agreement (deadlock). Each side keeps its position, so the dispute “will be continued and handed over for settlement to the Tangerang City manpower office”. The minutes were made “consciously, without any coercion or pressure from any party”.
• Signatures. For the first party, PT Nomnie Technologies Indonesia: signed, Randy Gunawan, General Manager of Indonesia (signature covered here). For the second party, “former worker”: Rahmat Wibowo, with the signature line blank.

Observations

1. The one point he conceded. The only agreement recorded is that he “admits his mistake” and that his employment ended during probation, not by dismissal. In the video in which he showed this document he still introduced himself as “the person fired by Nomni AI” and called for “bankrupting” the “oppressive company” (ev-20261031-010).
2. Rejected in full. The company rejected all four demands, including the more than Rp100 million in referral commission he later pursued at mediation (doc-20260714-001), where the mediator’s records give the same account: none of his referred candidates were accepted.
3. Unsigned by him. In the copy he showed, the company has signed and his own signature line is empty, though the minutes record his acknowledgement that he left during probation.
4. Named staff. He published it with the names and positions of the company’s two representatives. He named its HR partner again in the same video.