Sustainability 14 02745

Article
COVID-19 in the Workplace in Indonesia

Fatma Lestari 1,2,*, Margaret Cook 3, Kelly Johnstone 3, Miranda Surya Wardhany 2, Robiana Modjo 1,
Baiduri Widanarko 1 and Devie Fitri Octaviani 2
1 Occupational Health & Safety Department, Faculty of Public Health, Universitas Indonesia Campus,
Universitas Indonesia, Depok 16424, West Java, Indonesia; bian@ui.ac.id (R.M.); baiduri@ui.ac.id (B.W.)
2 Disaster Risk Reduction Center, Universitas Indonesia Campus, Universitas Indonesia, ILRC Building,
Level 2, Depok 16424, West Java, Indonesia; miranda.surya@ui.ac.id (M.S.W.); devie.fitri11@ui.ac.id (D.F.O.)
3 Occupational Health & Safety Science Program, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences,
The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia; m.cook4@uq.edu.au (M.C.);

k.johnstone2@uq.edu.au (K.J.)
* Correspondence: fatma@ui.ac.id
Abstract: Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been declared a pandemic because of its world-
wide spread. The COVID-19 pandemic does not only impact public health but also the operations
of businesses and workers’ safety in their workplace. The objectives of this study were to provide a
broad perspective of COVID-19 prevention and control implementation in industries, investigate
barriers and challenges as well as drivers in implementing COVID-19 prevention and control, and
provide key recommendations to the policy makers regarding COVID-19 prevention and control in
industries. This study was conducted through online interviews with selected organizations in var-
ious industries which were selected by the granting body, including agriculture and animal hus-
bandry; construction; manufacturing; and logistic and goods transportation. It also involved policy
makers from government agencies including the Ministry of Manpower, Ministry of Health, Indo-
nesian Safety and Health Council, International Labor Organization, and Indonesian COVID-19
Task Force. The participants of this study were chosen using convenience sampling. The findings of
Citation: Lestari, F.; Cook, M.; this study indicate that health protocols are implemented to varying degrees in companies, both
Johnstone, K.; Wardhany, M.S.; within and across the sectors, and that drivers to comply with the Health Protocols include compli-
Modjo, R.; Widanarko, B.; ance, business continuity, and top management commitment. The significant barriers and chal-
Octaviani, D.F. COVID-19 in the lenges include a perceived lack of clear direction from the government, rapid changes in directives’,
Workplace in Indonesia. poor worker awareness, and limited organizational resources. The key recommendations to the pol-
Sustainability 2022, 14, 2745. https:// icy maker include harmonization of the guidelines and legislation, additional schemes to provide
doi.org/10.3390/su14052745
funding in the COVID-19 prevention and control implementation, as well as facilitate the ongoing
Academic Editor: John Rennie Short education of the general working public.
Received: 25 January 2022

Keywords: COVID-19 prevention and control; implementation of health protocols;
Accepted: 22 February 2022
business continuity during pandemic
Published: 25 February 2022
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu-

tral with regard to jurisdictional
claims in published maps and institu-
1. Introduction
tional affiliations.
The world is presently affected by the coronavirus disease (COVID-19). COVID-19 is
a relatively new disease caused by the transmission of Severe Acute Respiratory Syn-
drome Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) which was first identified in December 2019 in Wuhan,
Copyright: © 2022 by the authors. Li- China. The outbreak was declared by the World Health Organization (WHO) as a world-
censee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. wide pandemic on 11 March 2020 [1].
This article is an open access article The COVID-19 pandemic has led to a dramatic loss of human life worldwide. Ac-
distributed under the terms and con- cording to the COVID-19 Situation report as of 22 October 2021, WHO reported a global
ditions of the Creative Commons At- cumulative number of 243 million positive cases and 4.94 million deaths since the start of
tribution (CC BY) license (https://cre- the pandemic [2]. In Indonesia, the Government of the Republic of Indonesia has reported
ativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). 4,238,594 confirmed cases of COVID-19 with 143,153 reported deaths [2].
Sustainability 2022, 14, 2745. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052745 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2022, 14, 2745 2 of 24
The COVID-19 pandemic also presents an unprecedented challenge to public health,

food systems, and the business world. The economic and social disruptions caused by the
pandemic are devastating. Millions of businesses face an existential threat because of in-
terrupted operations due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The pandemic COVID-19 has a sig-
nificant impact on the workplaces, including work practice changes such as working from
the office to work from home, affecting workers’ mental health, social distancing, unem-
ployment, and implementation of health protocols [3].
In the early phase of the pandemic, the Indonesian government through its Ministry
of Manpower held meetings and discussions on how to respond if the pandemic enters
Indonesia and how to deal with its impacts on businesses [4]. The Ministry of Manpower
also issued a circular to prevent the spread of this severe pneumonia in the labor sector.
In this Circular Letter (SE) Number B.5/51/AS.02.02/I/2020, the Ministry of Manpower
asked companies and related agencies to report and collect data on every case or sus-
pected case of severe pneumonia; take precautions for pneumonia cases in the workplace;
implement Clean and Healthy Behavior (PHBS). Meanwhile, the ministry continued to
collaborate with other countries and the International Labor Organization (ILO) on
COVID-19 prevention and control measures [4,5]. Several preventive measures for
COVID-19 transmission in the workplace within Indonesian companies have been imple-
mented including the implementation of procedure and policy, operational, health and
safety programs, and external activities [6].
Starting from 17 March 2020, all governors in Indonesia, based on the Circular Num-
ber M/3/H.04/III/2020 on Protection of Workers/Laborers and Business Continuity in the
Context of Preventing and Overcoming COVID-19, are expected to protect workers’
wages during the COVID-19 pandemic and make efforts to prevent and control COVID-
19 in the workplace. The Minister of Manpower stated that workers who are proven to be
COVID-19 suspects by a doctor’s statement and undergo quarantine or isolation have the
right to receive their full wage during quarantine/isolation [4,7].
After the WHO declared COVID-19 as a global pandemic, the Minister of Manpower
of the Republic of Indonesia announced that actions are needed to protect workers and busi-
ness continuity. These actions include, among others, providing guidance and supervision
on the implementation of regulations related to Occupational Safety and Health (OSH); re-
quiring companies to collect and report data to relevant agencies on COVID-19 cases in the
company; urging business owners to implement measures to prevent the spread of the coro-
navirus in the company [4,7]. Business continuity has been known to foster business activi-
ties and recovery processes from either natural or technological disasters [8].
The Ministry of Manpower then issued the Minister of Manpower Circular Number
M/7/ AS.02.02/V/2020 on Business Continuity Plans in Facing the 2019 Coronavirus Dis-
ease Pandemic (COVID-19) and Protocol for COVID-19 Transmission Prevention in Com-
panies [4,5,9]. In this circular, the following seven steps of action are required to maintain
business continuity during the pandemic:
1. Recognizing Business Priorities
In this stage, companies need to determine the main products or services of the com-
pany by ranking them based on their priority as well as identifying activities that need to
be carried out and workers who will do these activities.
2. Pandemic Risk Identification
This stage consists of efforts to identify and assess risks that may be faced by the
companies due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This risk identification and assessment must
consider possible threat scenarios, vulnerabilities in business activities, and company ca-
pabilities.
3. Planning for Risk Mitigation
A risk mitigation plan can be developed, including the preparation of Standard Op-
erating Procedures, to ensure that goods needed for business activities are available and
free from COVID-19 contamination. This step also includes re-analyzing policies related
to the possible impacts of the pandemic as well as implementing OSH as an effort to pre-
vent COVID-19 transmission in the workplace.
4. Pandemic Impact Response Identification
At this stage, the company responds accordingly as the pandemic develops by en-
suring workers understand actions that must be taken to prevent COVID-19 transmission.
The company also has to ensure that buyers and suppliers receive the necessary infor-
mation and know that the company is capable of dealing with the pandemic conditions.
5. Designing and Implementing Business Continuity Planning
This stage is carried out by gathering all related information and compiling a busi-
ness continuity plan that contains all business activities in the company.
6. Communicating Business Continuity Plan.
The plan that has been developed is disseminated and all information regarding the
plan is communicated to both internal and external parties.
7. Conducting Business Continuity Plan Tests
The plan must be tested periodically so that new problems can be identified, and
solutions and corrective measures can be implemented [4,5,9].
In addition to explaining the stages of the business continuity plan, the Minister of
Manpower Circular Number M/7/AS.02.02/V/2020 also discusses the health protocols that
must be implemented in the workplace to prevent the transmission of Coronavirus Dis-
ease 2019 (COVID-19) [4,6,9]. The health protocol that must be implemented includes: (1)
maintaining a clean and sanitary work environment; (2) providing hand washing facili-
ties, such as soap or hand sanitizer and running water; (3) ensuring that all workers must
wear masks when going to work or leaving their homes; (4) providing a non-contact ther-
mometer to check the worker’s body temperature before coming to work and paying at-
tention to the health condition of workers. Workers with a body temperature of above 37.5
°C or with symptoms of cough/cold/sore throat/shortness of breath are not allowed to
work in the workplace; (5) setting up the distance between workers to be at least 1 m and
urging workers not to have physical contact with other workers; (6) providing education
and outreach to all workers regarding COVID-19, such as what COVID-19 is, its causes,
symptoms, ways of transmission, and preventive measures; (7) arranging the company
work system so that workers can work at home or schedule workers who have to continue
working at the office to minimize the number of workers working at the same time; and
(8) if there are workers showing COVID-19 symptoms, the health workers or OSH experts
in the company need to report and coordinate with relevant agencies and provide educa-
tion about independent isolation to these workers [4,5,9].
The Ministry of Manpower also elaborates seven strategies to be implemented during
this pandemic, including:
1. Implementing transmission prevention measures by encouraging companies and
workers to make efforts to anticipate the spread of COVID-19 in the workplace.
2. Implementing the new normal procedure.
3. Providing social security protection for workers exposed to COVID-19.
4. Supervising the entire company, not only with regard to the implementation of the
health protocol for preventing COVID-19, but also other safety procedures in the
workplace, both online and onsite.
5. Collaborating with relevant parties, such as the ILO, the National Occupational
Safety and Health Council (DK3N), OSH stakeholders, universities, and inspection
service companies.
6. Creating communication access for the community through establishing an infor-
mation hub, giving consultation, and reporting OSH issues related to COVID-19 in
the company.
7. Shifting the OSH-related activities as regulated by the Ministry of Manpower, such

as OHSMS audits, the appointment of OSH experts in companies, and others, into
online activities [4,5,9].
The handling of the COVID-19 pandemic requires participation from all parties and
the business world has a major contribution in breaking the chain of transmission due to
the size of the working population and the amount of mobility and interactions of the
population generally caused by work activities [10]. Organizations are facing significant
challenges in responding rapidly as the government, particularly the Ministry of Man-
power encourages businesses to implement the COVID-19 Health Protocol through the
Ministry of Manpower Circular Number M/7/ AS.02.02/V/2020 on Business Continuity
Plans in Facing the 2019 Coronavirus Disease Pandemic (COVID-19) and Protocol for the
Prevention of COVID-19 Transmission in Companies [9].
The objectives of this study were to:
1. Provide a broad perspective on the implementation of COVID-19 prevention and con-
trol in specific industries from both the industry perspective and the policy makers'
perspective.
2. Investigate the barriers and challenges as well as the drives to the implementation of
COVID-19 prevention and control in the industries
3. Provide key recommendations to policy makers regarding the implementation of
COVID-19 prevention and control in the specified industries.
2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Research Design
This research project is a cross-sectional mixed method study designed to provide
insights and information regarding the implementation of COVID-19 Health Protocols in
selected industries and selected workplaces.
2.2. Industry Population

The study participants were drawn from four (4) industry sectors that were working
under the New Normal Policy. These sectors were chosen by the funding body as these
sectors are included in its priority scope of work. In addition, these sectors are deemed to
have a significant economic impact, yet the low risk of COVID-19 infection, based on the
assessment of the Indonesian COVID-19 Task Force (2020). The sectors included:
• Agriculture and Animal Husbandry
• Logistics and Goods Transportation
• Construction
• Manufacturing
Businesses were recruited using convenience sampling through the Indonesian Safety
Council Network. There were only three (3) businesses chosen from each of the four targeted
sectors. The companies were approached to participate through written and verbal corre-
spondence. For each business, the members of the COVID-19 Response Team/Task Force
(which included the top management and designated person/s in charge of personnel,
health, and safety, or a health worker) were recruited to be research participants.
2.3. Policy-Maker Involvement

Key employees from relevant Government Departments and other stakeholders re-
lated to policy making were recruited through contacts of the research team. There were
six stakeholders recruited from the Ministry of Labor, Ministry of Health, Indonesian
Safety and Health Council, International Labor Organization, and Indonesian COVID-19
Task Force.
2.4. Ethical Clearance

This research project obtained ethics approval from the Ethics Commission for Re-
search and Community Service Faculty of Public Health Universitas Indonesia under the
ethical clearance No. 436/UN2.F10.D11/PPM.00.02/2020 on 11 July 2020 and from The Uni-
versity of Queensland’s Human Research Ethics Committee (2020001712) on 21 July 2020.
Prior to the data collection process, all participants underwent the informed consent pro-
cess that consisted of explaining the project aims and objectives, their involvement in this
research, as well as the use and confidentiality of the data collected. Informed consent was
then obtained from all participants.
2.5. Data Collection

The members of each Business’ COVID-19 Response Team/Task Force were invited
to participate in panel online interviews using the Zoom platform. Secondary data, such
as the Business’ COVID-19 policy and procedures, examples of rapid test result mapping,
and worker self-risk assessment dashboards, were also collected.
The interviews were conducted between 1 October and 9 November 2020. The inter-
view questions were developed based on the requirements in the Minister of Manpower
Circular No. M/7/AS.02.02/V/2020 on Business Continuity Plans in the 2019 Coronavirus
Disease Pandemic (COVID-19) and Protocol for the Prevention of COVID-19 Transmission
in Companies. All interviews were recorded with the permission of the participants. The
audio recordings were transcribed verbatim for data analysis prior to English translation.
Prior to data analysis, individual stakeholders and participating companies were al-
located a code for de-identification purposes. The code was created using a prefix in ac-
cordance with each sector of industry. These prefixes were AG (agriculture and animal
husbandry), CS (Construction), MF (Manufacturing), LG (Logistics and Goods Transpor-
tation), and ST (Stakeholder).
2.6. Data Analysis

Interview transcripts were summarized and analyzed thematically. Data were com-
piled using excel and trends within and across industry sectors were identified.
2.7. Research Limitations

There were several limitations in this study. Firstly, this study was limited to four
industry sectors that were chosen by the granting body. Secondly, the organizations were
recruited using convenience sampling. This method of sampling was chosen because of
time constraints from the granting body to carry out research. It is recognized that these
limitations might affect the generalization of the findings in this study. However, because
of the qualitative nature of the data collection, the information obtained from the partici-
pants provides a detailed understanding of the implementation of COVID-19 prevention
and control strategies across the four industry sectors studied.
3. Results
The following presents a summary of the findings for each of the industry sectors
and stakeholders. A general description of the organizations is provided in Table 1.
Table 1. General Information of the sample organizations.
No. Sector Code Location Brief Overview of Organisation

AG01 was founded in 1990 and is en-
gaged in the seeding of vegetables. They
are involved in teaching farmers how to
1 AG01 Purwakarta
seed vegetables and grow ready-to-con-
sume vegetables. Have 600 employees
spread throughout Indonesia.
AG02 is an agribusiness, specifically in
palm oil with the production of CPO
Agriculture
2 AG02 Jakarta and its derivative products. Head office
in Jakarta and operating units through-
out Indonesia. 170,000 employees
AG03 is engaged in fertilization. Has 5
factories with a capacity of around 2.6
3 AG03 Palembang million tons of urea and 1.6 million tons
of ammonia.
1900 employees.
Logistics company managing land and
4 LG01 Jakarta sea freight cargo. It has 20 employees in
Head office.
Trucking and Warehousing. It consists
5 Goods Transportation LG02 Jakarta
of 60% Drivers and 40% employees.
Same-day courier service. It has 1800–
6 LG03 Jakarta 2000 employees at HQ, 200 other office-
based employees, and 1400 couriers.
MF01 has been engaged in the healthy
food and beverage industry since 1980.
7 MF01 Jakarta It produces a health drink brand that
has been distributing the products all
across more than 30 countries.
MF02 is a cement industry that is a sub-
sidiary of BUMN (State-Owned Enter-
prises). The MF02 is marketed in the Su-
8 MF02 Padang
matra area and partly exported. It has
1000 employees and around 2000–3000
Manufacturing
outsourced workers.
MF03 is a food and beverages company
that operates from Sabang to Merauke,
with approximately eight manufactur-
ing plants, with more than 300 distribu-
9 MF03 Jakarta tion centers. Whether it’s third-party or
premises. The total magnitude for the
employees is 6000 with the number of
contractors approximately the same as
6000, across Indonesia
CS01 is a subsidiary of BUMN (State-
Owned Enterprises) which specializes in
civil work. The head office is in Jakarta
10 CS01 Jakarta and projects all around Indonesia. Per-
manent employees, around 3000 people,
Construction
and temporary employees in projects of
more than 20,000 to 27,000.
CS02 is one of the leading state indus-
11 CS02 Jakarta tries in Indonesia that has had an inte-
gral part in infrastructure development
since 1961. It has around 6000 perma-

nent employees and thousands of tem-
porary employees in projects across In-
donesia.
CS03 is a state-owned company that is
engaged in construction services and
12 CS03 Jakarta
has been operating for nearly 40 years. It
has projects throughout Indonesia.
3.1. Agricultural Industry Findings

3.1.1. Overview
Three organizations from the agricultural industry participated in this study, includ-
ing an organization assisting farmers through the production of vegetable seedlings and
farmer education with over 600 people spread throughout Indonesia (AG01); an organi-
zation involved in palm oil production with over 170,000 employees throughout Indone-
sia (AG02); and an organization involved in the production of fertilizers with over 1900
employees (AG03).
The three organizations from the agricultural industry were all able to describe de-
tailed processes they have in place to manage the risk of COVID-19 transmission within
their operations. These included procedures for rapid testing, health surveillance, 3M pro-
cedures (masks, hand washing, and social distancing), 3T procedures (tracing, tracking,
and testing), temperature checks, work from home arrangements, rostering system, good
internal and external communications processes, education, crisis management proce-
dures, and restrictions on employees traveling outside the area.
3.1.2. Barriers and Challenges

The main barriers discussed by interviewees in this industry included difficulties in
maintaining high levels of workforce compliance including the need for ongoing educa-
tion and reminders on the 3Ms. This was reflected in several statements from the inter-
viewees. For example:
“For us, the biggest obstacle is awareness of the dangers of COVID-19, that it
can be spread to anyone, whether employees, managers, directors, none will be
spared. Second is their discipline to implement the 3M.” (AG01)
“So, it’s more of discipline actually, individual discipline. But we have the sys-
tem, it’ll be much easier.” (AG02)
“We have to monitor the implementation and remind the employees, that’s why
COVID-19 ranger is needed” (AG03)
The second main barrier was challenges faced in combating misinformation workers
obtained from social media and other sources. Again, this was tied back to the need for
education within the workplace.
There was also a potential infection risk presented by members of the public that work-
ers may interact with outside of work, which was another challenge in the efforts for pre-
venting COVID-19 prevention. Quotes from participants that highlight these themes in-
clude:
“Why, there are so many who don’t wear masks.” (AG01)
“In fact, our main concern regarding transmission comes from the evidence that
some are tested positive. It’s not because they are in the office because they
travel, meet their parents, meet friends, meet sellers, and outsiders. That’s what
we are afraid of.” (AG02)
Another barrier mentioned by the interviewees were public transport overcrowding
and schedules that do not accommodate work rostering requirements or issues with other
organizations not using rostering so normal peak hour presented an overcrowding risk
for travelers. There were also issues with inconsistencies in requirements at different lev-
els of government and in different areas of the country that impacted the two participating
organizations that operated in different areas of Indonesia.
3.1.3. Drivers
The main drivers discussed by interviewees in this industry included maintaining
employees’ health and maintaining sustainable operations.
All three organizations interviewed were consistent in their views regarding the
main driver for implementing COVID-19 requirements, which was to maintain employ-
ees’ health so that the company can maintain uninterrupted operations. Thus, it can be
stated that, basically, the driver was business continuity. This was illustrated in the fol-
lowing quotes from the interviewees:
“We have to keep our employees healthy as much as possible so they can work
well, and the company’s target can be achieved maximally.” (AG03)
“... the company’s commitment for COVID-19 is very high since we see the em-
ployees as assets and our business cannot be interrupted. Once one person is
tested positive, it will impact the entire unit.” (AG02)
Interviewees from AG02 also discussed their organization’s vision for sustainable
operations and the connection between this vision and having good management systems
for COVID-19 prevention:
“...the first driving factor is that we are working in a company that has the vision
to be a leader and a company that is sustainable, that becomes the choice of peo-
ple. Now, that’s a big vision that must be supported.”
3.1.4. Impacts
The main impacts discussed by interviewees in this industry included impacts on
productivity and the psychological impact of the changed working requirements.
All three agricultural organizations reported either no or positive impacts on produc-
tivity. For example:
“Our productivity is still good, there’s no significant decrease in performance.”
(AG03).
Work from home arrangements did not affect productivity negatively. One organi-
zation noted improvements in productivity due to the use of new technology and a
streamlining of its operations. For example:
“…used and explored the use of technology as much as possible. Therefore, in
my opinion, our productivity, especially related to training and auditing and so
on, actually increases.” (AG02)
In terms of the psychological impact of the changed working requirements, one of
the interviewees stated:
“... people are really uncomfortable working with the new system because they
are used to the old way of working. It’s a negative impact psychologically”.
(AG02)
3.2. Logistics Industry Findings

3.2.1. Overview
Three participating organizations from the logistics industry were a subsidiary com-
pany managing land and sea freight cargo with 20 people across port and head office
operations (LG01); a subsidiary company involved in trucking, warehousing, and for-
warding, who employed a combination of office staff and truck drivers (LG02); and a start-
up organization that provides same-day courier services with over 1800 workers, includ-
ing 400 office-based employees and 1400 independent couriers that operate across a num-
ber of regions of Indonesia (LG03)
The three organizations from the logistics industry were able to describe processes
they had in place to manage the risk of COVID-19 transmission within their operations.
These included procedures for COVID-19 Taskforce, 3M procedures (masks, hand wash-
ing, and social distancing), temperature checks (limited), testing (one company only),
work from home arrangements (in the initial phase), internal communications processes,
education, and provision of supplements.

The main barriers discussed by interviewees in this industry included available re-
sources, exposure of workers to the general population, compliance with health protocols,
and lack of specific guidelines.
Resources for implementing required activities (including both finances and time)
became one of the main barriers in this sector. LG01 reported that in respect to detection
(i.e., testing) they had been asked to test their workers by their parent company. However,
they reported that they had been unable to comply due to time constraints. Example
quotes that demonstrate this theme include:
“I am currently in the process of communicating with management whether we
really need to test 100% of our employees and drivers. But so far, it’s been deeply
examined, whether it is necessary or not. Because it’s related to the cost” [LG02]
“However, the rapid test is only provided if there is a possible interaction and
so on. It’s also because the total number of our couriers is high. There are 1400
people. So, in terms of expenses, it is somewhat difficult to facilitate everything.”
[LG03]
Furthermore, all three organizations were concerned about the exposure of their
workers to the public, which may lead to cross-transmission between the worker popula-
tion and the general population.
“But when they are outside, outside of our scope of work, they perhaps hang
out together with their friends, hang out together with their families. It is prob-
lematic for us to monitor their activities outside of office activities.” [LG01]
Inadequate compliance to health protocol also raised concerns among all organiza-
tions, particularly compliance to 3M among non-office workers (i.e., truck drivers and
couriers). It was also identified that communicating the importance of compliance with
health protocols was challenging.
“Because it is true that from different levels of education, the way of understand-
ing and comprehending is different, so the way to communicate must also be
different.” [LG03]
One participant, which is a start-up independent company, voiced concerns about
the lack of specific guidance both from regional governments and respective sectors.
“For the specific preventive protocol for logistics, I don’t know it yet, Ma’am, I
still don’t know it yet. We still haven’t had any communication or initiative with
the regional government or related agencies.” [LG03]
3.2.3. Drivers
The main drivers discussed by interviewees in this industry were ensuring the health
of their workers and, for subsidiaries, implementation of protocols as assigned by the par-
ent company.
All three organizations considered that ensuring the health of all their workers would
minimize the impact of the pandemic on their operations. There was a strong focus on build-
ing the immunity of the workers through the provision of supplements (i.e., vitamins and
immunity builders), as well as temperature checking, education, and enforcement of the 3M.
For subsidiary companies (LG01 and LG02) in particular, a focus on implementing
the protocols of the parent company was conveyed.
3.2.4. Impacts
The main impacts discussed by interviewees in this industry included the initial im-
pact of the pandemic on productivity; problems related to the Work From Home (WFH)
protocols; and impacts from the number of workers who were found positive for COVID-
19 and needed to isolate
All three businesses reported initial impacts on productivity, which was very severe
in some cases. Nevertheless, all organizations were then able to pivot to new and emerg-
ing markets to sustain their businesses and were all now financially viable.
These businesses considered the WFH protocols to be problematic as they affect op-
erations and may lead to operational issues. This is reflected in the following statement:
“If we apply a work from home system or a shift system in our company, we
will find it difficult to carry out the operational activities. Finally, we gathered
all the employees, told them that this job indeed required human resources who
must be present at the office. It cannot be done by working from home since it
is an operational work [LG01]”.
General concerns about the impact of positive cases and the need for workers to iso-
late were also voiced by the interviewees. For example:
“If there’s a test that comes back positive, it will affect the business process, in
which we have to close for 3 days, with the closing of 3 days, yes, commercially,
we will be harmed.” [LG02]
In addition, there was also a statement that the enforcement of the protocols within
these organizations was still inadequate and that the impact was still minimal.
3.3. Construction Industry Findings

3.3.1. Overview
The three construction companies that participated in this research are leading state
industries in Indonesia, which included an organization that has been operating for 60
years and specializes in civil work with five business lines including construction, EPC,
investment, property, and manufacturing (CS01); an organization that has been operating
for 59 years as a general contractor that also has a construction investment business with
four main core businesses including toll and non-toll roads, property, and manufacturing.
(CS02); and an organization engaged in construction services which have been operating
for nearly 40 years, which is also engaged in the property sector. (CS03).
The three organizations from the construction industry were able to describe pro-
cesses they had in place to manage the risk of COVID-19 transmission within their oper-
ations. These included procedures for establishing a COVID-19 Task Force (including cri-
sis management team and COVID-19 rangers); Working from Home (WFH) and Work at
the Office (WAO) policies; 3T procedure (Testing, Tracing and Tracking); 3M procedure
(Mask, Washing Hands and Physical Distancing); temperature checks; health self-assess-
ment through mobile application; use of COSMIC application “COVID-19 Safe Manage-
ment Information and Compliance” developed by the Ministry of State Enterprises; health
Promotion and education through WhatsApp groups, email, banners, safety induction
and toolbox meeting; and crisis management plan.

The main barriers discussed by interviewees in this industry included difficulties in
educating workers and enforcing 3M among workers; relocation of budget for 3M imple-
mentation; and lack of public awareness of the company’s health protocol.
The interviewees from the three organizations conveyed the difficulties in reaching
a large number of employees to educate, implement and enforce 3M (using masks, wash-
ing hands, and physical distancing) as stated below.
“Not all projects are located in an environment that has adequate health facilities
and infrastructures, and personnel… In addition, there may be mobilization and
transportation problems in small areas.” (CS03)
“So, I always do socialization about 3M. For me, I add one, namely increasing
immunity, maintaining immunity. This is the hardest thing to do in the project.”
(CS01)
“It’s because of the relationship with behavior change, right? At the head office
itself and at the cooperative office every morning, we have started to get used to
conducting safety briefings. In this case, the briefing is related to this COVID-19
health problem. In each workspace in a working group, we take turns to deliver.
Yes, even though what was said was repeated over and over again, we hope
people will remember it.” (CS01)
In order to implement the 3M, relevant provisions need to be made available and this
required a large amount of money. This also created challenges in terms of reallocating
the budget as described by the interviewees.
Concerns were also voiced regarding the lack of the public’s awareness of the com-
pany’s health protocol. This was justifiable concerns due to the possible transmission
caused by interactions between the public and workers. For example:
“The biggest obstacle is the concern of external parties related to our company.
Because no matter how sophisticated and strict the government to control and
evaluate COVID-19, without any supports from externals who interact in-
tensely, it will eventually become ineffective” (CS02)
3.3.3. Drivers
The main drivers discussed for this industry included top management commitment
and the use of technology. The three companies all discussed that top management com-
mitment is the key driver for implementing health protocols. The interviewees discussed
companies’ board of directors and their commitment and involvement in implementing
the response to COVID-19 in the workplace through the implementation of the COVID-
19 related company’s policies and procedures, as well as the establishment of a COVID-
19 Task Force. For example:
“The director of CS02 already has commitment and involvement in handling
COVID-19 by placing the QHSE functions as the main command (VP Quality
HSE and systems). Commanding all the directors of the subsidiary and in chief
of senior VP of operations.” (CS02)
“The company’s commitment is evidenced by the existence of programs to pre-
vent virus transmission… Monitoring is performed every week, which is led di-
rectly by the Task Force Team Leader chaired by the Director of Finance and
Human Resources and attended by the project leader.” (CS03)
“The company provides a means for washing hands. Then the company also
provides the workers’ barracks that we have designed so that they cannot talk,
release droplets, and infect other people. So, we put screens on their beds.”
(CS01)
The use of technology was also considered one of the important drivers in the imple-
mentation of COVID-19 protocols. The development of IT-based applications, such as
COSMIC, helps companies monitor and promote COVID-19 prevention in the workplace.
3.3.4. Impacts
One of the main impacts discussed by interviewees in this industry included impacts
on the economy and productivity. All three construction organizations reported that the
COVID-19 pandemic has affected their companies in terms of economy and productivity
as stated below.
“First, it must have an impact. It must have an impact from all sides, both from
the economic point of view as well as work productivity… In addition, previ-
ously the government allocated funds for projects. But in the end, it was can-
celed because the project budget was relocated to the national COVID-19 coun-
termeasures effort.” (CS01)
“Productivity is affected, and this productivity is lower than normal.” (CS02)
Another common impact raised was the required change in work and operational
systems. The implementation of health protocols has driven the companies to establish
online work systems.
“All CS02 governance is IT-based. Project meetings, business unit coordination
meetings, project pre-implementation, quarterly coordination meetings, vendor
negotiations, and walkthrough survey by top management to projects has done
by online system” (CS02)
“For communication, information technology is basically used, because there
are no face-to-face interactions due to physical distancing” (CS03)
3.4. Manufacturing Industry Findings

3.4.1. Overview
The three participating organizations from the manufacturing industry were an or-
ganization involved in the food and beverage industry since 1980 (MF01); an organization
involved in the cement industry which is a subsidiary of a State-owned enterprise. (MF02);
and an organization involved in the manufacture and distribution of beverages. (MF03)
The three organizations from the manufacturing industry were able to describe de-
tailed processes they have in place to manage the risk of COVID-19 transmission within
their operations. These included procedures for COVID-19 Task Force; Work from home
or Work from Office system; PCR Testing; tracing and tracking System; company doctors;
communication systems; self-assessment; reporting system; and employee socialization,
education, and monitoring.

There were several main barriers discussed by interviewees in this industry, one of
which was employees’ perceptions of COVID-19 and changing the culture related to
health protocol implementation. For example:
“Then also outside, it turns out that there are also many employees who are still
subject to local customs. Like ngaliwet and so on.” (MF01)
“The internal obstacle faced by the company is changing the culture, which re-
quires a huge effort” (MF03)
Numerous government policies that are difficult to understand and implement be-
came another barrier conveyed by the interviewees. This issue is highlighted in the fol-
lowing quotes:
“The use of the medical terms in Permenkes (Ministry of Health Regulations)
are difficult for ordinary people to understand” (MF01)
“As an illustration, I will tell you that there is a change in temperature for the
reference from 38 to 37.3. That may sound simple. But for the implementation,
changing the mindset, and providing an explanation for why it changed, that’s
a tremendous effort.” (MF02)
In addition to the two barriers above, insufficient financial resources to implement
desired prevention strategies was also mentioned as a barrier in preventing COVID-19
transmission in companies.
“On the other hand, the lower the productivity level, the lower the sales volume
level, giving vitamins means providing extra budget.” (MF03)
3.4.3. Drivers
All interviewees from the three manufacturing companies agreed that the main driv-
ing factor was a commitment from the top management. For example:
“The formation of the COVID-19 Task Force is directly led by the board of di-
rectors” (MF01)
“MF02 management commitment to COVID-19 is very high. The team has to
report every week on what we do: there is a team that manages prevention and
a specific team for the adaptation to the new habits that we have done. Decisions
are made right away in meetings, including reporting on the Behavioral Change
Assessment (BCA). There is a BCA team that monitors the general level of com-
pliance with the COVID-19 protocol.” (MF02)
“Top Management commitment. The company’s CEO went down immediately
to do daily updates on the latest conditions at the start of the pandemic, then
continued to do weekly updates which also involved BOD.” (MF03)
Furthermore, they also agreed that routine communication and socialization using
digital technology also has a significant impact on COVID-19 Protocol implementation.
“The first one is Outlook blasting, e-mail blasting. So, at the factory, it was
blasted from the internal community to all employees with certain materials.
Then through the WhatsApp Group, so we know that in each work unit they
always have a WhatsApp Group.” (MF01)
“Demographically, the companies are spread in various provinces with extraor-
dinary magnitude. Without this communication, participatory and consultative
technology, it could not work well.” (MF03)
3.4.4. Impacts
The main impacts discussed by interviewees in this industry included impacts on
productivity and total sales, as well as the use of technology in dealing with the pandemic.
The three companies stated that there was a decrease in productivity and total sales, as
stated below.
“The impact on sales, it definitely happened. Especially, …. because schools
were closed, of course, the impact was very much, because we sold a lot in
school canteens” (MF01)
“During the pandemic, our production is only about 80%.” (MF02)
In terms of the use of technology in dealing with the pandemic, some interviews gave
the following statements:
“Usually we use Teams, ma’am. Connected to the company server. Even the co-
ordination between sites and so on, which we used to frequent if we don’t meet
in person, it’s becoming difficult, now, while at home we can have meetings. So,
I think there is a fundamental change in the way we work.” (MF01)
“For offices, WFO is attempted for a maximum 50% or even only 30% (of the
office capacity) by utilizing technology for work, including also for communica-
tion and meetings that support our work. Meetings are generally held virtually.”
(MF02)
3.5. Stakeholders Findings

3.5.1. Overview
The six participating stakeholders are key employees from relevant Government De-
partments stakeholders related to policy development. The roles of each stakeholder in-
clude the followings:
1. Provide guidance, supervision, examination, testing, law enforcement efforts as well
as formulating safety and health norms in the workplace (ST01)
2. Develop policies and implement NSPK (Norms, Standards, Procedures, and Criteria)
as well as provide technical assistance and supervision, and evaluation in occupa-
tional safety and health (ST02)
3. Provide advice for the implementation of government policies related to OHS issues
(ST02)
4. Coordinate the health program at work (ST04)
5. Encourage the policy maker to establish comprehensive regulations, as well as mon-
itoring and evaluating the implementation of regulations in a global context (ST05)
6. Involved in policy making, cross-sectoral coordination, inter-ministerial coordina-
tion, limited cabinet meetings, as well as regular coordination with the regions (ST06)
3.5.2. Implementation of the Regulation

From the perspective of the stakeholders, it was discussed that the regulations related
to COVID-19 Prevention and Control are implemented in coordination with Government
Supervisors (Inspectors) throughout Indonesia as well as the health and safety committees
in the companies. For example:
“So, we empower the health and safety committee, we prepare tools for business
continuity, new normal, physical activity with exercise. Those are items that we
design to prevent transmission of COVID-19 in the workplace.” (ST01)
“At the level of the company or industry, there are several steps that are already
performed by ST02, one of which is norm enforcement by colleagues in the su-
pervision department… The implementation is done by involving and coordi-
nating with related parties so that when COVID-19 prevention measures are im-
plemented.” (ST02)
The regulations are also communicated to related parties through seminars, cam-
paigns, training, and meetings to encourage workers and the public to understand the
issue of preventing COVID-19.
“There have been many campaigns, there have been training, and there have
been many meetings which incidentally were to encourage workers and the
community to be more aware of the issue of prevention and the issue of COVID-
19 in more depth.” (ST05)
3.5.3. Monitoring and Evaluation of Regulation

The interviewees suggested that the monitoring and evaluation of the regulations are
carried out using a ‘PentaHelix’ approach that involves multiple parties, including super-
visors in each region in collaboration with local governments, COVID-19 rangers in the
companies, professional representatives, academics, expert associations, and communi-
ties.
“…fellow supervisors are measuring the policies carried out by the local gov-
ernment where they implement policies of COVID-19 in the workplace… also
we created COVID-19 ranger in the workplace… that helps supervisors to carry

out the COVID-19 prevention protocol.” (ST01)
“In monitoring and evaluating health protocols in the workplace… we have a
means of monitoring health protocol compliance or behavior adherence in the
context of behavior change, we look at their practice individually and in institu-
tions… We also conduct surveys… We are actually the ‘PentaHelix’ approach.
Become multi-partners… So, in the process, we also received reports from all
those parties.” (ST06)
There are IT-based monitoring evaluation tools for health protocol compliance which
are reported systematically.
“Monitoring is basically done through ‘Siperi K3′ application digitally. Compa-
nies can fill out (the application) and they will automatically know in which risk
category they are in, whether it is in the high, medium, or low-risk categories.”
(ST02)
3.5.4. Barriers in Implementing the Regulation

There were several barriers discussed by the stakeholders. The first barrier was the
difficulty of businesses to comply with the regulations since there are a lot of regulations
regarding COVID-19.
“Due to compliance with many regulations, businessmen are also stressed. For
example, someone asked me, ‘Mr. Director, how come there are many regula-
tions regarding the COVID-19 issue, which we have complied with. We want to
comply; we don’t want our business is disturbed’.” (ST01)
This condition became even more challenging with the lack of coordination among
institutions in implementing the regulations.
“In the implementation of monitoring and evaluation, the barrier is coordina-
tion… Based on this observation, the government needs to appoint a leading
sector, in this case, the Coordinating Minister, to do inter-agency coordination
so that the barrier in terms of coordination as we see today can be minimized
and there would be no coordination issue triggered by sectoral ego.” (ST02)
“Regarding applications and so on, it is true that in the context of monitoring
evaluation, there has been a tremendous disruption in Indonesia, many parties
want to make their own, and ultimately not integrated” (ST06)
Furthermore, some companies were unable to facilitate COVID-19 prevention and
control due to budget limitations. This was worsened by the fact that the public does not
fully understand the existing regulations, thus the need for socialization and education
related to regulations, which indirectly influence the effectiveness of the control measures
applied in the company. There was also a tendency of workers to not comply with the
protocols.
“People tend to get tired of enforcing health protocols… there is still a stigma in
the community regarding COVID-19... ‘If people wear masks, they are sick. So,
if they don’t feel sick, they don’t need masks’… And this generally happens in
informal workplaces.” (ST04)
3.5.5. Drivers in Implementing the Regulation

The main driver identified from the discussion with interviewees was the health pro-
tocol enforcement that is regulated under Presidential Instruction no. 6 of 2020.
“In order to enforce the health protocol in the form of Presidential Instruction
no. 6 of 2020, it is mandated that all parties, which includes the regional govern-
ment, the army, and the police are asked to enforce discipline in implementing
health protocols in the community. For law enforcement, it can be from a re-
gional regulation; it can be a regional head regulation. And it is dependent on
each region.” (ST06)
“But if you don’t obey … they finally had to stop the production process. We
leave it to the local government. For example, in Jakarta, if 1 person in the com-
pany is affected by COVID-19, then the company must be stopped for 3 days.
It’s a form of sanction.” (ST01)
4. Discussion
The findings of the study provide a broad perspective on the implementation of the
health protocol, its drivers, barriers, and challenges that are common across the organiza-
tions and within sectors. Research about COVID-19 transmission prevention and health
measures implemented in the workplace is limited [6,11–16]. Even though previous stud-
ies have been conducted for precautionary measures against COVID-19 in Indonesian
workplaces, analyses about drivers, barriers, and challenges against health protocols have
not been determined [6,17].
4.1. Implementation of Health Protocols

A summary of the key measures reported to be implemented by the organizations is
provided in Table 2.
Table 2. Summary of the implementation of Health Protocols across Organizations and their Sectors.
Measure AG01 AG02 AG03 LG01 LG02 LG03 MF01 MF02 MF03 CS01 CS02 CS03
COVID-19 task force x x x x x x x x x x x x
3M (Masks, hand washing, social dis-
x x x x x x x x x x x x
tancing)
3T (tracing, tracking, and testing) x x x x x x x x x
WFH x x x x x x x x x x x
Rapid testing—random x x
Rapid testing—high risk x x
Rapid testing—all x x x x
PCR testing—targeted x x x x x x x x x
Temperature check x x x x x x x x
Self-Risk Assessment x x x x x x x x x
Company Doctor/Clinic x x x x x x
Rostering system x x x
Internal communication x x x x x x x x x
Education x x x x x x x x x x x x
Employee monitoring and/or enforce-
x x x x x x x x x x x
ment
Management of returning travelers x x x x x
Provision of supplements x x x x
The data summary highlights that the Health Protocols are being implemented to
varying degrees both within and across the sectors. This study found that all organizations
have already established a COVID-19 task force that is responsible for planning, imple-
menting, controlling, and evaluating the implementation of COVID-19 Health protocols
and other prevention and control measures. In Indonesian workplaces, it is compulsory
to form a COVID-19 task force in the workplace based on the Indonesian Ministry of
Health Regulation, and it appears to be one of the strong drivers for COVID-19 transmis-
sion prevention in the workplace. A similar study has also shown the formation of the
COVID-19 task force in the workplace on US Construction projects [18].
It is also apparent that most of the organizations have consistently implemented the
3M (wearing masks, hand washing, and physical distancing) protocol by ensuring all
workers always wear masks, providing hand washing facilities, and setting the distance
between workers to be at least 1 m and urging workers not to have physical contact with
other workers. These protocols are also stated clearly in the COVID-19 procedures in the
companies. According to the Ministry of Manpower Circular Letter, COVID-19 preven-
tion in the workplace shall include the implementation of a clean and healthy lifestyle,
mask use, physical distancing, and provision of health facilities [9]. Research shows that
personal protective measures (e.g., physical distancing, hand hygiene, and mask-wearing)
are considered as one of the main public health and social measures (PHSMs) that should
be implemented in order to suppress COVID-19 transmission [19,20]. The importance to
using masks, handwashing, social distancing, maintaining a healthy lifestyle, con-
ducting tracing, tracking, and testing provide significant COVID-19 cases from the
workplace [3,6,12–17,21–37].
Our study found that all organizations have already conducted socialization and ed-
ucation regarding COVID-19 to the workers. The information disseminated includes the
causes, symptoms, ways of transmission, and preventive measures of COVID-19, as well
as the Clean and Healthy Living Behavior (PHBS). Educating workers on COVID-19 pol-
icies, signs and symptoms, hygiene procedures, and understanding the spread of the virus
might provide workers the knowledge about the significance of requisite behaviors that
effectively combat the spread of the outbreaks [38]. Our study also found that socialization
and education are conducted through safety inductions, online meetings, webinars, train-
ing, WhatsApp blasts, campaigns, and posters. According to the ISO/PAS 4005:2020, these
communication methods are suggested so the messages are accessible and can be under-
stood by all relevant parties with different levels of literacy [38–41]. It seems that all or-
ganizations in this study have implemented effective health communication which is a
key factor to break the transmission of COVID-19. It is suggested that accurate and well-
developed health communication can facilitate how societies promote and accomplish ad-
herence to necessary behavior change [38,42]. In addition, effective risk communication is
crucial to enhance the understanding of the health threats as well as to facilitate the society
in making informed decisions for mitigating the risk regarding COVID-19 [38,43]. How-
ever, learning various communication tools might be challenging. Lack of familiarity and
expertise with digital solutions and communication tools might affect workers’ produc-
tivity and mental health. The increased use of technology to facilitate communication
could lead to potential impacts such as increased stress and work-life balance issues
[38,44].
Most organizations participating in this study already have a business continuity
plan that is included in the Emergency Response procedures or other related procedures
in the company. However, these documents are not written according to the business con-
tinuity plan template described in the Ministry of Manpower Circular. In the circular let-
ter, the Ministry of Manpower required the organizations to implement a business conti-
nuity management system to maintain business continuity during the pandemic [9]. Re-
search has shown that protecting business continuity is one of the effective management
strategies to overcome health and safety challenges during COVID-19 [8,38]. Indeed, busi-
ness continuity has been known to foster organizations' resilience and foster recovery
from any disruptions including pandemic COVID-19 [45,46].
Our study found that there are several differences in COVID-19 prevention and con-
trol measures implemented by the organizations within and across the sectors. The most
significant area of difference is around the testing protocol. This ranges from organiza-
tions conducting no testing to organizations implementing rapid testing of all employ-
ees/visitors/etc. complemented with PCR testing. Most organizations have reported ran-
dom or high-risk testing implementation first and then progressed to comprehensive test-
ing. Organizations that do not test frequently, or even do not do any testing, mention
financial resource limitation as the reason, despite the fact that the government through
the Ministry of Manpower already facilitates rapid testing as well as PCR/Swab Test for
industries. This finding shows that intense upgrading of testing capacities in the work-
place is required as testing will subsequently help to discover cases and cohorts, trace
contacts, and ensure the implementation of preventive self-isolation of contacts, which is
crucial in breaking the chain of transmission [47]. In addition, the monitoring of COVID-
19 testing results provides information as to whether the prevention and control measures
have been effective or not [48]. However, published studies generally concluded that all
testing should be combined with high-quality workplace infection control practices [49–
52].
In summary, our study found that the Health Protocols are implemented to varying
degrees, both within and across the sectors. There is a range of factors that may have con-
tributed to these differences, including the nature of the business, organizational structure
and size, financial resources, and geographic location. It was also identified that well-es-
tablished large organizations, with comprehensive management systems, appeared to
have a better ability to rapidly and effectively implement COVID-19 policies and proce-
dures. Thus, it is suggested that policy makers consider additional schemes to provide
funding and/or other resources to assist organizations (particularly SMEs) to comply with
the Health Protocols.
4.2. Drivers to Implement Health Protocols

This study revealed that the drivers for compliance towards health protocols vary
among organizations; however, these three main areas apply in all organizations:
1. Compliance with Government directives
2. Ensuring business continuity by keeping workers healthy
3. Response to the top management commitment or, in the case of subsidiary organiza-
tions, response to the parent company’s commitment towards COVID-19 prevention
and control measures.
We found that all participating organizations from the Agriculture and Logistics sec-
tors were consistent in their views regarding the main driver for implementing COVID-
19 control measures, being the maintenance of employees’ health so that the company can
continue uninterrupted operations. Basically, the driver is business continuity. The fol-
lowing quote illustrates this driver:
“... the company’s commitment for COVID-19 is very high since we see the em-
ployees as assets and our business cannot be interrupted. Once one person is
tested positive, it will impact the entire unit.” (AG02)
Previous research has also identified this main business continuity driver, finding
that organization’s responses to the COVID-19 crisis is to ensure the well-being of the
workforce and to reduce the negative effects of the outbreak while creating the conditions
for enhancing the human capital of the organization [47]. A business continuity plan has
been known to speed up COVID-19 recovery and enhance workplace resilience [8,45,46].
On the other hand, the participating organizations from the construction and manu-
facturing sectors agree that the key driver for implementing health protocols is top man-
agement commitment. All interviewees suggested that the companies’ board of directors
were committed and involved in implementing COVID-19 response in the workplace
through the implementation of the company’s policies and procedures regarding COVID-
19 and the establishment of a COVID-19 Task Force. The example quotes describing this
driver include:
“The director of CS02 already has commitment and involvement in handling
COVID-19 by placing the QHSE functions as the main command (VP Quality
HSE and systems). Commanding all the directors of the subsidiary and in chief
of the senior VP of operations.” (CS02)
“The formation of the COVID-19 Task Force is directly led by the board of di-
rectors.” (MF01)
According to the ISO/PAS 45005:2020, organizations should demonstrate leadership
and commitment to collective responsibility and safe working practices to assist effective
management of COVID-19 in the workplace [39]. Research also demonstrates that organ-
izations with a high level of commitment are reported to have been more resilient during
the crisis and fostering the prevention of COVID-19 transmission in the workplaces
[32,53–55]. A previous study showed management commitment will encourage an em-
ployee to adopt positive behaviors which consist of employees’ voluntary and creative
actions beyond the formal requirements [32].
From the perspective of the Ministry of Manpower, it is stated that the main driver
for organizations to implement the Health Protocol is law enforcement. It is suggested
that organizations need to comply with the Government directives as enforced by Presi-
dential Instruction no. 6 of 2020 [4]. Recent research has found that the fear of non-com-
pliance is associated with rules dictated by authorities. It is suggested that the COVID-19
pandemic is perceived as a threat, which then acts as a motivational factor to increase the
probability of compliance with regulations [56].
4.3. Barriers and Challenges in Implementing Health Protocols

Our results found that the significant barriers and challenges to the implementation
of the protocols were overall consistent across all participating organizations.
Perceived a lack of clear direction from government agencies due to differences in
directives from different levels of government and across regions and sectors, which is
particularly challenging for organizations operating at a national level. This issue is also
identified by the stakeholders that have identified the difficulties faced by businesses in
complying with the regulations due to various different regulations regarding the
COVID-19 response. In addition, this study also highlights other barriers to the imple-
mentation of the Health Protocols in the workplace, including the rapid changes in direc-
tives with limited timeframes for information dissemination and action. Literature also
underlines the lack of government policies as a challenge in implementing COVID-19 pre-
vention and control measures [57]. Research has shown that organizations were over-
whelmed by constantly changing COVID-19 prevention and control guidelines. Even
though there is an awareness of new guidelines or standards, the application of these mit-
igations is unprecedented with no guidance to share examples of good practice. Hence
the adherence to guidelines is influenced by levels of support, commitment, and commu-
nication from management [44,49]. On the other hand, the government should frame ef-
fective policies that could be easily implemented to prevent COVID-19 from spreading
[57]. Therefore, it is recommended that key agencies should aim to better coordinate and
integrate their efforts to ensure more consistent messaging in terms of regulations. Alt-
hough the multi-agency (Penta Helix) approach has advantages in securing support from
key players, it is contributing to a lack of clarity. The desired output is a harmonization of
the regulations.
Another finding is the presence of ‘COVID-19 pandemic fatigue’ as a challenge to
implement the Health Protocols. The term ‘Pandemic fatigue’ is defined as distress that
emerges gradually, resulting in demotivation to follow recommended protective behavior
over time [58–61]. Pandemic fatigue appears to exist due to long exposure to pandemic
COVID-19, this includes mental health disturbances, burnout, and stress [11,58–62]. A
continuous intervention that is forced by the company because of the uncertainty and
complexities of the pandemic has led to persistent feelings of fatigue and less motivation
that counteracts the virus [38]. Organizations in our study stated that there is a tendency
for workers to not comply with the protocols. It shows poor worker awareness and com-
pliance with an emphasis on sustained behavior, ongoing vigilance, and enforcement
problems. Given the complex nature of so-called ‘pandemic fatigue’, a multifactorial ac-
tion must be taken in accordance with the barriers and drivers experienced by people and
implemented in an integrated way [58]. Thus, it is suggested that policymakers facilitate
the ongoing education of workers in general, with a particular focus on exploring new
ways to counteract pandemic fatigue.
This study also found the difficulties faced by organizations to increase workers’
awareness and change the behavior through socialization, education, and enforcement
due to limited resources including financial resources, infrastructure, and personnel. The
barrier related to limited organizational resources is not only found in the changing be-
havior issue but also in implementing other desired (and/or) required actions of COVID-
19 prevention and control. For instance, it is reported that in respect to detection (i.e., test-
ing), some organizations have been unable to comply due to budget limitations and time
constraints. This issue is highlighted in the following quote:
“I am currently in the process of communicating with management whether we
really need to test 100% of our employees and drivers. But so far it’s been deeply
examined, whether it is necessary or not. Because it’s related to the cost.” [LG02]
A previous study also described the lack of resources as one of the barriers to imple-
menting public health and social measures [57]. The resources here refer to resources like
equipment, personnel, and financial resources, which become critical barriers in imple-
menting COVID-19 preventive measures [57]. It is suggested that the government should
prioritize funding, particularly for Small-Medium Enterprises (SMEs) which may lack fi-
nancial resources for adequate prevention and control programs [49].
4.4. Positive Implications of COVID-19 Prevention and Control Measures

Some of the participants identified positive impacts from the implementation of
COVID-19 prevention and control measures, including improvements in productivity as
a result of work from home arrangements, the use of new technology, and a streamlining
of operations. Other studies have also reported on positive impacts for workplaces and
society related to COVID-19 driven innovations in technology [63] and the benefits for
society from work from home arrangements [64].
5. Conclusions
Several conclusions are made based on this study. Firstly, health protocols are imple-
mented to varying degrees in companies, both within and across the sectors, with well-
established large organizations having more comprehensive management systems and
being better able to rapidly and effectively implement COVID policies and procedures.
Secondly, drivers to comply with the New Normal Health Protocols also vary but focus
on three main areas including compliance with government directives, ensuring business
continuity by keeping workers healthy, and response to the top management commitment
on COVID-19 response. Thirdly, significant barriers and challenges for implementing the
protocols are identified and consistent across all participating organizations. These barri-
ers and challenges included perceived lack of clear direction from government agencies;
rapid changes in directives with limited timeframes for information dissemination and
action; poor worker awareness and compliance with an emphasis on sustained behavior
(pandemic fatigue); on-going vigilance and enforcement problems; and limited organiza-
tional resources to implement desired (and/or required) actions.
Thus, it is recommended that the key agencies aim to better coordinate and integrate
their efforts to ensure more consistent messaging and harmonization of guidelines and leg-
islation across industry and more broadly across Indonesia. The policy maker should also
consider additional schemes to provide funding and/or other resources to assist organiza-
tions, particularly SMEs, comply with the Health Protocols. Moreover, policy makers
should facilitate the ongoing education of the general working public, with a particular fo-
cus on exploring new ways to counteract ‘pandemic fatigue’. In addition, it is suggested that
further research with measurable variables is needed to provide a broad perspective on the
effectiveness of the implementation of the COVID-19 related Health Protocols in work-
places.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, F.L., M.C. and K.J.; Data curation, F.L., M.C., K.J., M.S.W.,
R.M., B.W. and D.F.O.; Formal analysis, F.L., M.C., K.J., M.S.W., R.M., B.W. and D.F.O.; Methodology,
F.L., M.C. and K.J.; Project administration, F.L., M.C., K.J. and M.S.W.; Supervision, F.L.; Writing—
original draft, F.L., M.C., K.J., M.S.W. and D.F.O.; Writing—review & editing, F.L., M.C., K.J., M.S.W.,
R.M. and B.W. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This project is sponsored by the Australia-Indonesia Centre through Small, Rapid Re-
search Grants with project reference number AICPAIRSRR4 and supported by grants from Univer-
sitas Indonesia International Grant Publication number NKB-576/UN2.RST/HKP.05.00/2021.
Institutional Review Board Statement: The study was conducted in accordance with the Declara-
tion of Helsinki, and approved by the Ethics Commission for Research and Community Service
Faculty of Public Health Universitas Indonesia under the ethical clearance No.
436/UN2.F10.D11/PPM.00.02/2020 on 11 July 2020 and from The University of Queensland’s Human
Research Ethics Committee (2020001712) on 21 July 2020.
Informed Consent Statement: Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the
study.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Acknowledgments: This research has been presented at the 16th Multi-Hazards Symposiums 2021
in which only the abstract that has been published into the proceedings. We would like to
acknowledge the great contribution of the National Occupational Safety and Health Council, par-
ticularly Istiati Suraningsih, Ghazmahadi, Abdul Hakim, Muhammad IdhamRima Melati, and Mu-
hammad Isradi Zainal in data collection process. We also acknowledge all participants from the
stakeholders, and organizations for their participation in this study.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in deter-
mination of study design; data collection, analyses, and interpretation; manuscript writing; or deci-
sion-making process regarding result publication.
References
1. World Health Organization. Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19). Available online: https://www.who.int/health-topics/corona-
virus#tab=tab_1 (accessed on 24 October 2021).
2. World Health Organization. COVID-19 Weekly Epidemiological Update October 2021; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021.
3. Kniffin, K.M.; Narayanan, J.; Anseel, F.; Antonakis, J.; Ashford, S.P.; Bakker, A.B.; Bamberger, P.; Bapuji, H.; Bhave, D.P.; Choi,
V.K.; et al. COVID-19 and the Workplace: Implications, Issues, and Insights for Future Research and Action. Am. Psychol. 2021,
76, 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000716.
4. Lestari, F.;Thabrany, H.; Haryanto, B.; Ronoatmodjo, S.; Purwana, R.; Trihandini, I.; Utomo, B.; Pratommo, H.; Wiweko, B.; Kasali, R.;
et. al. Indonesia’s Experience in COVID-19 Control; Badan Nasional Penanggulangan Bencana: Jakarta, Indonesia, 2020.
5. Aspan, H. Legal Basis for the Implementation of Work from Home Amid The COVID-19 Pandemic in Indonesia. Saudi J. Hu-
manit. Soc. Sci. 2021, 6, 116–121. https://doi.org/10.36348/sjhss.2021.v06i04.002.
6. Pratama, M.R.; Supriyadi, A.; Sari, N. Assessment of Precautionary Measures against COVID-19 in Indonesian Workplaces. Int.
J. Public Health Sci. 2021, 10, 281-288. https://doi.org/10.11591/ijphs.v10i2.20663.
7. Ministry of Manpower Republic Indonesia. Surat Edaran Menteri Nomor M/3/H.04/III/2020. Available online:
https://jdih.kemnaker.go.id/se-dan-instruksi-menaker.html (accessed on 11 January 2021).
8. Schmid, B.; Raju, E.; Jensen, P.K.M. COVID-19 and Business Continuity—Learning from the Private Sector and Humanitarian
Actors in Kenya. Prog. Disaster Sci. 2021, 11, 100181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pdisas.2021.100181.
9. Ministry of Manpower Republic of Indonesia. Surat Edaran Menteri Ketenagakerjaan Nomor M/7/AS.02.02/V-2020. Available
online: https://covid19.go.id/p/regulasi/surat-edaran-menteri-ketenagakerjaan-nomor-m70202v2020 (accessed on 14 January
2020).
10. United Nations. The World of Work and COVID-19 June 2020; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2020.
11. Giorgi, G.; Lecca, L.I.; Alessio, F.; Finstad, G.L.; Bondanini, G.; Lulli, L.G.; Arcangeli, G.; Mucci, N. COVID-19-Related Mental Health
Effects in the Workplace: A Narrative Review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2020, 17, 7857 https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17217857.
12. Agius, R.M.; Robertson, J.F.R.; Kendrick, D.; Sewell, H.F.; Stewart, M.; McKee, M. Covid-19 in the Workplace. BMJ 2020, 370.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m3577.
13. Seo, E.; Mun, E.; Kim, W.; Lee, C. Fighting the COVID-19 Pandemic: Onsite Mass Workplace Testing for COVID-19 in the
Republic of Korea. Ann. Occup. Environ. Med. 2020, 32, e22. https://doi.org/10.35371/AOEM.2020.32.E22.
14. George, R.; George, A. Prevention of COVID-19 in the Workplace. South Afr. Med. J. 2020, 110, 0–0
https://doi.org/10.7196/SAMJ.2020.V110I4.14723.
15. Reuschke, D.; Felstead, A. Changing Workplace Geographies in the COVID-19 Crisis. Dialogues Hum. Geogr. 2020, 10, 208–212.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2043820620934249.
16. Arroyos-Calvera, D.; Drouvelis, M.; Lohse, J.; McDonald, R. Improving Compliance with COVID-19 Guidance: A Workplace
Field Experiment. SSRN Electron. J. 2021. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3760562.
17. Sumas, S.; Widoyo, S. New Normal Workplace during the Covid-19 Pandemic in Indonesia. J. Bina Ketenagakerjaan 2021, 1, 25–41.
18. Alsharef, A.; Banerjee, S.; Uddin, J.; Albert, A.; Jaselskis, E. Pandemic on the United States Construction Industry. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 1559.
19. Cirrincione, L.; Plescia, F.; Ledda, C.; Rapisarda, V.; Martorana, D.; Moldovan, R.E.; Theodoridou, K.; Cannizzaro, E. COVID-
19 Pandemic: Prevention and Protection Measures to Be Adopted at the Workplace. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3603.
https://doi.org/10.3390/SU12093603.
20. World Health Organization. Consideration for Implementing and Adjusting Public Health and Social Measures in Context of COVID-
19; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021.
21. Mauras, S.; Cohen-Addad, V.; Duboc, G.; Dupréla Tour, M.; Frasca, P.; Mathieu, C.; Opatowski, L.; Viennot, L. Mitigating
COVID-19 Outbreaks in Workplaces and Schools by Hybrid Telecommuting. PLoS Comput. Biol. 2021, 17, e1009264.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009264.
22. Malekpour, F.; Ebrahimi, H.; Yarahmadi, R.; Mohammadin, Y.; Kharghani Moghadam, S.M.; Soltanpour, Z. Prevention
Measures and Risk Factors for COVID-19 in Iranian Workplaces. Work 2021, 69, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-205045.
23. Lindsley, W.G.; Blachère, F.M.; Burton, N.C.; Christensen, B.; Estill, C.F.; Fisher, E.M.; Martin, S.B.; Mead, K.R.; Noti, J.D.; Seaton,
M. COVID-19 and the Workplace: Research Questions for the Aerosol Science Community. Aerosol Sci. Technol. 2020, 54, 1117–
1123. https://doi.org/10.1080/02786826.2020.1796921.
24. Ahadzi, D.F.; Owusu, H.-M.; Ekow Otoo Bono Regional Health Directorate, J.; Akumah, E.E. Applying Behavioral Science in
Combating COVID-19 at the Workplace: A Narrative Review. Preprints 2021, 2021040136. https://doi.org/10.20944/pre-
prints202104.0136.v1.
25. Poole, S.F.; Gronsbell, J.; Winter, D.; Nickels, S.; Levy, R.; Fu, B.; Burq, M.; Saeb, S.; Edwards, M.D.; Behr, M.K.; et al. A Holistic
Approach for Suppression of COVID-19 Spread in Workplaces and Universities. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0254798.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254798.
26. Golbabaei, F.; Kalantary, S. A Review of the Strategies and Policies for the Prevention and Control of the COVID-19 at Work-
places. Int. J. Occup. Hyg. 2020, 12, 60–65.
27. De Lucas Ancillo, A.; del Val Núñez, M.T.; Gavrila, S.G. Workplace Change within the COVID-19 Context: A Grounded Theory
Approach. Econ. Res.-Ekonomska Istrazivanja 2021, 34, 2297–2316. https://doi.org/10.1080/1331677X.2020.1862689.
28. Zisook, R.E.; Monnot, A.; Parker, J.; Gaffney, S.; Dotson, S.; Unice, K. Assessing and Managing the Risks of COVID-19 in the
Workplace: Applying Industrial Hygiene (IH)/Occupational and Environmental Health and Safety (OEHS) Frameworks. Toxicol.
Ind. Health 2020, 36, 607–618. https://doi.org/10.1177/0748233720967522.
29. Hou, H.C.; Remøy, H.; Jylhä, T.; vande Putte, H. A Study on Office Workplace Modification during the COVID-19 Pandemic in
The Netherlands. J. Corp. Real Estate 2021, 23, 168–202. https://doi.org/10.1108/JCRE-10-2020-0051.
30. Jahangiri, M.; Cousins, R.; Gharibi, V. Let’s Get Back to Work: Preventive Biological Cycle Management of COVID-19 in the
Workplace. Work. 2020, 66, 713–716. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-203217.
31. Ying, Z.; Xu, S.; Wei, C.; Chunnan, F.; Liru, G.; Xiaoli, W.; Ning, Z.; Yuting, G.; Xiaochun, D.; Ying, Z.; et al Epidemiological
Investigation on a Cluster Epidemic of COVID-19 in a Collective Workplace in Tianjin. Chin. J. Endem. 2020, 41, 648–652.
https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112338-20200219-00121.
32. Vu, T.-V.; Vo-Thanh, T.; Nguyen, N.P.; van Nguyen, D.; Chi, H. The COVID-19 Pandemic: Workplace Safety Management
Practices, Job Insecurity, and Employees’ Organizational Citizenship Behavior. Saf. Sci. 2022, 145, 105527.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105527.
33. Asaoka, H.; Sasaki, N.; Imamura, K.; Kuroda, R.; Tsuno, K.; Kawakami, N. Changes in COVID-19 Measures in the Workplace:
8-Month Follow-up in a Cohort Study of Full-Time Employees in Japan. J. Occup. Health 2021, 63, e12273.
https://doi.org/10.1002/1348-9585.12273.
34. Ozenen, G. Practical, Rapid, and Cost-Efficient Interior Architectural Precautions for Prevention of COVID-19 in the Workplace.
Work 2020, 67, 3–9. https://doi.org/10.3233/WOR-203247.
35. Al-Kuwari, M.G.; Al-Nuaimi, A.A.; Abdulmajeed, J.; Semaan, S.; Al-Romaihi, H.E.; Kandy, M.C.; Swamy, S. COVID-19 Infection
across Workplace Settings in Qatar: A Comparison of COVID-19 Positivity Rates of Screened Workers from March 1st until July
31st, 2020. J. Occup. Med. Toxicol. 2021, 16, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12995-021-00311-5.
36. Eguchi, H.; Hino, A.; Inoue, A.; Tsuji, M.; Tateishi, S.; Ando, H.; Nagata, T.; Matsuda, S.; Fujino, Y. Effect of Anxiety About
COVID-19 Infection in the Workplace on the Association Between Job Demands and Psychological Distress. Front. Public Health
2021, 9, 1477. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2021.722071.
37. Taylor, H.; Collinson, S.; Saavedra-Campos, M.; Douglas, R.; Humphreys, C.; Roberts, D.J.; Paranthaman, K. Lessons Learnt
from an Outbreak of COVID-19 in a Workplace Providing an Essential Service, Thames Valley, England 2020: Implications for
Investigation and Control. Public Health Pract. 2021, 2, 100217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.puhip.2021.100217.
38. Pamidimukkala, A.; Kermanshachi, S. Impact of Covid-19 on Field and Office Workforce in Construction Industry. Proj. Leadersh.
Soc. 2021, 2, 100018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.plas.2021.100018.
39. British Standards Institution, T. BSI Standards Publication Occupational Health and Safety Management-General Guidelines for Safe
Working during the COVID-19 Pandemic; BSI: London, UK, 2020.
40. Sorsby, S.; Schmit, E.; Ventres, W. Workplace Communication in the Midst of COVID-19: Making Sense of Uncertainty, Prepar-
ing for the Future. Fam. Med. 2021, 53, 159–160. https://doi.org/10.22454/FamMed.2021.216908.
41. Shabani, M.; Goffin, T.; Mertes, H. Reporting, Recording, and Communication of COVID-19 Cases in Workplace: Data Protec-
tion as a Moving Target. J. Law Biosci. 2020, 7, lsaa008. https://doi.org/10.1093/jlb/lsaa008.
42. Finset, A.; Bosworth, H.; Butow, P.; Gulbrandsen, P.; Hulsman, R.L.; Pieterse, A.H.; Street, R.; Tschoetschel, R.; van Weert, J.
Effective Health Communication—a Key Factor in Fighting the COVID-19 Pandemic. Patient Educ. Couns. 2020, 103, 873–876.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2020.03.027.
43. Porat, T.; Nyrup, R.; Calvo, R.A.; Paudyal, P.; Ford, E. Public Health and Risk Communication During COVID-19—Enhancing
Psychological Needs to Promote Sustainable Behavior Change. Front. Public Health 2020, 8, 637.
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.573397.
44. Stiles, S.; Golightly, D.; Ryan, B. Impact of COVID-19 on Health and Safety in the Construction Sector. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf.
Serv. Ind. 2021, 31, 425-437. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.20882.
45. Begum, R.; Kanza Nisar, S.; Perveen, S.; Arshad, M. COVID-19 and Business Continuity Management: A Case of Pakistan,
Contributing to Mixed Methods Research. Int. J. Bus. Manag. Soc. Res 2021, 10, 573–576.
46. Galbusera, L.; Cardarilli, M.; Giannopoulos, G. The ERNCIP Survey on COVID-19: Emergency & Business Continuity for Fos-
tering Resilience in Critical Infrastructures. Saf. Sci. 2021, 139, 105161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105161.
47. Margherita, A.; Heikkilä, M. Business Continuity in the COVID-19 Emergency: A Framework of Actions Undertaken by World-
Leading Companies. Bus. Horiz. 2021, 64, 683–695. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2021.02.020.
48. Seidu, A.-A.; Hagan, J.E.; Ameyaw, E.K.; Ahinkorah, B.O.; Schack, T. The Role of Testing in the Fight against COVID-19: Current
Happenings in Africa and the Way Forward. Int. J. Infect. Dis. 2020, 98, 237–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.06.089.
49. Ingram, C.; Downey, V.; Roe, M.; Chen, Y.; Archibald, M.; Kallas, K.A.; Kumar, J.; Naughton, P.; Uteh, C.O.; Rojas-Chaves, A.;
et al. COVID-19 Prevention and Control Measures in Workplace Settings: A Rapid Review and Meta-Analysis. Int. J. Environ.
Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 7847. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18157847.
50. Eilersen, A.; Sneppen, K. Cost–Benefit of Limited Isolation and Testing in COVID-19 Mitigation. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 1–7.
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-75640-2.
51. Kerr, C.C.; Mistry, D.; Stuart, R.M.; Rosenfeld, K.; Hart, G.R.; Núñez, R.C.; Cohen, J.A.; Selvaraj, P.; Abeysuriya, R.G.; Jastrzębski, M.;
et al. Controlling COVID-19 via Test-Trace-Quarantine. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-021-23276-9.
52. Panovska-Griffiths, J.; Kerr, C.C.; Stuart, R.M.; Mistry, D.; Klein, D.J.; Viner, R.M.; Bonell, C. Determining the Optimal Strategy for
Reopening Schools, the Impact of Test and Trace Interventions, and the Risk of Occurrence of a Second COVID-19 Epidemic Wave
in the UK: A Modelling Study. Lancet Child Adolesc. Health 2020, 4, 817–827. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(20)30250-9.
53. Moda, H.M.; Dama, F.M.; Nwadike, C.; Alatni, B.S.; Adewoye, S.O.; Sawyerr, H.; Doka, P.J.S.; Danjin, M. Assessment of Work-
place Safety Climate among Healthcare Workers during the Covid-19 Pandemic in Low and Middle Income Countries: A Case
Study of Nigeria. Healthcare 2021, 9, 661. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare9060661.
54. Boiral, O.; Brotherton, M.-C.; Rivaud, L.; Guillaumie, L. Organizations’ Management of the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Scoping
Review of Business Articles. Sustainability 2021, 13, 3993. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13073993.
55. Dantjie, P.; Setyaningsih, Y.; Nurjazuli. Safety and Health Management Commitment and Implementation of COVID-19 Pre-
vention at Manufacture Workplace Environment. E3S Web Conf. 2020, 202, 12015. https://doi.org/10.1051/e3sconf/202020212015.
56. Valenti, G.D.; Faraci, P. Identifying Predictive Factors in Compliance with the COVID-19 Containment Measures: A Mediation
Analysis. Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2021, 14, 1325–1338. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S323617.
57. Maqbool, A.; Khan, N.Z. Analyzing Barriers for Implementation of Public Health and Social Measures to Prevent the Transmis-
sion of COVID-19 Disease Using DEMATEL Method. Diabetes Metab. Syndr. Clin. Res. Rev. 2020, 14, 887–892.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dsx.2020.06.024.
58. World Health Organization. Pandemic Fatigue Reinvigorating the Public to Prevent COVID-19 Policy Framework for Supporting Pan-
demic Prevention and Management Revised Version November 2020; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020.
59. Kase, S.M.; Gribben, J.L.; Guttmann, K.F.; Waldman, E.D.; Weintraub, A.S. Compassion Fatigue, Burnout, and Compassion Satis-
faction in Pediatric Subspecialists during the SARS-CoV-2 Pandemic. Pediatric Res. 2022, 91, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41390-
021-01635-y.
60. Janson, M.; Sharkey, J.D.; del Cid, D.A. Predictors of Mental Health Outcomes in Grocery Store Workers amid the COVID-19
Pandemic and Implications for Workplace Safety and Moral Injury. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 8675.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168675.
61. Ruiz-Fernández, M.D.; Ramos-Pichardo, J.D.; Ibáñez-Masero, O.; Cabrera-Troya, J.; Carmona-Rega, M.I.; Ortega-Galán, Á.M.
Compassion Fatigue, Burnout, Compassion Satisfaction and Perceived Stress in Healthcare Professionals during the COVID-19
Health Crisis in Spain. J. Clin. Nurs. 2020, 29, 4321–4330. https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.15469.
62. Sitanggang, F.P.; Wirawan, G.B.S.; Wirawan, I.M.A.; Lesmana, C.B.J.; Januraga, P.P. Determinants of Mental Health and Practice
Behaviors of General Practitioners during Covid-19 Pandemic in Bali, Indonesia: A Cross-Sectional Study. Risk Manag. Healthc.
Policy 2021, 14, 2055. https://doi.org/10.2147/RMHP.S305373.
63. Rachmawati, R.; Mei, E.T.W.; Nurani, I.W.; Ghiffari, R.A.; Rohmah, A.A.; Sejati, M.A. Innovation in Coping with the Covid-19
Pandemic: The Best Practices from Five Smart Cities in Indonesia. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12072. https://doi.org/10.3390/su132112072.
64. Rachmawati, R.; Choirunnisa, U.; Pambagyo, Z.A.; Syarafina, Y.A.; Ghiffari, R.A. Work from Home and the Use of ICT during the
COVID-19 Pandemic in Indonesia and Its Impact on Cities in the Future. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6760.
https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126760.

Sustainability 14 02745

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sustainability 14 02745

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article

COVID-19 in the Workplace in Indonesia

The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia; m.cook4@uq.edu.au (M.C.);

Received: 25 January 2022

Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neu-

Sustainability 2022, 14, 2745. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14052745 www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

The COVID-19 pandemic also presents an unprecedented challenge to public health,

7. Shifting the OSH-related activities as regulated by the Ministry of Manpower, such

2. Materials and Methods

2.2. Industry Population

2.3. Policy-Maker Involvement

2.4. Ethical Clearance

2.5. Data Collection

2.6. Data Analysis

2.7. Research Limitations

Table 1. General Information of the sample organizations.

No. Sector Code Location Brief Overview of Organisation

since 1961. It has around 6000 perma-

3.1. Agricultural Industry Findings

3.1.2. Barriers and Challenges

3.2. Logistics Industry Findings

3.2.2. Barriers and Challenges

3.3. Construction Industry Findings

3.3.2. Barriers and Challenges

3.4. Manufacturing Industry Findings

3.4.2. Barriers and Challenges

3.5. Stakeholders Findings

3.5.2. Implementation of the Regulation

3.5.3. Monitoring and Evaluation of Regulation

we created COVID-19 ranger in the workplace… that helps supervisors to carry

3.5.4. Barriers in Implementing the Regulation

3.5.5. Drivers in Implementing the Regulation

4.1. Implementation of Health Protocols

4.2. Drivers to Implement Health Protocols

4.3. Barriers and Challenges in Implementing Health Protocols

4.4. Positive Implications of COVID-19 Prevention and Control Measures

You might also like