According to Mathis and Jackson (2006), employee status refers to an employee's legal and administrative position in an organization that reflects their employment relationship with the employer, either permanently (permanently) or impermanent (contract). This status defines the entitlements rights, obligations, and legal treatment that an individual receives during his or her employment.

According to Armstrong (2014), the selection of employment status is a managerial strategy that has a direct effect on motivation, job security, and organizational commitment. On the other hand, Karavardar (2014) emphasizes that uncertain contract status can trigger job insecurity, which in turn negatively impacts job satisfaction and employee performance.

According to De Witte (1999), job insecurity is the uncertainty felt by employees regarding the sustainability of their employment in the future, both the threat of total or partial job loss. According to Greenhalgh and Rosenblatt (2010), Job insecurity pertains to an employee’s perception of the likelihood of job loss. or essential aspects of it which consists of elements of continuity, threats, risky features, and helplessness.

According to Qian et al. (2019), job insecurity is a perceived threat to job sustainability and important features in work such as promotion opportunities or job autonomy, which has an impact on job satisfaction and employee mental health. According to De Witte et al. (2015), job insecurity reflects a gap between the expectation of job security and the perception that current jobs are threatened, subjective and unintentional.

According to Duha (2018), job satisfaction is a state when individuals feel happy in carrying out their work activities. According to Busro (2018), job satisfaction is influenced by psychological, social, and physical factors, which affect employees' satisfaction with their work.

According to Sutrisno (2019), Job satisfaction is a favorable emotional state that arises from evaluating one’s job. which is influenced by factors such as opportunities for advancement, job security, supervision, working conditions, and social relationships. According to Hariani & Hakim (2021), job satisfaction can be measured through five main elements, namely the job itself, supervision, salary, promotion opportunities, and relationships with colleagues.

According to Silaen et al. (2021), Employee performance refers to the outcomes or achievements of an individual in completing assigned tasks according to their responsibilities, viewed from the perspectives of quality, quantity, timeliness, and teamwork. According to Indahningwati & Nugroho (2020), employee performance can be assessed using five indicators: work quantity, work quality, timeliness, attendance, and collaboration.

According to Nguyen et al. (2020), employee performance consists of three main components, namely technical abilities (knowledge, methods, techniques, equipment, experience, training), conceptual abilities (understanding organizational complexity, responsibilities), and interpersonal relationship skills (cooperation, motivation, negotiation).

: Direct Influence

: Indirect Influence

Figure 1. Frame of Mind

Based on empirical facts, previous research findings, and relevant theoretical foundations, the hypotheses in this study are formulated as follows:

Table 3. Convergent Validity Test Phase I

Based on the measurement results, most of the indicators in this study show an outer loading value above 0.7, which means it is valid and can be used for further analysis. However, there are two indicators that do not meet the requirements for Convergent validity is indicated by outer loading values that are below 0.7, namely the X2.4 indicator in the Job Insecurity variable and the Y2.2 indicator in the Performance variable. Therefore, both indicators should be eliminated from the model to improve the overall quality of construct measurements.

Table4. Convergent Validity Test Phase II

After the X2.4 and Y2.2 indicators are eliminated from the model, all remaining indicators show an outer loading value above 0.7, which means that they have met the convergent validity requirements. Thus, all data used in the measurement model can be declared valid and feasible for further analysis in the structural model evaluation stage. This convergent validity that has been fulfilled reinforces the belief that each indicator consistently represents the construct being measured.

Table 5. Discriminating Validity Test

Employe Status (X1)

Job Insecurity (X2)

Job Satisfaction (Y1)

Performanc e (Y2)

Based on the results of measurements using the Fornell-Larcker method, all constructs in this model have met the requirements for discriminant validity. The values of each variable, all of which are greater than the correlation between constructs, with values above 0.7. Thus, it can be concluded that each construct has good peculiarities and is able to be clearly distinguished from each other in this research model

Table 6. Composite Reliability Test

According to the test findings, all the constructs in this model have met the reliability criteria. The Composite Reliability (CR) and Cronbach's Alpha (CA) values for each variable are above the 0.7 mark, while the AVE values for each construct are above 0.5. Thus, It can be inferred that all variables in this research, namely Employee Status, Job Insecurity, Job Satisfaction, and Performance, have a good level of internal consistency and are suitable for further structural model testing.

Table 7. Test R Square

Drawing from the test outcome, the Job Satisfaction variable (Y1) has an R Square value of 0.512 and an R Square Adjusted of 0.502, which Indicates that 51.2% of the variation in job satisfaction is accounted for by Employment Status and Job Insecurity. Meanwhile, the Performance variable (Y2) has an R Square value of 0.478 and an R Square Adjusted of 0.462, which means that 47.8% of variance in employee performance can be explained by the variables Job Satisfaction, Employee Status, and Job Insecurity. Thus, this model can be categorized as having moderate predictive capabilities and feasible for use in advanced analysis.

Table 8. Hypothesis Test

Based on the above data, hypothesis testing was carried out to analyze the associations among variables within the research model, both directly and indirectly. The interpretation of each hypothesis can be explained as follows:

significant influence on job satisfaction. The test results showed a t- statistic value of 12.398 and a p-value of 0.000, so this hypothesis was accepted.

significant effect on performance through job satisfaction. The test results showed a t-statistical value of 3.704 and a p-value of 0.000, so this hypothesis was accepted.

effect on performance through job satisfaction. The test results showed a t-statistical value of 0.058 and a p-value of 0.954, so this hypothesis was rejected

The analysis results revealed That employment status exerted a positive and significant influence on job satisfaction, with a t-statistic value of 12.398 and a p-value of 0.000. Statistically, this indicates that the better or more stable an employee's employment status, the level of job satisfaction also tends to increase. This positive relationship means that if the employee's status increases—for example, from contract to permanent—then job satisfaction will also increase. This finding can be explained through Maslow's theory of needs, which places security as a basic human need. A definite job status provides a sense of security, career clarity, and confidence in the future, so employees feel more comfortable and satisfied at work.

This research is consistent with the findings of earlier research. Gazi et al. (2024) in their research stated that fixed employment status significantly affects job satisfaction as employees continue to have access to long-term job security, benefits, and greater promotional opportunities. In addition, Djuli et al. (2023) explain that certainty of job status contributes to increased psychological satisfaction and employee attachment to the organization. Both studies support the findings in this study that stable employment status is one of the important factors in increasing job satisfaction.

The results of the analysis showed that job insecurity had no significant effect on job satisfaction, with a t-statistic value of 0.062 and a p-value of 0.951. Statistically, this shows that changes in the level of job insecurity do not have a significant effect on the level of employee job satisfaction. In other words, even if an employee feels uncertainty about the continuity of his job, it does not directly decrease or increase his job satisfaction. This finding contradicts Herzberg's two- factor theory, which states that job uncertainty is part of a hygienic factor that, if not met, can reduce job satisfaction.

These results are also not in line with some previous studies. For example, research by Maulana et al. (2024) states that job insecurity significantly negatively impacts job satisfaction because it causes continuous psychological stress and discomfort. In addition, Nemteanu et al. (2021) mentioned that uncertainty about work sustainability lowers employee motivation and commitment, which ultimately has an impact on declining job satisfaction. In contrast to the two studies, the results in this study suggest that other factors may be more dominant in shaping the perception of job satisfaction, rather than just feeling safe or not at work.

The results of the analysis showed that employment status showed a positive and significant impact on employee performance, as indicated by a t- statistic of 2.951 and a p-value of 0.003. Statistically, this indicates that the higher or more stable an employee's employment status, the more likely their performance is to increase. This positive relationship means that if an employee has a more permanent or permanent status, his motivation and commitment in

carrying out his duties will also increase, thus having an impact on improving performance. These findings are in line with McClelland's motivation theory, which states that individuals who feel valued and secure at work tend to have a stronger performance drive.

These findings are backed by findings from prior studies. Research by Sugiono & Persada (2023) shows that fixed job status contributes to improved performance because employees feel more responsible and have a long-term commitment to the organization. In addition, a study conducted by Sutrisno et al. (2022) revealed that employees with contract status show lower performance due to a lack of security and attachment to the organization. These two findings corroborate that employment status has an important influence in shaping productive work behavior.

The analysis indicated that job insecurity had no significant impact on employee performance, as reflected by a t-statistic value of 1.739 and a p-value of

0.083. Statistically, this indicates that the job insecurity felt by employees does not directly affect the level of performance they produce. This means that even if an employee feels insecure about the continuity of their work, it does not necessarily have a negative impact on productivity or the achievement of their work targets. These findings contradict the theory of work stress by Lazarus and Folkman which states that perceptions of threat or uncertainty can lower individual performance due to increased psychological stress.

These results are also not entirely in line with previous research. For example, research by Kurnia & Widigdo (2021) demonstrates that job insecurity has an adverse effect on performance, both directly and indirectly, through work stress and decreased motivation. In addition, research by Ma et al. (2023) also states that job uncertainty significantly reduces employee morale and effectiveness in completing tasks. However, in the context of this study, the influence was not seen significantly, so it is possible that other variables were more dominant in influencing employee performance.

The analysis revealed that job satisfaction had a positive and significant influence on employee performance, indicated by a t-statistic value of 3.759 and a p-value of 0.000. Statistically, this indicates that the higher the level of job satisfaction felt by employees, the higher the level of performance they show. This positive relationship indicates that job satisfaction plays a role a key driver in increasing motivation, commitment, and work productivity. This finding is in line with Locke's (1976) theory of job satisfaction, which states that satisfied employees tend to work more effectively and have the desire to achieve optimal work results.

These results are reinforced by previous research. Kuncorowati et al. (2022) stated that employees who feel satisfied with their work show better performance, have high loyalty, and have less conflict and absenteeism. In addition, a study by Gazi et al. (2024) found that there is a significant positive

correlation between job satisfaction and individual performance, which is consistent across different types of jobs and industries. These findings support the results of this study that job satisfaction is one of the important determinants in achieving optimal performance.

The outcone of the analysis showed that employee status had a positive and significant influence on performance mediated by job satisfaction, with a t- statistic value of 3.704 and a p-value of 0.000. Statistically, this shows that a more stable employment status not only contributes directly to improved performance, but also has an indirect influence through increased job satisfaction. This means that better employee status will increase job satisfaction, which ultimately has a positive impact on performance. These findings are in line with the Job Characteristics Model theory by Hackman and Oldham which states that perceptions of job clarity and certainty can improve internal motivation and performance through job satisfaction.

These results are supported by previous research. Research by Suci et al. (2022) states that stable work status strengthens job satisfaction and indirectly contributes to improved employee performance. In addition, research by Pentury & Usmany (2023) states that job satisfaction serves as a crucial intermediary variable in bridging the influence of organizational factors such as employment status on work results. These two studies confirm that work status not only has a direct effect on performance, but also through increased satisfaction as an intermediary mechanism.

The results of the analysis showed that job insecurity did not have a significant effect on performance through job satisfaction, with a t-statistic value of 0.058 and a p-value of 0.954. Statistically, this indicates that the job insecurity felt by employees lacks an indirect impact on performance through job satisfaction. This means that even if employees experience feelings of insecurity about their job continuity, it does not significantly affect their job satisfaction levels, so it does not have a further impact on performance achievement. These findings do not agree with the theory of work stress by Lazarus and Folkman, which states that uncertainty in work can reduce job satisfaction and lead to decreased work performance.

These results also contradict a number of previous studies. For example, research by Candra & Rojuaniah (2022) shows that job insecurity negatively impacts job satisfaction and indirectly reduces performance quality. In addition, a study by Narotama & Sintaasih (2022) found that job insecurity causes dissatisfaction and psychological tension, which further decreases work engagement and productivity. However, in this study, the results obtained showed that the effect was not proven to be significant, which indicates that there are other factors that are more dominant in mediating the impact of job insecurity on performance.