Turordning vid arbetsbrist. En historisk analys av turordningsreglernas bakgrund och syften
(2013) JURM02 20132Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Den här uppsatsen behandlar turordningsreglerna vid uppsägning ur ett historiskt perspektiv. Genom att sätta turordningsreglerna i sin historiska kontext har avsikten varit att utröna varför turordningsreglerna kom till, varför just principen om ”sist in, först ut” blev det huvudsakliga urvalskriteriet i anställningsskyddslagen samt vilka argument som har framförts och av vem/vilka. Urvalskriterierna är naturligtvis av central betydelse för turordningsreglerna, för att förstå deras inverkan på turordningen måste dock även andra delar såsom turordningskretsarna, kravet på tillräckliga kvalifikationer, relationen till omplaceringsskyldigheten och undantag klargöras. Tillsammans skapar de en helhet. Eftersom turordningsreglerna utgör en... (More)
- Den här uppsatsen behandlar turordningsreglerna vid uppsägning ur ett historiskt perspektiv. Genom att sätta turordningsreglerna i sin historiska kontext har avsikten varit att utröna varför turordningsreglerna kom till, varför just principen om ”sist in, först ut” blev det huvudsakliga urvalskriteriet i anställningsskyddslagen samt vilka argument som har framförts och av vem/vilka. Urvalskriterierna är naturligtvis av central betydelse för turordningsreglerna, för att förstå deras inverkan på turordningen måste dock även andra delar såsom turordningskretsarna, kravet på tillräckliga kvalifikationer, relationen till omplaceringsskyldigheten och undantag klargöras. Tillsammans skapar de en helhet. Eftersom turordningsreglerna utgör en intresseavvägning mellan arbetsgivarnas intresse av en effektiv verksamhet och arbetstagarnas intresse av trygghet i anställningen har fokus lagts på avvägningen mellan dessa intressen.
Innan anställningsskyddslagen tillkomst fanns turordningsregler i varierande omfattning och utformning i kollektivavtal. De uppstod från början som en del av kampen för föreningsrätt och trygghet i anställningen, mot bakgrund av de förändringar som skedde på arbetsmarknaden i samband med industrialiseringen. Sedan föreningsrätten tryggats blev det huvudsakliga syftet att skydda arbetstagarna från arbetsgivarnas godtycke. På den stora delen av arbetsmarknaden som var bunden av överenskommelser mellan LO och SAF gällde dock ett förbud mot turordningsregler fram till Saltsjöbadsavtalet. I Saltsjöbadsavtalet instiftades icke-bindande turordningsregler där stor hänsyn fick tas till verksamhetens behov av effektivitet.
Under 1950- och 1960-talet skedde stora förändringar på arbetsmarknaden vilket resulterade i att arbetslösheten bland äldre steg kraftigt. För att skydda denna utsatta grupp beslutade den då socialdemokratiska regeringen att lagreglera anställningsskyddet. Turordningsreglerna utformades i enlighet med syftet att skydda den äldre arbetskraften och begränsade möjligheterna till effektivitetshänsyn, som ansågs vara en del av problemet. Vidare skulle reglerna vara enkla att tillämpa.
Arbetsgivarsidan har ända sedan anställningsskyddslagens tillkomst kritiserat turordningsreglerna och argumenterat för större hänsyn till verksamhetens behov av kompetens och för arbetet lämplig arbetskraft. Dessa krav har i viss mån hörsammats av de borgerliga partierna genom förändringar i lagstiftningen och i Arbetsdomstolens praxis. Sedan 1974 års anställningsskyddslag har vidare fokus alltmer riktats mot turordningsreglernas funktion som allmänt anställningsskydd och som ett skydd mot godtycke. Eftersom turordningsreglerna är semidispositiva kan de emellertid inte ses som en upparbetad rättighet för den enskilde arbetstagaren. (Less) - Abstract
- This essay explore the order of selection in case of collective redundancy from a historical point of view. By placing the rules of the selection order in their historical context, the intention has been to ascertain why rules about the order of selection came about, why the principle of “last in, first out” became the main selection criterion in the Employment Protection Act and which arguments have been made and by whom. The criterions of selection are of course central to the rules of the selection order. However, to understand the criterions impact on the selection order other parts such as the selection circles, the requirement for sufficient qualifications, the relationship to the obligation of redeployment and exemptions must be... (More)
- This essay explore the order of selection in case of collective redundancy from a historical point of view. By placing the rules of the selection order in their historical context, the intention has been to ascertain why rules about the order of selection came about, why the principle of “last in, first out” became the main selection criterion in the Employment Protection Act and which arguments have been made and by whom. The criterions of selection are of course central to the rules of the selection order. However, to understand the criterions impact on the selection order other parts such as the selection circles, the requirement for sufficient qualifications, the relationship to the obligation of redeployment and exemptions must be clarified. Together they create a whole. Since the rules of the selection order is balancing the employers´ interest of business efficiency and the employees´ interest of job security, the focus of this essay has been on the balance of these interests.
Prior to the Employment Protection Act rules of the selection order existed in varying extent and shape in collective agreement. They arose as part of the struggle for freedom of association and job security in light of the changes that had occurred on the labor market due to the industrialization. As the right to association fortified the main aim became to protect employees from employers' discretion. However, members of LO and SAF was prohibited to settle rules of selection order until the Agreement in Saltsjöbaden (Saltsjöbadsavtalet). In this agreement non-binding rules of the selection order were instituted where much consideration could to be taken to the needs of efficiency.
During the 1950´s - and 1960´s significant changes took place on the labor market resulting in a sharp increase of unemployment among older employees. In order to protect this vulnerable group the then social democratic government decided to regulate the employment protection in law. The rules of the selection order were designed in accordance with the purpose of protecting older employees and limited considerations towards efficiency, which were considered to be part of the problem. Furthermore, the rules were designed to be easily applied.
Ever since the Employment Protection Act were introduced the employers have argued for greater consideration towards the needs of competence and suitable labour. These requests have to some extent been heeded by the bourgeois parties through changes in the Act and in the Labour Court´s practice. Since the Employment Protection Act of 1974 the focus has also increasingly been directed towards the rules of the selection order´s function as protection of job security and as a safeguard against arbitrariness. However, since the priority rules are semi-compulsory they cannot be seen as an accrued right of the individual employee. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/4230854
- author
- Duvinger, Ida LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The order of selection in case of collective redundancy. A historical analysis of the background and aims of the rules of the selection order
- course
- JURM02 20132
- year
- 2013
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Rättshistoria. Arbetsrätt. Anställningsskydd. Arbetsbrist. Turordning.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 4230854
- date added to LUP
- 2014-01-24 10:56:00
- date last changed
- 2014-01-24 10:56:00
@misc{4230854,
abstract = {{This essay explore the order of selection in case of collective redundancy from a historical point of view. By placing the rules of the selection order in their historical context, the intention has been to ascertain why rules about the order of selection came about, why the principle of “last in, first out” became the main selection criterion in the Employment Protection Act and which arguments have been made and by whom. The criterions of selection are of course central to the rules of the selection order. However, to understand the criterions impact on the selection order other parts such as the selection circles, the requirement for sufficient qualifications, the relationship to the obligation of redeployment and exemptions must be clarified. Together they create a whole. Since the rules of the selection order is balancing the employers´ interest of business efficiency and the employees´ interest of job security, the focus of this essay has been on the balance of these interests.
Prior to the Employment Protection Act rules of the selection order existed in varying extent and shape in collective agreement. They arose as part of the struggle for freedom of association and job security in light of the changes that had occurred on the labor market due to the industrialization. As the right to association fortified the main aim became to protect employees from employers' discretion. However, members of LO and SAF was prohibited to settle rules of selection order until the Agreement in Saltsjöbaden (Saltsjöbadsavtalet). In this agreement non-binding rules of the selection order were instituted where much consideration could to be taken to the needs of efficiency.
During the 1950´s - and 1960´s significant changes took place on the labor market resulting in a sharp increase of unemployment among older employees. In order to protect this vulnerable group the then social democratic government decided to regulate the employment protection in law. The rules of the selection order were designed in accordance with the purpose of protecting older employees and limited considerations towards efficiency, which were considered to be part of the problem. Furthermore, the rules were designed to be easily applied.
Ever since the Employment Protection Act were introduced the employers have argued for greater consideration towards the needs of competence and suitable labour. These requests have to some extent been heeded by the bourgeois parties through changes in the Act and in the Labour Court´s practice. Since the Employment Protection Act of 1974 the focus has also increasingly been directed towards the rules of the selection order´s function as protection of job security and as a safeguard against arbitrariness. However, since the priority rules are semi-compulsory they cannot be seen as an accrued right of the individual employee.}},
author = {{Duvinger, Ida}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Turordning vid arbetsbrist. En historisk analys av turordningsreglernas bakgrund och syften}},
year = {{2013}},
}