Advanced

Fri rörlighet och stridsåtgärder – en studie av den fria rörlighetens inverkan på svensk kollektiv arbetsrätt

Thornquist, Peter LU (2011) JURM01 20111
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
I den svenska arbetsmarknadsmodellen sker kollektiv reglering av arbetsvillkoren genom frivilliga självständiga förhandlingar mellanarbetsmarknadens parter. I denna modell utgör stridsåtgärder det yttersta maktmedlet för arbetstagareorganisationerna, varigenom dessa tillförsäkra sig inflytande över arbetsvillkoren och tillser att ett monopol på arbetskraften upprätthålls. Den svenska rättsordningen kännetecknas av en långtgående autonomi vad gäller regleringen av stridsåtgärder. Statlig reglering existerar på begränsade områden, där främst fredsplikten under gällande kollektivavtal ska nämnas. Fredsplikten är dock inte mer långtgående än att sympatiåtgärder godtas så länge den primära åtgärden är lovlig. Därmed säkerställs att... (More)
I den svenska arbetsmarknadsmodellen sker kollektiv reglering av arbetsvillkoren genom frivilliga självständiga förhandlingar mellanarbetsmarknadens parter. I denna modell utgör stridsåtgärder det yttersta maktmedlet för arbetstagareorganisationerna, varigenom dessa tillförsäkra sig inflytande över arbetsvillkoren och tillser att ett monopol på arbetskraften upprätthålls. Den svenska rättsordningen kännetecknas av en långtgående autonomi vad gäller regleringen av stridsåtgärder. Statlig reglering existerar på begränsade områden, där främst fredsplikten under gällande kollektivavtal ska nämnas. Fredsplikten är dock inte mer långtgående än att sympatiåtgärder godtas så länge den primära åtgärden är lovlig. Därmed säkerställs att arbetsgivaren kan utsättas för ett effektivt tvång, oavsett fackföreningarnas relativa styrka på en viss arbetsplats. När inget kollektivavtal råder saknas i stor utsträckning lagstiftning som inskränker stridsrätten. Ändringen av Utstationeringslagen utgör i detta hänseende en betydande nyordning.
I och med EU-domstolens domar i Laval och Viking så klargjordes att den svenska kollektiva arbetsrätten har ytterligare en dimension, den EU-rättsliga. Fördragsbestämmelserna om den fria rörligheten utgör en rättskälla som normerar nationella arbetstagareorganisationernas vidtagande av stridsåtgärder. Fördragsreglerna är dock tillämpliga endast i de fall stridsåtgärderna skapar hinder för en enskilds gränsöverskridande ekonomisk aktivitet. Vad exakt som utgör ett hinder är omstritt. EU-domstolens praxis är inte otvetydig, men begreppet täcker troligen ett flertal olika situationer då svenska arbetstagareorganisationer vidtar stridsåtgärder.
Om en stridsåtgärd utgör ett hinder så är den a priori förbjuden, men kan rättfärdigas i den mån den är ändamålsenlig och nödvändig för att säkerställa ett trängande allmänintresse. Huruvida en viss stridsåtgärd skyddar ett trängande allmänintresse och är ändamålsenlig och nödvändig avgörs i det enskilda fallet, med tillämpning av den EU-rättsliga proportionalitetsprincipen. Det rättsliga materialet är alltför tunt och osäkert för att kunna ge ett omfattande och klart svar på frågan om och när en i och för sig handelshindrande stridsåtgärd är lovlig. Viss vägledning kan dock finnas i EU-domstolens praxis, sekundärrättsliga rättsakter, fördragens målparagrafer i Rättighetsstadgan och Europakonventionen. Rättsutvecklingen efter Lissabon-fördragets ikraftträdande och det faktum att Europakonventionen fått en starkare position i EU:s rättsordning kan innebära att EU-domstolens praxis går i en ny riktning, mot ett mer långtgående accepterande av stridsåtgärder som en integrerad och legitim del av den inre marknaden. (Less)
Abstract
The Swedish labor market model is distinguished by the fact that working conditions are, to a large extent, regulated through voluntary autonomous collective bargaining between management and labor. Strike action and other collective measures constitute the leverage with which the labor organizations can influence working conditions and maintain a monopoly on the supply of labor. To facilitate the effective functioning of the labor organizations in this respect, these are awarded a high degree of autonomy regarding if, when and how collective action is to be taken. To be sure, state interventions exist, mainly in the form of a peace obligation during the time a collective agreement binds the parties. The peace obligation is rather limited,... (More)
The Swedish labor market model is distinguished by the fact that working conditions are, to a large extent, regulated through voluntary autonomous collective bargaining between management and labor. Strike action and other collective measures constitute the leverage with which the labor organizations can influence working conditions and maintain a monopoly on the supply of labor. To facilitate the effective functioning of the labor organizations in this respect, these are awarded a high degree of autonomy regarding if, when and how collective action is to be taken. To be sure, state interventions exist, mainly in the form of a peace obligation during the time a collective agreement binds the parties. The peace obligation is rather limited, however, as it allows for extensive use of secondary action as long as the primary action is considered lawful. This ensures that great pressure can be exerted on employers, regardless of the strength of the union on any particular work place. When no binding collective agreement exists, legislation contains very few norms constraining the right of the labor organizations to take collective actions. The new rules regarding the posting of workers are a rather eye-catching change in this respect.
When the ECJ delivered its rulings in the Laval and Viking cases it was made manifest that the Swedish collective labor law has a European dimension. The provisions regarding free movement in the TFEU constitutes a source of law, which regulates collective action taken by labor organizations on a national level. These provisions are not universally applicable. Individuals can rely on these provisions only in as far as a collective action constitutes a restriction on an economical activity which contain a cross border element. What measures amounts to a restriction, is a source of debate. The jurisprudence from the ECJ is somewhat ambiguous. Regardless of the exact boundaries of the term, it is clear that collective actions taken by Swedish labor organizations may constitute such restrictions in numerous situations.
If a collective action does in fact restrict cross border economic activity, it is a priori forbidden. However, restrictions can be justified if the collective action is an effective and necessary measure to protect certain interests, in the voice of the ECJ dubbed imperative or mandatory requirements. Whether a collective action an actually be justified has to be decided in the individual case, through the application of the proportionality-principle. The legal sources are not developed enough to be able to supply a comprehensive and clear answer as to when a collective action is in breach of the provision in the TFEU. However, some guidance can be found in the jurisprudence of the ECJ, certain secondary legislation, the objectives of the EU as stipulated in the treaties themselves and certain Human Rights instrument, notably the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. The coming into force of the Lisbon treaty could give the ECJ an incentive to develop its jurisprudence in another direction, towards an understanding of collective action as an integral part of the internal market. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Thornquist, Peter LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Free movement and collective action - a study of the impact of free movement on Swedish collective labour law
course
JURM01 20111
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt, EU-rätt
language
Swedish
id
1981281
date added to LUP
2011-06-22 12:02:27
date last changed
2011-06-22 12:02:27
@misc{1981281,
  abstract     = {The Swedish labor market model is distinguished by the fact that working conditions are, to a large extent, regulated through voluntary autonomous collective bargaining between management and labor. Strike action and other collective measures constitute the leverage with which the labor organizations can influence working conditions and maintain a monopoly on the supply of labor. To facilitate the effective functioning of the labor organizations in this respect, these are awarded a high degree of autonomy regarding if, when and how collective action is to be taken. To be sure, state interventions exist, mainly in the form of a peace obligation during the time a collective agreement binds the parties. The peace obligation is rather limited, however, as it allows for extensive use of secondary action as long as the primary action is considered lawful. This ensures that great pressure can be exerted on employers, regardless of the strength of the union on any particular work place. When no binding collective agreement exists, legislation contains very few norms constraining the right of the labor organizations to take collective actions. The new rules regarding the posting of workers are a rather eye-catching change in this respect.
When the ECJ delivered its rulings in the Laval and Viking cases it was made manifest that the Swedish collective labor law has a European dimension. The provisions regarding free movement in the TFEU constitutes a source of law, which regulates collective action taken by labor organizations on a national level. These provisions are not universally applicable. Individuals can rely on these provisions only in as far as a collective action constitutes a restriction on an economical activity which contain a cross border element. What measures amounts to a restriction, is a source of debate. The jurisprudence from the ECJ is somewhat ambiguous. Regardless of the exact boundaries of the term, it is clear that collective actions taken by Swedish labor organizations may constitute such restrictions in numerous situations.
If a collective action does in fact restrict cross border economic activity, it is a priori forbidden. However, restrictions can be justified if the collective action is an effective and necessary measure to protect certain interests, in the voice of the ECJ dubbed imperative or mandatory requirements. Whether a collective action an actually be justified has to be decided in the individual case, through the application of the proportionality-principle. The legal sources are not developed enough to be able to supply a comprehensive and clear answer as to when a collective action is in breach of the provision in the TFEU. However, some guidance can be found in the jurisprudence of the ECJ, certain secondary legislation, the objectives of the EU as stipulated in the treaties themselves and certain Human Rights instrument, notably the ECHR and the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU. The coming into force of the Lisbon treaty could give the ECJ an incentive to develop its jurisprudence in another direction, towards an understanding of collective action as an integral part of the internal market.},
  author       = {Thornquist, Peter},
  keyword      = {arbetsrätt,EU-rätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Fri rörlighet och stridsåtgärder – en studie av den fria rörlighetens inverkan på svensk kollektiv arbetsrätt},
  year         = {2011},
}