Advanced

Skydd mot missbruk av tidsbegränsad anställning

Kärnefelt, Ola LU (2012) JURM02 20121
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Mot bakgrund av direktiv 1999/70/EG som genomför ramavtalet om visstidsarbete slutet mellan ETUC, UNICE och CEEP har det ifrågasatts om lag (1982:80) om anställningsskydd lever upp till direktivets krav avseende införande av hinder mot att tidsbegränsade anställningsformer missbrukas. Ramavtalet mellan de sociala parterna inriktar sig speciellt på missbruk som uppstår ur användningen av på varandra följande visstidsavtal. Den Europeiska Kommissionen har i en formell underrättelse till Sverige underkänt vår reglering av tidsbegränsade anställningsformer. Kritiken inriktar sig på att Sverige saknar en tydlig övre tidsgräns för allmän visstidsanställning och vikariat samt total avsaknad av skydd avseende säsongsanställning och tidsbegränsad... (More)
Mot bakgrund av direktiv 1999/70/EG som genomför ramavtalet om visstidsarbete slutet mellan ETUC, UNICE och CEEP har det ifrågasatts om lag (1982:80) om anställningsskydd lever upp till direktivets krav avseende införande av hinder mot att tidsbegränsade anställningsformer missbrukas. Ramavtalet mellan de sociala parterna inriktar sig speciellt på missbruk som uppstår ur användningen av på varandra följande visstidsavtal. Den Europeiska Kommissionen har i en formell underrättelse till Sverige underkänt vår reglering av tidsbegränsade anställningsformer. Kritiken inriktar sig på att Sverige saknar en tydlig övre tidsgräns för allmän visstidsanställning och vikariat samt total avsaknad av skydd avseende säsongsanställning och tidsbegränsad anställning för personer som fyllt 67 år.

4-6 §§ LAS reglerar tillåtligheten av tidsbegränsade anställningar i Sverige. Tillsvidareanställning är den huvudsakliga anställningsformen men tidsbegränsad anställning kan enligt 5 § och 6 § ingås för allmän visstidsanställning, vikariat, säsongsanställning, tidsbegränsad anställning när arbetstagaren har fyllt 67 år samt provanställning. Allmän visstidsanställning och vikariat har en maximal tidsgräns på två år under en femårsperiod. Tidsgränserna är av den karaktären att anställningar kan staplas på varandra utan att den maximala anställningstiden nås. EU-kommissionen, fackliga företrädare och andra aktörer har ifrågasatt detta. I uppsatsen ställs bland annat frågan om den svenska implementeringen stämmer överrens med EU-rättens krav. Det är också den viktigaste frågeställningen i min uppsats.

Av praxis kan man bl.a. dra slutsatsen att begreppet objektiva grunder i ramavtalet även omfattar vikariat som inte är knutna till en viss person. Det framgår också att en nationell lagstiftning anses leva upp till direktivets krav om det finns lagliga åtgärder som är likvärdiga med dem i klausul 5. EU-domstolen tolkar likvärdiga lagliga åtgärder extensivt, det viktiga är att åtgärderna sammantaget ger ett verkligt skydd mot missbruk. Medlemsstaternas utrymme för skönsmässig bedömning är dock inte obegränsat och alla arbetstagare måste skyddas.

Jag har kommit fram till att det fortfarande är osäkert om Sverige har implementerat direktivet korrekt. Det lutar dock mot att tidsgränsen för allmän visstidsanställning är för otydlig och att Sverige måste införa en takregel för flera anställningsformer. (Less)
Abstract
Following the entry into force of Council Directive 1999/70/EC concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP it has been questioned whether the Swedish Employment Protection Act is in accordance with the directive concerning the introduction of measures to prevent abuse of fixed-term employment contracts. The framework agreement between the social partners mainly focuses on abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment contracts. The Commission stated in a letter of formal notice that Sweden had not fulfilled its obligations according to the directive. The Commission is of the view that Sweden lacks a clear maximum total duration for successive fixed-term employment contracts. The... (More)
Following the entry into force of Council Directive 1999/70/EC concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP it has been questioned whether the Swedish Employment Protection Act is in accordance with the directive concerning the introduction of measures to prevent abuse of fixed-term employment contracts. The framework agreement between the social partners mainly focuses on abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment contracts. The Commission stated in a letter of formal notice that Sweden had not fulfilled its obligations according to the directive. The Commission is of the view that Sweden lacks a clear maximum total duration for successive fixed-term employment contracts. The main problem is combinations of general fixed-term employment and temporary substitute employment. The Commission is also of the opinion that Sweden completely lacks measures to prevent abuse regarding seasonal employment and employees who have reached the age of 67.

Section 4-6 in the Employment Protection Act regulates fixed-term employment. Employment contracts of an indefinite duration are the general form of employment whereas fixed-term employment contracts are allowed for general fixed-term employment, temporary substitute employment, seasonal employment, fixed-term contracts for employees over the age of 67 and probationary employment. General fixed-term employment and temporary substitute employment are limited in duration by two years over a period of five years. The limit can, however, be extended by the use of a combination of successive fixed-term employment contracts. The European Commission and Swedish social partners question this fact. The thesis mainly examines the question whether the Swedish transposition is in accordance with EC-law.

As made clear by case law of the ECJ, the term objective reason must be interpreted as not precluding provisions that allows temporary replacements where there is a temporary need of staff even though that need is recurring or even permanent. It is also clear that equivalent legal measures are sufficient by comparison to the measures to prevent abuse provided for by clause 5 in the framework agreement. The ECJ has interpreted equivalent legal measures in an extensive manner, as long as the provisions effectively prevent abuse. The margin of appreciation is not unlimited though and all workers must enjoy protection by the directives standards.

I have come to the conclusion that it is still uncertain whether the Swedish law is in accordance with the Directive. However, I find it possible that the limitation regarding general fixed-term employment might be too unclear. In that case Sweden must introduce a clear maximum total duration for fixed-term employment spanning over all types of fixed-term employment. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Kärnefelt, Ola LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Measures to prevent abuse of fixed-term employment
course
JURM02 20121
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Arbetsrätt
language
Swedish
id
2607745
date added to LUP
2012-08-31 15:31:18
date last changed
2012-08-31 15:31:18
@misc{2607745,
  abstract     = {Following the entry into force of Council Directive 1999/70/EC concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP it has been questioned whether the Swedish Employment Protection Act is in accordance with the directive concerning the introduction of measures to prevent abuse of fixed-term employment contracts. The framework agreement between the social partners mainly focuses on abuse arising from the use of successive fixed-term employment contracts. The Commission stated in a letter of formal notice that Sweden had not fulfilled its obligations according to the directive. The Commission is of the view that Sweden lacks a clear maximum total duration for successive fixed-term employment contracts. The main problem is combinations of general fixed-term employment and temporary substitute employment. The Commission is also of the opinion that Sweden completely lacks measures to prevent abuse regarding seasonal employment and employees who have reached the age of 67.

Section 4-6 in the Employment Protection Act regulates fixed-term employment. Employment contracts of an indefinite duration are the general form of employment whereas fixed-term employment contracts are allowed for general fixed-term employment, temporary substitute employment, seasonal employment, fixed-term contracts for employees over the age of 67 and probationary employment. General fixed-term employment and temporary substitute employment are limited in duration by two years over a period of five years. The limit can, however, be extended by the use of a combination of successive fixed-term employment contracts. The European Commission and Swedish social partners question this fact. The thesis mainly examines the question whether the Swedish transposition is in accordance with EC-law.

As made clear by case law of the ECJ, the term objective reason must be interpreted as not precluding provisions that allows temporary replacements where there is a temporary need of staff even though that need is recurring or even permanent. It is also clear that equivalent legal measures are sufficient by comparison to the measures to prevent abuse provided for by clause 5 in the framework agreement. The ECJ has interpreted equivalent legal measures in an extensive manner, as long as the provisions effectively prevent abuse. The margin of appreciation is not unlimited though and all workers must enjoy protection by the directives standards.

I have come to the conclusion that it is still uncertain whether the Swedish law is in accordance with the Directive. However, I find it possible that the limitation regarding general fixed-term employment might be too unclear. In that case Sweden must introduce a clear maximum total duration for fixed-term employment spanning over all types of fixed-term employment.},
  author       = {Kärnefelt, Ola},
  keyword      = {Arbetsrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Skydd mot missbruk av tidsbegränsad anställning},
  year         = {2012},
}