Sist in, först ut? – en kritisk belysning av och diskussion kring turordningsreglernas rättsliga innebörd och rättspolitiska diskurs i ett svenskt och EU-rättsligt perspektiv
(2012) JURM02 20121Department of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Syftet med uppsatsen är att kritiskt belysa, analysera och diskutera turordningsreglernas rättsliga innebörd och rättspolitiska diskurs i ett svenskt och EU-rättsligt perspektiv.
Lagen om anställningsskydd trädde i kraft 1974 och har allt sedan dess varit en av de mest omdiskuterade svenska lagstiftningarna. I centrum för diskussionen står turordningsreglerna. Anledningen till att frågan blivit så omdebatterad ligger inte minst i arbetsmarknadens parters ofta starkt divergerande intressen i fråga om arbetsmarknadens konstruktion.
Hos arbetsgivarsidan ligger fokus ofta på reglernas hämmande effekt avseende arbetsmarknaden. Regeln om sist in, först ut gör att dessa arbetstagare får svårare att komma in på arbetsmarknaden, men de... (More) - Syftet med uppsatsen är att kritiskt belysa, analysera och diskutera turordningsreglernas rättsliga innebörd och rättspolitiska diskurs i ett svenskt och EU-rättsligt perspektiv.
Lagen om anställningsskydd trädde i kraft 1974 och har allt sedan dess varit en av de mest omdiskuterade svenska lagstiftningarna. I centrum för diskussionen står turordningsreglerna. Anledningen till att frågan blivit så omdebatterad ligger inte minst i arbetsmarknadens parters ofta starkt divergerande intressen i fråga om arbetsmarknadens konstruktion.
Hos arbetsgivarsidan ligger fokus ofta på reglernas hämmande effekt avseende arbetsmarknaden. Regeln om sist in, först ut gör att dessa arbetstagare får svårare att komma in på arbetsmarknaden, men de hindrar också äldre arbetstagare från att röra sig mellan jobb i hög ålder. Reglerna är såtillvida sysselsättningshämmande. Hos arbetstagarsidan ligger fokus på turordningsreglernas trygghetsskapande effekt. De menar bl.a. att reglerna skyddar mot godtycke i arbetsbristsituationer. Försvararna av lagstiftningen lyfter förhållandevis ofta fram betydelsen av turordningsregler vid t.ex. nödvändiga driftsinskränkningar på stora företag då man menar att det är av yttersta betydelse med trygghet för arbetstagarna.
Inom det europarättsliga samarbetet saknas en gemensam skyddslagstiftning liknande lagen om anställningsskydd. Regler avseende anställningsskydd återfinns istället bl.a. i Europeiska unionens stadga om de grundläggande rättigheterna och regleras därutöver bl.a. genom direktiv och regler avseende direkt och indirekt diskriminering. Genom det svenska medlemskapet i Europeiska unionen, och Lissabonfördragets ikraftträdande, upphöjdes dessa regler till primärrätt inom unionsrätten.
För svenskt vidkommande, och diskussionen avseende turordningsreglerna, spelar också implementeringen av flexicurity-begreppet på gemenskapsnivå en betydande roll. Implementeringen kan sägas leda till en avreglering av trygghetsaspekterna i det svenska anställningsskyddet. Arbetsdomstolens praxis avseende t.ex. arbetsgivarens omplaceringsskyldighet i samband med uppsägning p.g.a. arbetsbrist kan sägas ligga i linje med flexicurity. Långvarig anställning och hög ålder skyddar inte per definition mot att arbetsgivaren kan erbjuda arbetstagare omplacering.
Utvecklingen på gemenskapsnivå och nationell nivå kan sägas gå mot ett flexibelt anställningsskydd, med fokus på en lätthet att säga upp och nyanställa, på kompetens och vidareutbildning, snarare än på trygghet och skydd mot godtycke. Utvecklingen speglas i såväl den politiska debatten som ett ökat samförstånd mellan arbetsmarknadens parter. (Less) - Abstract
- The purpose of this thesis is to critically highlight, analyze and discuss the priority rules, their judicial meaning and legal policy discourse in a Swedish and European legal perspective.
The Act on Employment came into force in 1974 and since then it has been one of the most controversial legislations in Sweden. At the very center of the debate are the priority rules. The reason that the rules have become so controversial lies not least in the often strongly diverging views concerning the social construction of the labor market among the parties on the market.
Among employers, focus is often on the inhibitory effects of the priority rules. The rule of last in, first out makes it difficult for workers to enter into the labor... (More) - The purpose of this thesis is to critically highlight, analyze and discuss the priority rules, their judicial meaning and legal policy discourse in a Swedish and European legal perspective.
The Act on Employment came into force in 1974 and since then it has been one of the most controversial legislations in Sweden. At the very center of the debate are the priority rules. The reason that the rules have become so controversial lies not least in the often strongly diverging views concerning the social construction of the labor market among the parties on the market.
Among employers, focus is often on the inhibitory effects of the priority rules. The rule of last in, first out makes it difficult for workers to enter into the labor market, but it also prevents older workers from moving between jobs at an old age, they claim. Among employees, focus is often on the reassuring effects of the priority rules. In their view, the rules protect against arbitrariness in redundancy situations.
In terms of the judicial cooperation within the European union, a common protective legislation like the Act on Employment does not exist. The rules relating to employment protection is instead partly found in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and regulated through directives and regulations relating to direct and indirect discrimination. Through the Swedish membership in the European Union, and the Lisbon treaty coming into effect, these regulations have been elevated to primary law within the European Union.
With regards to the priority rules, the implementation of the flexicurity concept at Community level plays a significant role. Flexicurity can be said to lead to a liberalization of security aspects of the Swedish employment protection. Statements from the Swedish Labour Court concerning employer's obligation in connection with termination of redundancy to reassign employees can be said to be in line with flexicurity. Long-standing employment and old age does not, by definition, protect against the employer offering employees reassignments to other parts of the company.
Developments at community and national level can be said to move towards a flexible employment, with a focus on making it easier for employers to terminate and re-hire within the work force, on skills and training, rather than on security and protection against arbitrary interference. The trend is reflected in both the political debate as well as in a growing consensus among social partners on the labor market. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/2733873
- author
- Nill Elmér, Niklas LU
- supervisor
-
- Mia Rönnmar LU
- organization
- alternative title
- Last in, first out? – a critical discussion of the judicial meaning and legal policy discourse of the priority rules in a Swedish and European legal perspective
- course
- JURM02 20121
- year
- 2012
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- arbetsrätt, arbetsbrist, turordningsreglerna, flexicurity
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 2733873
- date added to LUP
- 2012-10-15 12:07:39
- date last changed
- 2012-10-15 12:07:39
@misc{2733873,
abstract = {{The purpose of this thesis is to critically highlight, analyze and discuss the priority rules, their judicial meaning and legal policy discourse in a Swedish and European legal perspective.
The Act on Employment came into force in 1974 and since then it has been one of the most controversial legislations in Sweden. At the very center of the debate are the priority rules. The reason that the rules have become so controversial lies not least in the often strongly diverging views concerning the social construction of the labor market among the parties on the market.
Among employers, focus is often on the inhibitory effects of the priority rules. The rule of last in, first out makes it difficult for workers to enter into the labor market, but it also prevents older workers from moving between jobs at an old age, they claim. Among employees, focus is often on the reassuring effects of the priority rules. In their view, the rules protect against arbitrariness in redundancy situations.
In terms of the judicial cooperation within the European union, a common protective legislation like the Act on Employment does not exist. The rules relating to employment protection is instead partly found in the European Charter of Fundamental Rights and regulated through directives and regulations relating to direct and indirect discrimination. Through the Swedish membership in the European Union, and the Lisbon treaty coming into effect, these regulations have been elevated to primary law within the European Union.
With regards to the priority rules, the implementation of the flexicurity concept at Community level plays a significant role. Flexicurity can be said to lead to a liberalization of security aspects of the Swedish employment protection. Statements from the Swedish Labour Court concerning employer's obligation in connection with termination of redundancy to reassign employees can be said to be in line with flexicurity. Long-standing employment and old age does not, by definition, protect against the employer offering employees reassignments to other parts of the company.
Developments at community and national level can be said to move towards a flexible employment, with a focus on making it easier for employers to terminate and re-hire within the work force, on skills and training, rather than on security and protection against arbitrary interference. The trend is reflected in both the political debate as well as in a growing consensus among social partners on the labor market.}},
author = {{Nill Elmér, Niklas}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Sist in, först ut? – en kritisk belysning av och diskussion kring turordningsreglernas rättsliga innebörd och rättspolitiska diskurs i ett svenskt och EU-rättsligt perspektiv}},
year = {{2012}},
}