Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Arbetstagares brottslighet som grund för skiljande från anställning

Blendberg, Ellen LU (2013) JURK01 20132
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Uppsatsen redogör för rättsläget kring uppsägningar och avsked med arbetstagarens brottslighet som grund. För avskedande krävs att arbetstagaren grovt åsidosatt sina åligganden enligt anställningsavtalet och för uppsägning finns ett krav på saklig grund. Vid bedömningen av huruvida saklig grund föreligger ställs krav på hur arbetsgivaren handlat. Arbetsgivaren har en rad lojalitetsplikter gentemot den anställde innan en uppsägning får vidtas.

Arbetstagaren anses också ha en lojalitetsplikt. Denna innefattar bland annat ett krav på att inte begå brott som drabbar arbetet, arbetsgivaren eller arbetskamraterna. Arbetsdomstolen har sett strängt på brottslighet riktad mot arbetsgivaren och kollegor, men också brottslighet som sker utan... (More)
Uppsatsen redogör för rättsläget kring uppsägningar och avsked med arbetstagarens brottslighet som grund. För avskedande krävs att arbetstagaren grovt åsidosatt sina åligganden enligt anställningsavtalet och för uppsägning finns ett krav på saklig grund. Vid bedömningen av huruvida saklig grund föreligger ställs krav på hur arbetsgivaren handlat. Arbetsgivaren har en rad lojalitetsplikter gentemot den anställde innan en uppsägning får vidtas.

Arbetstagaren anses också ha en lojalitetsplikt. Denna innefattar bland annat ett krav på att inte begå brott som drabbar arbetet, arbetsgivaren eller arbetskamraterna. Arbetsdomstolen har sett strängt på brottslighet riktad mot arbetsgivaren och kollegor, men också brottslighet som sker utan koppling till arbetet kan ge upphov till att grund finns för att skilja arbetstagaren från sin anställning.

Våldsbrott med koppling till arbetet ger i regel arbetsgivaren rätt att säga upp, och ofta till och med avskeda, en arbetstagare. Förmögenhetsbrott riktade mot arbetsgivaren eller dennes intressesfär utgör i regel saklig grund för uppsägning, om förmildrande omständigheter saknas.

Vid drogrelaterad brottslighet har arbetsgivaren ett rehabiliteringsansvar om brottsligheten beror på att arbetstagaren har ett missbruk av sjukdomskaraktär. Detta ansvar aktualiseras inte om brottsligheten är särskilt grov. Är brottsligheten inte sjukdomsrelaterad gör Arbetsdomstolen en helhetsbedömning som tar hänsyn till dels arbetsgivarens intressen, dels till arbetstagarens personliga förhållanden. Så länge bruket inte skadat arbetsgivaren och prognosen för framtiden är god saknas i regel grund för skiljande från anställning. Undantag har gjorts då arbetstagaren haft en förtroendeställning inom företaget eller arbetet rört särskilt utsatta grupper.

När brottet saknar direkt koppling till arbetet görs en bedömning av huruvida arbetsgivaren anses kunna ha fortsatt förtroende för den anställde. Detta är i hög grad beroende av vad arbetstagaren har för arbetsuppgifter. Finns möjlighet att omplacera arbetstagaren till arbetsuppgifter som inte korrelerar med den brottslighet han eller hon gjort sig skyldig till ska så ske innan saklig grund för uppsägning anses föreligga. Denna skyldighet föreligger inte i avskedssituationer. Situationer där arbetstagaren dömts för grov brottslighet och kommer att avtjäna ett långt frihetsstraff har också ansetts innebära att saklig grund för uppsägning föreligger. (Less)
Abstract
This essay describes the legal situation regarding ordinary dismissals and summary dismissals based on an employee’s criminal activity. In order for the employer to be able to accomplish a summary dismissal the employee must have severely neglected his obligations against the employer. To accomplish an ordinary dismissal, the employer must show that the dismissal is based on objective grounds. The employer’s actions before the dismissal are of large importance for determining whether an ordinary dismissal is based on objective grounds or not.

The employee has an obligation not to commit crimes that affect the work, the employer or colleagues. The Swedish Labour Court has a strict view on crime against the employer and colleagues, but... (More)
This essay describes the legal situation regarding ordinary dismissals and summary dismissals based on an employee’s criminal activity. In order for the employer to be able to accomplish a summary dismissal the employee must have severely neglected his obligations against the employer. To accomplish an ordinary dismissal, the employer must show that the dismissal is based on objective grounds. The employer’s actions before the dismissal are of large importance for determining whether an ordinary dismissal is based on objective grounds or not.

The employee has an obligation not to commit crimes that affect the work, the employer or colleagues. The Swedish Labour Court has a strict view on crime against the employer and colleagues, but crime without any connection to the employer or work can also give the employer ground to dismiss the employee.

Crimes of violence linked to the work generally give the employer the right to perform an ordinary dismissal, and often even a summary dismissal, of an employee. Property crimes against the employer or his costumers, clients, partners etc. normally constitute objective grounds for ordinary dismissal, unless mitigating circumstances exists.

In case of drug-related crimes, the employer has a responsibility for rehabilitation of the employer if the crimes were a result of an abuse that could be medically diagnosed as a disease. The employer does not have this responsibility if the crime is particularly serious. If the crime is not disease-related, the Labour Court will do an overall assessment which takes into account both the employer's interests and the employee's personal circumstances. As long as the abuse has not hurt the employer and the prognosis for the future is good, there is normally no ground for dismissal. Exceptions have been made when the worker has had a position of trust within the company or the work has involved particularly vulnerable groups.

When the crime has no direct connection to the work, an assessment of whether the employer is considered to be able to have future trust in the employee is made. This is dependent on what kind of work the employee performs. If the employee is not considered trusted for his current work, the employer has an obligation to reassign the employee if possible before he can accomplish an ordinary dismissal.
This obligation does not exist in summary dismissal situations. Situations where the employee has been convicted of serious crimes, and will serve a lengthy custodial sentence, have also been taken to mean that objective ground for ordinary dismissal exists. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Blendberg, Ellen LU
supervisor
organization
course
JURK01 20132
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt, arbetstagare, brott, brottslighet
language
Swedish
id
4228635
date added to LUP
2014-01-28 17:21:46
date last changed
2014-01-28 17:21:46
@misc{4228635,
  abstract     = {This essay describes the legal situation regarding ordinary dismissals and summary dismissals based on an employee’s criminal activity. In order for the employer to be able to accomplish a summary dismissal the employee must have severely neglected his obligations against the employer. To accomplish an ordinary dismissal, the employer must show that the dismissal is based on objective grounds. The employer’s actions before the dismissal are of large importance for determining whether an ordinary dismissal is based on objective grounds or not.

The employee has an obligation not to commit crimes that affect the work, the employer or colleagues. The Swedish Labour Court has a strict view on crime against the employer and colleagues, but crime without any connection to the employer or work can also give the employer ground to dismiss the employee.

Crimes of violence linked to the work generally give the employer the right to perform an ordinary dismissal, and often even a summary dismissal, of an employee. Property crimes against the employer or his costumers, clients, partners etc. normally constitute objective grounds for ordinary dismissal, unless mitigating circumstances exists.

In case of drug-related crimes, the employer has a responsibility for rehabilitation of the employer if the crimes were a result of an abuse that could be medically diagnosed as a disease. The employer does not have this responsibility if the crime is particularly serious. If the crime is not disease-related, the Labour Court will do an overall assessment which takes into account both the employer's interests and the employee's personal circumstances. As long as the abuse has not hurt the employer and the prognosis for the future is good, there is normally no ground for dismissal. Exceptions have been made when the worker has had a position of trust within the company or the work has involved particularly vulnerable groups.

When the crime has no direct connection to the work, an assessment of whether the employer is considered to be able to have future trust in the employee is made. This is dependent on what kind of work the employee performs. If the employee is not considered trusted for his current work, the employer has an obligation to reassign the employee if possible before he can accomplish an ordinary dismissal.
This obligation does not exist in summary dismissal situations. Situations where the employee has been convicted of serious crimes, and will serve a lengthy custodial sentence, have also been taken to mean that objective ground for ordinary dismissal exists.},
  author       = {Blendberg, Ellen},
  keyword      = {arbetsrätt,arbetstagare,brott,brottslighet},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Arbetstagares brottslighet som grund för skiljande från anställning},
  year         = {2013},
}