Skip to main content

LUP Student Papers

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

Vägen runt LAS Om begreppet provocerad uppsägning och behovet av lagstiftning

Magnusson, Evelina LU (2014) LAGM01 20142
Department of Law
Abstract
This work discusses and investigates the concept provoked dismissal and its use in Swedish law. The essay has been limited to only discuss the Swedish law since there are no EU rules corresponding to those found in the Swedish Employment Protection Act. Since there is only very limited doctrine on the subject, the concept has been investigated using case studies. The legal cases are taken from the Labour Court's practice, since it is the Labour Court which is the highest court in Sweden regarding labor law.
The legislation that regulates provoked dismissal is mainly the Employment Protection Act (LAS), but other labor law such as the MBL may be applicable. Other laws such as the Swedish contractual law (Avtalslagen) may also be applicable... (More)
This work discusses and investigates the concept provoked dismissal and its use in Swedish law. The essay has been limited to only discuss the Swedish law since there are no EU rules corresponding to those found in the Swedish Employment Protection Act. Since there is only very limited doctrine on the subject, the concept has been investigated using case studies. The legal cases are taken from the Labour Court's practice, since it is the Labour Court which is the highest court in Sweden regarding labor law.
The legislation that regulates provoked dismissal is mainly the Employment Protection Act (LAS), but other labor law such as the MBL may be applicable. Other laws such as the Swedish contractual law (Avtalslagen) may also be applicable to cases of provoked dismissal.
In Swedish law the concept of provoked dismissal, as it looks today, is a result of the Labour Court's practice. This practice can be traced back to 1974 and the first Employment Protection Act. The Court then refined the concept through its practice and developed a number of requisites that can be used for the assessment of cases of provoked dismissal. There are many different situations that fall under what is to be seen as a provoked dismissal. The essay discusses some typical examples and how courts have reasoned in the different cases.
There are other ways to go around the employment protection that LAS provides. One method is called mock redundancy. Mock redundancy is a technical term developed by the Labour Court's practice. Because redundancy is always seen as a legitimate reason for a dismissal employers sometimes choose to indicate redundancy as grounds for termination, even though the dismissal was for personal reasons and no real redundancy exists. The rules requiring repositioning and order of termination lists, as found in the Employment Protection Act, can also be exploited by the employer to go around the employment protection.
There are also cases where an employer chooses to provoke a dismissal even though the employer has reasonable grounds for dismissal. This may be because it is uncertain whether the reasonable grounds would hold up in a court trial. This may also be a way for the employer to speed up the process or avoid the interference of the union.
There is some discordance if we look more closely at how the AD reason in its court cases. One of the most obvious discordances , we will find if we compare the Labour Court's practices regarding reasonable grounds when it is the employer who terminates the employment compared to when it is the employee who chose to do so.
In order to overcome this discordance in practice for two situations governed by the same section I suggest that in 7 § LAS introduces a paragraph that equates provoked dismissal with a termination by the employer without reasonable grounds. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Detta arbete behandlar och utreder begreppet provocerad uppsägning och dess användning i svensk rätt. Arbetet har begränsats till att endast avhandla den svenska rätten eftersom det inte finns EU-rättsliga bestämmelser som motsvarar det som finns i den svenska anställningsskyddslagen. Eftersom det endast finns mycket begränsad doktrin på området så har begreppet utretts med hjälp av rättsfallstudier. Rättsfallen är hämtade från Arbetsdomstolens praxis, då det är arbetsdomstolen som är den främsta domstol i Sverige vad gäller arbetsrättsfrågor.
Lagstiftningen som blir aktuell vad gäller provocerad uppsägning är främst Anställningsskyddslagen (LAS), men andra lagar på arbetsrättens område så som Medbestämmandelagen (MBL) kan bli... (More)
Detta arbete behandlar och utreder begreppet provocerad uppsägning och dess användning i svensk rätt. Arbetet har begränsats till att endast avhandla den svenska rätten eftersom det inte finns EU-rättsliga bestämmelser som motsvarar det som finns i den svenska anställningsskyddslagen. Eftersom det endast finns mycket begränsad doktrin på området så har begreppet utretts med hjälp av rättsfallstudier. Rättsfallen är hämtade från Arbetsdomstolens praxis, då det är arbetsdomstolen som är den främsta domstol i Sverige vad gäller arbetsrättsfrågor.
Lagstiftningen som blir aktuell vad gäller provocerad uppsägning är främst Anställningsskyddslagen (LAS), men andra lagar på arbetsrättens område så som Medbestämmandelagen (MBL) kan bli tillämpliga. Även andra lagar så som Avtalslagen kan bli tillämpliga på fall av provocerad uppsägning.
I svensk rätt så är begreppet provocerad uppsägning som det ser ut i dag ett resultat av AD:s praxis. Denna praxis går att följa tillbaka till 1974 och den första anställningsskyddslagen. Domstolen har sedan genom sin praxis förfinat begreppet och framtagit en rad rekvisit som kan användas för bedömningen av fall av provocerad uppsägning. Det finns mängder av olika situationer som faller in under vad som är att se som en provocerad uppsägning. Uppsatsen tar upp några typexempel och hur domstolarna har resonerat i de olika fallen.
Det finns andra sätt att gå runt de skydd för en anställd som finns i LAS. En metod är det som kallas fingerad arbetsbrist. Fingerad arbetsbrist är en rättsteknisk term som utarbetats genom AD:s praxis. Eftersom arbetsbrist alltid ses som en skälig grund för en uppsägning så väljer arbetsgivare ibland att ange arbetsbrist som uppsägningsgrund, trots att uppsägningen beror på personliga skäl och ingen egentlig arbetsbrist föreligger. Även bestämmelserna om omplacering och turordning som finns i LAS kan utnyttjas för att gå runt anställningsskyddet.
Det finns även fall då en arbetsgivare väljer att provocera fram en uppsägning trots att arbetsgivaren har en saklig grund för uppsägning. Detta kan bero på att det är osäkert om grunden skulle hålla vid prövning i domstol. Det kan även vara ett sätt för arbetsgivaren att snabba på processen eller undgå inblandning av facket.
Det finns vissa oenigheter om vi ser närmare på hur AD resonerar i sina domskäl. En av de tydligaste oenigheterna finner vi om vi jämför AD:s praxis vad gäller saklig grund i de fall då det är arbetsgivaren som avslutar anställningen mot om det är den anställde själv som väljer att göra det.
För att komma till rätta med denna skillnad i praxis för två situationer som regleras i samma paragraf så föreslår jag att det i 7 § LAS införs ett stycke som jämställer en provocerad uppsägning med en uppsägning från arbetsgivaren utan saklig grund. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Magnusson, Evelina LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Bypassing LAS The concept of provoked dismissal and the need for legislation
course
LAGM01 20142
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt, labour law, provocerad uppsägning, LAS, anställningsskydd, uppsägning, fingerad arbetsbrist
language
Swedish
id
4905040
date added to LUP
2015-01-16 09:22:45
date last changed
2015-01-16 09:22:45
@misc{4905040,
  abstract     = {{This work discusses and investigates the concept provoked dismissal and its use in Swedish law. The essay has been limited to only discuss the Swedish law since there are no EU rules corresponding to those found in the Swedish Employment Protection Act. Since there is only very limited doctrine on the subject, the concept has been investigated using case studies. The legal cases are taken from the Labour Court's practice, since it is the Labour Court which is the highest court in Sweden regarding labor law.
The legislation that regulates provoked dismissal is mainly the Employment Protection Act (LAS), but other labor law such as the MBL may be applicable. Other laws such as the Swedish contractual law (Avtalslagen) may also be applicable to cases of provoked dismissal.
In Swedish law the concept of provoked dismissal, as it looks today, is a result of the Labour Court's practice. This practice can be traced back to 1974 and the first Employment Protection Act. The Court then refined the concept through its practice and developed a number of requisites that can be used for the assessment of cases of provoked dismissal. There are many different situations that fall under what is to be seen as a provoked dismissal. The essay discusses some typical examples and how courts have reasoned in the different cases.
There are other ways to go around the employment protection that LAS provides. One method is called mock redundancy. Mock redundancy is a technical term developed by the Labour Court's practice. Because redundancy is always seen as a legitimate reason for a dismissal employers sometimes choose to indicate redundancy as grounds for termination, even though the dismissal was for personal reasons and no real redundancy exists. The rules requiring repositioning and order of termination lists, as found in the Employment Protection Act, can also be exploited by the employer to go around the employment protection.
There are also cases where an employer chooses to provoke a dismissal even though the employer has reasonable grounds for dismissal. This may be because it is uncertain whether the reasonable grounds would hold up in a court trial. This may also be a way for the employer to speed up the process or avoid the interference of the union.
There is some discordance if we look more closely at how the AD reason in its court cases. One of the most obvious discordances , we will find if we compare the Labour Court's practices regarding reasonable grounds when it is the employer who terminates the employment compared to when it is the employee who chose to do so.
In order to overcome this discordance in practice for two situations governed by the same section I suggest that in 7 § LAS introduces a paragraph that equates provoked dismissal with a termination by the employer without reasonable grounds.}},
  author       = {{Magnusson, Evelina}},
  language     = {{swe}},
  note         = {{Student Paper}},
  title        = {{Vägen runt LAS Om begreppet provocerad uppsägning och behovet av lagstiftning}},
  year         = {{2014}},
}