Advanced

Turordningsreglerna och dispositiviteten - Hur fungerar dagens lagstiftning om anställningsskydd?

Jabbari Motlagh, Farnaz LU (2015) JUR092 20151
Department of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Industrialismens frammarsch och utvecklingen mot vidgad näringsfrihet gav arbetsgivare en stark position på arbetsmarknaden. 1898 gick arbetstagarsidan ihop och bildade Landorganisationen, LO. Svenska Arbetsgivarföreningen, SAF, bildades kort därefter som motvikt till LO, och därmed skapades större balans mellan arbetsgivare och arbetstagare. Det första kollektivavtalet mellan parterna, decemberkompromissen, ingicks 1906 och innebar att LO godtog arbetsgivarens rätt att leda och fördela arbetet som en del av SAF:s stadgar, samtidigt som SAF erkände föreningsrätten. Långt härefter gällde principen om arbetsgivarens fria uppsägningsrätt som i kollektivavtalen modifierades genom kravet på arbetsbrist som saklig grund för uppsägningar.... (More)
Industrialismens frammarsch och utvecklingen mot vidgad näringsfrihet gav arbetsgivare en stark position på arbetsmarknaden. 1898 gick arbetstagarsidan ihop och bildade Landorganisationen, LO. Svenska Arbetsgivarföreningen, SAF, bildades kort därefter som motvikt till LO, och därmed skapades större balans mellan arbetsgivare och arbetstagare. Det första kollektivavtalet mellan parterna, decemberkompromissen, ingicks 1906 och innebar att LO godtog arbetsgivarens rätt att leda och fördela arbetet som en del av SAF:s stadgar, samtidigt som SAF erkände föreningsrätten. Långt härefter gällde principen om arbetsgivarens fria uppsägningsrätt som i kollektivavtalen modifierades genom kravet på arbetsbrist som saklig grund för uppsägningar. Kollektivavtalen började även innehålla villkor om att arbetstagare skulle sägas upp i tur och ordning där hänsyn skulle tas till anställningstidens längd. Från början växte således turordningsregler fram genom kollektivavtal. När anställningsskyddslagen trädde i kraft 1974 stadgades i lagens 22 § turordningsregler, mycket i enlighet med vad som dittills gällt enligt kollektivavtal mellan arbetsmarknadens parter. Lagen har därefter ändrats i omgångar, men grunden när det gäller turordningen vid uppsägning är densamma. Det är anställningstidens längd och principen om ”sist in – först ut” som är utgångspunkten vid uppsägningar på grund av arbetsbrist. Detta tenderar att skapa motsättningar mellan parterna på arbetsmarknaden och turordningsreglerna har varit omdiskuterade sedan de utformades. Den viktigaste skillnaden mellan arbetsgivare, särskilt inom privat sektor, och fack angående tillämpningen av turordningsreglerna är i vilken utsträckning hänsyn ska tas till personliga egenskaper som påverkar hur arbetet utförs. Enkelt uttryckt vill arbetsgivare värdera personliga egenskaper och kompetens högre än anställningstidens längd vid valet av vem som ska få fortsätta sin anställning. Fackliga organisationer i sin tur anser att avgöranden utifrån personliga egenskaper lätt skapar godtyckliga beslut och anser att anställningstidens längd som utgångspunkt är en godtagbar objektiv grund för uppsägning vid arbetsbrist. Vi kan konstatera att det idag är svårare att säga upp den arbetstagare som har längst anställningstid hos arbetsgivaren. Det råder dock oenighet kring frågan om turordningsreglerna leder till utanförskap och låsningar på arbetsmarknaden, där unga får svårt att slå sig in på arbetsmarknaden och äldre inte vågar bryta upp av rädsla att förlora intjänad anställningstid hos en arbetsgivare. Lagstiftaren har försökt skapa flexibilitet i regelverket genom att införa undantag från turordningen, genom krav på tillräckliga kvalifikationer för den som erbjuds fortsatt anställning samt genom avtalsfrihet. Det är just avtalsfriheten som är det centrala för denna uppsats. Det är intressant att titta närmare på hur avtalsfriheten utnyttjas av parterna på arbetsmarknaden, vilka möjligheter till undantag detta skapar och om möjligheten att ingå avtal vid sidan om lagens turordningsregler leder till att dessa lagregler förlorar sin skyddseffekt. (Less)
Abstract
Industrialism's advancement and the development towards a wider freedom of trade gave employers a strong position in the labor market. In 1898 worker organizations joined forces and formed The Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO). Shortly after this the employer organizations answered by forming The Employers Federation (SAF). Thereby a stable balance was created between the employer and worker organizations.
In December 1906 the first collective agreement "the December compromise" was signed. This entailed that LO recognized the employers right to allocate and lead labor as a part of SAFs charter. At the same time SAF recognized the worker organization’s right of association. For a long time the principle was that employers had the... (More)
Industrialism's advancement and the development towards a wider freedom of trade gave employers a strong position in the labor market. In 1898 worker organizations joined forces and formed The Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO). Shortly after this the employer organizations answered by forming The Employers Federation (SAF). Thereby a stable balance was created between the employer and worker organizations.
In December 1906 the first collective agreement "the December compromise" was signed. This entailed that LO recognized the employers right to allocate and lead labor as a part of SAFs charter. At the same time SAF recognized the worker organization’s right of association. For a long time the principle was that employers had the right to dismiss workers as they saw fit, later this was modified in collective agreements to redundancy as a just cause for layoffs. Collective agreements started to include rulings regarding seniority with respect to employee layoffs. Thus the principle of seniority developed in parallel with collective agreements. When the employment protection act of 1974 came into force much of 22 § concerning seniority with regards to layoffs was in line with what had already been applied in the contents of earlier collective agreements.
The law has since been changed in successive steps but remains fundamentally the same with respect to seniority. It is the employee’s seniority in the job and the principle of “first in last out” that is the basis for layoffs caused by redundancy. However this situation has a tendency to cause antagonism between the concerned parties within the labor market. The Legislation has been the subject of discussion, since its introduction. The most important difference between employers, and unions particularly in the private sector concern the implementation of the seniority regulations, specifically to what extent the Personal characteristics of an employee should be taken into account pertaining to the work performed.
To simplify, employers place a higher value on personal characteristics and competence than on seniority, when it comes to the choice of whom they layoff and whom stays in employment. The unions however consider that decisions based on personal characteristics are arbitrary. The unions are of the opinion that seniority is an acceptable objective basis for layoffs caused by redundancy. We can observe that at present it is difficult for employers to dismiss workers that have been employed for long periods of time.
There is however dissension as to whether or not the seniority legislation causes isolation and obstructions in the labor market, where younger people have difficulty gaining access to the market, and older people won’t move on through fear of losing their seniority rights. Legislators have tried to create flexibility in the system by introducing exceptions, such as the requirement of adequate qualifications for the employee that is offered continued employment and also the freedom to draw up contracts. It is the freedom to draw up contracts that is central for this paper. It is interesting to look closer at how the freedom to draw up contracts is used by the parties within the labor market.
And what possibilities exceptions to the legislation create. Furthermore if the possibility to draw up contracts in parallel to the legislation leads to a loss of the protection that it was originally meant to facilitate. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Jabbari Motlagh, Farnaz LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
Priority rules and the dispositivity - How does the legislation concerning employment protection work?
course
JUR092 20151
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
Labour law, arbetsrätt, anställningsskydd, turordningsregler, dispositivitet
language
Swedish
id
5435347
date added to LUP
2015-06-02 10:30:21
date last changed
2015-06-02 10:30:21
@misc{5435347,
  abstract     = {Industrialism's advancement and the development towards a wider freedom of trade gave employers a strong position in the labor market. In 1898 worker organizations joined forces and formed The Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO). Shortly after this the employer organizations answered by forming The Employers Federation (SAF). Thereby a stable balance was created between the employer and worker organizations.
In December 1906 the first collective agreement "the December compromise" was signed. This entailed that LO recognized the employers right to allocate and lead labor as a part of SAFs charter. At the same time SAF recognized the worker organization’s right of association. For a long time the principle was that employers had the right to dismiss workers as they saw fit, later this was modified in collective agreements to redundancy as a just cause for layoffs. Collective agreements started to include rulings regarding seniority with respect to employee layoffs. Thus the principle of seniority developed in parallel with collective agreements. When the employment protection act of 1974 came into force much of 22 § concerning seniority with regards to layoffs was in line with what had already been applied in the contents of earlier collective agreements. 
The law has since been changed in successive steps but remains fundamentally the same with respect to seniority. It is the employee’s seniority in the job and the principle of “first in last out” that is the basis for layoffs caused by redundancy. However this situation has a tendency to cause antagonism between the concerned parties within the labor market. The Legislation has been the subject of discussion, since its introduction. The most important difference between employers, and unions particularly in the private sector concern the implementation of the seniority regulations, specifically to what extent the Personal characteristics of an employee should be taken into account pertaining to the work performed. 
To simplify, employers place a higher value on personal characteristics and competence than on seniority, when it comes to the choice of whom they layoff and whom stays in employment. The unions however consider that decisions based on personal characteristics are arbitrary. The unions are of the opinion that seniority is an acceptable objective basis for layoffs caused by redundancy. We can observe that at present it is difficult for employers to dismiss workers that have been employed for long periods of time. 
There is however dissension as to whether or not the seniority legislation causes isolation and obstructions in the labor market, where younger people have difficulty gaining access to the market, and older people won’t move on through fear of losing their seniority rights. Legislators have tried to create flexibility in the system by introducing exceptions, such as the requirement of adequate qualifications for the employee that is offered continued employment and also the freedom to draw up contracts. It is the freedom to draw up contracts that is central for this paper. It is interesting to look closer at how the freedom to draw up contracts is used by the parties within the labor market. 
And what possibilities exceptions to the legislation create. Furthermore if the possibility to draw up contracts in parallel to the legislation leads to a loss of the protection that it was originally meant to facilitate.},
  author       = {Jabbari Motlagh, Farnaz},
  keyword      = {Labour law,arbetsrätt,anställningsskydd,turordningsregler,dispositivitet},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Turordningsreglerna och dispositiviteten - Hur fungerar dagens lagstiftning om anställningsskydd?},
  year         = {2015},
}