Advanced

Förbudet mot etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet - Hur effektivt är det?

Konomi, Niki LU (2017) JURM02 20171
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
1994 infördes ett förbud mot etnisk diskriminering i svensk rätt. Sedan dess har Arbetsdomstolen prövat etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet endast i 40 fall och arbetsgivaren har fällts endast i två fall. Detta utgör en väldigt låg bifallsfrekvens som skiljer sig markant från de allmänna domstolarnas bifallsfrekvens. Arbetsdomstolen har fått omfattande kritik om hur den tillämpar gällande lagstiftning och i synnerhet den särskilda bevisbörderegeln.

Syftet med min uppsats har varit att analysera hur effektivt förbudet mot etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet är. För att uppnå detta syfte har jag undersökt och analyserat gällande lagstiftning och i synnerhet den särskilda bevisbörderegeln och dess tillämpning.

I mitt arbete har jag... (More)
1994 infördes ett förbud mot etnisk diskriminering i svensk rätt. Sedan dess har Arbetsdomstolen prövat etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet endast i 40 fall och arbetsgivaren har fällts endast i två fall. Detta utgör en väldigt låg bifallsfrekvens som skiljer sig markant från de allmänna domstolarnas bifallsfrekvens. Arbetsdomstolen har fått omfattande kritik om hur den tillämpar gällande lagstiftning och i synnerhet den särskilda bevisbörderegeln.

Syftet med min uppsats har varit att analysera hur effektivt förbudet mot etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet är. För att uppnå detta syfte har jag undersökt och analyserat gällande lagstiftning och i synnerhet den särskilda bevisbörderegeln och dess tillämpning.

I mitt arbete har jag redogjort för “Domar i diskrimineringsmål 1999–2009. En förstudie.” (förstudie) och SOU 2016:87 ”Bättre skydd mot diskriminering” (utredning). Förstudien har analyserat domar i diskrimineringsmål från Arbetsdomstolen och de allmänna domstolarna under en tio års period. Analysen har visat på påtagliga skillnader mellan de allmänna domstolarna och Arbetsdomstolen när det kommer till bifallsfrekvensen och tillämpning av den särskilda bevisbörderegeln. Enligt förstudien tillämpas bevisbördereglen som en presumtionsregel av de allmänna domstolarna medan Arbetsdomstolen tillämpar den som en regel om delad bevisbörda. Utredningen har också gjort en analys av domar i diskrimineringsmål från de allmänna domstolarna och Arbetsdomstolen. Till skillnad från förstudien, har utredningen analyserat domar som har meddelats under perioden 2009 och 2015. I utredningen kommer man fram till en lägre skillnad i bifallsfrekvensen mellan Arbetsdomstolen och de allmänna domstolarna än i förstudien. Enligt utredningen har numera Arbetsdomstolen samma syn på tillämpning av bevisbörderegeln som de allmänna domstolarna, alltså som en presumtionsregel. Vidare säger utredningen att de skillnader som har setts mellan domstolsslagen, har inte att göra med tillämpningen av bevibörderegeln utan snarare med att målen är mer komplexa i Arbetsdomstolen och att domstolen inte tillämpar den särskilda bevisbörderegeln.

I min rättsfallsanalys har jag tagit upp rättsfall som har meddelats både innan år 2009 och efter. I analysen har jag konstaterat att Arbetsdomstolen kringgår tillämpningen av bevisbörderegeln och ställer låga krav på arbetsgivaren.

Förstudien och utredningen föreslår olika lösningar för att komma till rätta med de problemen som har iakttagits. En av de föreslagna lösningarna är införandet av en diskrimineringsnämnd. Diskrimineringsnämnden skulle kunna bidra till att fler människor, även de som inte är medlemmar i en facklig organisation, kan föra sin egen talan och få prövning i sak. Detta skulle leda till att frågan om etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet prövades oftare. (Less)
Abstract
In 1994, a prohibition against ethnic discrimination was introduced in Swedish law. Since then, the Labour Court has adjudicated ethnic discrimination in working life only in 40 cases and the employer has only been convicted in two cases. This represents a very low approval rate, which differs significantly from the general courts' approval rate. The Labour Court has received extensive criticism on how it applies established legislation and, in particular, the special burden of proof rule.

The purpose of my thesis has been to analyse how effectively the prohibition against ethnic discrimination in working life is. In order to achieve this purpose, I have examined and analysed the law, and in particular the special burden of proof rule... (More)
In 1994, a prohibition against ethnic discrimination was introduced in Swedish law. Since then, the Labour Court has adjudicated ethnic discrimination in working life only in 40 cases and the employer has only been convicted in two cases. This represents a very low approval rate, which differs significantly from the general courts' approval rate. The Labour Court has received extensive criticism on how it applies established legislation and, in particular, the special burden of proof rule.

The purpose of my thesis has been to analyse how effectively the prohibition against ethnic discrimination in working life is. In order to achieve this purpose, I have examined and analysed the law, and in particular the special burden of proof rule and its application.

In my thesis, I have used "Judgments in Discrimination Caces 1999-2009. A preliminary study. "(Preliminary study) and SOU 2016: 87" Better protection against discrimination "(investigation). The preliminary study has analysed judgments in discrimination cases from the Labour Court and the general courts for a period of ten years. The analysis has shown significant differences between the general courts and the Labour Court when it comes to the approval rate and application of the special burden of proof rule. According to the preliminary study, the burden of proof rule is being applied as a presumption rule by the general courts, while the Labour Court applies it as a rule of shared burden of proof. The investigation has also conducted an analysis of judgments in discrimination cases from the general courts and the Labour Court. Unlike the preliminary study, the investigation has analysed judgments that have been adjudicated between year 2009 and 2015. The investigation reveals a lower difference in the approval rate between the Labour Court and the general courts than in the preliminary study. According to the investigation, the Labour Court has now the same view on the application of the burden of proof rule as the general courts, thus as a presumption rule. Furthermore, the investigation states that the differences that have been observed between the court categories, are not related to the application of the burden of proof rule, but rather to the fact that the discrimination cases are more complex in the Labour Court and that the court does not apply the special burden of proof.

In my analysis of case law, I have brought up legal cases that have been announced before the year 2009 as well as after. In the analysis, I have found that the Labour Court circumvents the application of the burden of proof rule and imposes low demands on the employer.

The preliminary study and the investigation suggest different solutions to address the problems that have been observed. One of the proposed solutions is the introduction of a Discrimination Board. The Discrimination Board could help more people, including those who are not members of a union, to bring their own action and get a case-by-case review. This would mean that the issue of ethnic discrimination in working life will be tested more often. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Konomi, Niki LU
supervisor
organization
alternative title
The prohibition against ethnic discrimination in working life - How effective is it?
course
JURM02 20171
year
type
H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
subject
keywords
etnisk diskriminering, arbetslivet
language
Swedish
id
8929975
date added to LUP
2018-01-25 14:18:46
date last changed
2018-01-25 14:18:46
@misc{8929975,
  abstract     = {In 1994, a prohibition against ethnic discrimination was introduced in Swedish law. Since then, the Labour Court has adjudicated ethnic discrimination in working life only in 40 cases and the employer has only been convicted in two cases. This represents a very low approval rate, which differs significantly from the general courts' approval rate. The Labour Court has received extensive criticism on how it applies established legislation and, in particular, the special burden of proof rule.

The purpose of my thesis has been to analyse how effectively the prohibition against ethnic discrimination in working life is. In order to achieve this purpose, I have examined and analysed the law, and in particular the special burden of proof rule and its application.

In my thesis, I have used "Judgments in Discrimination Caces 1999-2009. A preliminary study. "(Preliminary study) and SOU 2016: 87" Better protection against discrimination "(investigation). The preliminary study has analysed judgments in discrimination cases from the Labour Court and the general courts for a period of ten years. The analysis has shown significant differences between the general courts and the Labour Court when it comes to the approval rate and application of the special burden of proof rule. According to the preliminary study, the burden of proof rule is being applied as a presumption rule by the general courts, while the Labour Court applies it as a rule of shared burden of proof. The investigation has also conducted an analysis of judgments in discrimination cases from the general courts and the Labour Court. Unlike the preliminary study, the investigation has analysed judgments that have been adjudicated between year 2009 and 2015. The investigation reveals a lower difference in the approval rate between the Labour Court and the general courts than in the preliminary study. According to the investigation, the Labour Court has now the same view on the application of the burden of proof rule as the general courts, thus as a presumption rule. Furthermore, the investigation states that the differences that have been observed between the court categories, are not related to the application of the burden of proof rule, but rather to the fact that the discrimination cases are more complex in the Labour Court and that the court does not apply the special burden of proof.

In my analysis of case law, I have brought up legal cases that have been announced before the year 2009 as well as after. In the analysis, I have found that the Labour Court circumvents the application of the burden of proof rule and imposes low demands on the employer.

The preliminary study and the investigation suggest different solutions to address the problems that have been observed. One of the proposed solutions is the introduction of a Discrimination Board. The Discrimination Board could help more people, including those who are not members of a union, to bring their own action and get a case-by-case review. This would mean that the issue of ethnic discrimination in working life will be tested more often.},
  author       = {Konomi, Niki},
  keyword      = {etnisk diskriminering,arbetslivet},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Förbudet mot etnisk diskriminering i arbetslivet - Hur effektivt är det?},
  year         = {2017},
}