Advanced

Har vi gått över gränsen? - Förändrad svensk utstationeringslagstiftning i ljuset av EUs fria rörlighet

Persson, Alexander LU (2017) LAGF03 20172
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats försöker att klargöra huruvida det, sedan 2007 års Lavaldom, har skett en utveckling inom EU-rätten som tillåter att stridsåtgärder används i ett ökat antal fall, och huruvida den senaste ändringen av den svenska utstationeringslagen är i samklang med nuvarande EU-rätt. Uppsatsen fokuserar på EU-rätt och svensk rätt, och folkrätten är därför utelämnad.
Utstationeringsdirektivet, utfärdat år 1996, lade fast en ”hård kärna” av värdstatens miniminormer, vilka alltid skulle tillämpas gentemot utländska arbetsgivare. Lavaldomen gjorde dock klart att dessa miniminormer skulle ses som ett hinder för stridsåtgärder som syftade till att genomdriva arbetsvillkor över miniminivån. EU-domstolens tolkning var sådan att rätten till... (More)
Denna uppsats försöker att klargöra huruvida det, sedan 2007 års Lavaldom, har skett en utveckling inom EU-rätten som tillåter att stridsåtgärder används i ett ökat antal fall, och huruvida den senaste ändringen av den svenska utstationeringslagen är i samklang med nuvarande EU-rätt. Uppsatsen fokuserar på EU-rätt och svensk rätt, och folkrätten är därför utelämnad.
Utstationeringsdirektivet, utfärdat år 1996, lade fast en ”hård kärna” av värdstatens miniminormer, vilka alltid skulle tillämpas gentemot utländska arbetsgivare. Lavaldomen gjorde dock klart att dessa miniminormer skulle ses som ett hinder för stridsåtgärder som syftade till att genomdriva arbetsvillkor över miniminivån. EU-domstolens tolkning var sådan att rätten till stridsåtgärder för villkor som gick utöver miniminivån ansågs vara en omotiverad inskränkning av friheten att tillhandahålla tjänster.
För att leva upp till Lavaldomens krav ändrade Sverige utstationeringslagen år 2010. Stridsåtgärder mot utländska arbetsgivare som utstationerade arbetskraft på den svenska arbetsmarknaden blev förbjudna ifall arbetsgivarna kunde visa att de tillämpade villkor som minst levde upp till de svenska miniminormerna inom den ”hårda kärnan”.
Under åren efter Lavaldomen har EU-rätten genomgått förändringar som har gjort den mer socialt medveten. Främst av dessa är Lissabonfördraget från år 2009, som har upphöjt stadgan till primärrätt och introducerat fördragsbestämmelser med målsättningen att tillse social utveckling. Inom doktrinen ses detta av vissa författare som anledningen till vad de uppfattar vara en uppmjukning av EU-praxis, med en EU-domstol som nu är mer benägen att rättfärdiga sociala intressen när dessa kolliderar med EUs ekonomiska friheter (som ju skedde i Lavalmålet). Då andra författare inte förespråkar en motsatt rörelse hos EU-domstolen dras i den här uppsatsen därför slutsatsen att en förskjutning mot en mer socialt nyanserad praxis verkligen har skett, om än en liten och osäker sådan.
2017 ändrades utstationeringslagen igen och nu tillåts stridsåtgärder att genomdriva svenska kollektivavtal gentemot utländska arbetstagare, även när dessa redan tillämpar villkor i enlighet med miniminormerna. Det finns en möjlighet att denna senaste utveckling kan vara tillåten enligt den nuvarande, uppmjukade EU-rätten, men rättsläget är för osäkert för att något säkert ska kunna sägas. (Less)
Abstract
This thesis tries to elucidate whether, since the Laval judgment of 2007, there has been a development in EU law allowing for collective action to be used in a greater amount of cases, and whether the latest amendment to the Swedish Posting of Workers Act is in accordance with the current EU law. The thesis focusses on EU law and Swedish law, and international law is thus omitted from its scope.
The Posting of Workers Directive, issued in 1996, laid down a ”hard nucleus” of host state minimum norms which were to be applied to foreign employers at all time. However, the Laval judgment made it clear that these minimum norms were to act as a bar against collective actions aiming to enforce terms of employment that went above the minimum... (More)
This thesis tries to elucidate whether, since the Laval judgment of 2007, there has been a development in EU law allowing for collective action to be used in a greater amount of cases, and whether the latest amendment to the Swedish Posting of Workers Act is in accordance with the current EU law. The thesis focusses on EU law and Swedish law, and international law is thus omitted from its scope.
The Posting of Workers Directive, issued in 1996, laid down a ”hard nucleus” of host state minimum norms which were to be applied to foreign employers at all time. However, the Laval judgment made it clear that these minimum norms were to act as a bar against collective actions aiming to enforce terms of employment that went above the minimum level. Such was the interpretation made by the ECJ that the right to take collective actions for terms going beyond the minimum level was treated as an unjustified restriction on the freedom to provide services.
In 2010, Sweden’s Posting of Workers Act was amended in order to comply with the Laval ruling. Collective action was prohibited against foreign employers that posted workers to the Swedish labour market if the employers could show that they offered terms of employment that were at least on par with the Swedish minimum norms of the ”hard nucleus”.
In the years after the Laval ruling, EU law has gone through changes that have made it more socially aware. Foremost among these is the Lisbon Treaty of 2009, which has elevated the Charter to primary law and introduced treaty provisions with the goal of ensuring social development. In legal literature, this is seen by some authors as the reason for what they perceive to be a softening of the ECJ case law, with a Court that is now more prone to justify social rights whenever these clash with the economic freedoms of the EU (as happened in Laval). Since other authors don’t argue that the ECJ has moved in the opposite direction, this essay therefore concludes that a shift towards a more socially nuanced case law has indeed occured, though small and uncertain it may be.
In 2017 Sweden once more amended its Posting of Workers Act, now allowing for collective actions to enforce Swedish collective agreements against foreign employers, even when they already offer terms in accordance with the minimum norms. There is a possibility that this latest legal development may be allowed by the current, softened EU law, though it is too uncertain to say for sure. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Persson, Alexander LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20172
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt, EU-rätt, utstationering, Laval
language
Swedish
id
8930637
date added to LUP
2018-02-07 11:06:23
date last changed
2018-02-07 11:06:23
@misc{8930637,
  abstract     = {This thesis tries to elucidate whether, since the Laval judgment of 2007, there has been a development in EU law allowing for collective action to be used in a greater amount of cases, and whether the latest amendment to the Swedish Posting of Workers Act is in accordance with the current EU law. The thesis focusses on EU law and Swedish law, and international law is thus omitted from its scope.
The Posting of Workers Directive, issued in 1996, laid down a ”hard nucleus” of host state minimum norms which were to be applied to foreign employers at all time. However, the Laval judgment made it clear that these minimum norms were to act as a bar against collective actions aiming to enforce terms of employment that went above the minimum level. Such was the interpretation made by the ECJ that the right to take collective actions for terms going beyond the minimum level was treated as an unjustified restriction on the freedom to provide services. 
In 2010, Sweden’s Posting of Workers Act was amended in order to comply with the Laval ruling. Collective action was prohibited against foreign employers that posted workers to the Swedish labour market if the employers could show that they offered terms of employment that were at least on par with the Swedish minimum norms of the ”hard nucleus”. 
In the years after the Laval ruling, EU law has gone through changes that have made it more socially aware. Foremost among these is the Lisbon Treaty of 2009, which has elevated the Charter to primary law and introduced treaty provisions with the goal of ensuring social development. In legal literature, this is seen by some authors as the reason for what they perceive to be a softening of the ECJ case law, with a Court that is now more prone to justify social rights whenever these clash with the economic freedoms of the EU (as happened in Laval). Since other authors don’t argue that the ECJ has moved in the opposite direction, this essay therefore concludes that a shift towards a more socially nuanced case law has indeed occured, though small and uncertain it may be.
In 2017 Sweden once more amended its Posting of Workers Act, now allowing for collective actions to enforce Swedish collective agreements against foreign employers, even when they already offer terms in accordance with the minimum norms. There is a possibility that this latest legal development may be allowed by the current, softened EU law, though it is too uncertain to say for sure.},
  author       = {Persson, Alexander},
  keyword      = {arbetsrätt,EU-rätt,utstationering,Laval},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Har vi gått över gränsen? - Förändrad svensk utstationeringslagstiftning i ljuset av EUs fria rörlighet},
  year         = {2017},
}