Advanced

Fingerad arbetsbrist - en undersökning i rättspraxis av arbetstagares rättsliga skydd

Aas, Astrid LU (2018) LAGF03 20181
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract
This report aims to investigate how current Swedish legislation regulates inaccurate dismissals based on labor shortage from the judicial position that has emerged from case law. The topic of fictitious labor shortage is addressed and the question discussed is if today’s case law concerning fictitious labor shortage is sufficient protection for the employee.
Fictitious labor shortage exists when an employee is wrongfully dismissed on the basis of labor shortage, while the accurate reason is in fact personal. An explanation as to why this appears in Swedish labor law is because dismissals based on economic reasons are easier for the employer to justify than dismissals based on personal reasons. A way for employers to circumvent the... (More)
This report aims to investigate how current Swedish legislation regulates inaccurate dismissals based on labor shortage from the judicial position that has emerged from case law. The topic of fictitious labor shortage is addressed and the question discussed is if today’s case law concerning fictitious labor shortage is sufficient protection for the employee.
Fictitious labor shortage exists when an employee is wrongfully dismissed on the basis of labor shortage, while the accurate reason is in fact personal. An explanation as to why this appears in Swedish labor law is because dismissals based on economic reasons are easier for the employer to justify than dismissals based on personal reasons. A way for employers to circumvent the stricter regulations tied to dismissals due to personal reasons is thus to fabricate labor shortage.
According to Proposition 1981/82:71, labor shortage is an objective reason for dismissal. The court will not review if the dismissal was economically justified unless the employee can prove that the dismissal happened as a result of personal reasons. This approach was formulated in AD 1976 nr 26 and will be subject to further analysis and discussion in this report.
From case law presented in this report, employees seldom reach success when they claim fictitious labor shortage since the court often states that there are actual economic reasons for the dismissal. Based on Swedish doctrine, the court is not obliged to examine the alleged personal reasons. Consequently, the existence of labor shortage is a sufficient reason for the dismissal to be considered an objectively acceptable dismissal.
A vital conclusion of the report is that the court should apply a more strict approach in terms of labor shortage and enable potential personal reasons to have a greater impact. Also, if employers were legally bound to prove that they had attempted to solve the issue of labor shortage in other ways than dismissal of the employee, there would most likely be fewer dismissals. This would further have been true if the regulation of the sufficient qualification requirement was reevaluated. These are examples of possible solutions for the situation that case law has resulted in, where protection from fictitious labor shortage for employees is currently not considered enough. (Less)
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka hur gällande svensk rätt reglerar felaktiga uppsägningar som baseras på arbetsbrist utifrån det rättsläge som primärt praxis har lett fram till. Arbetet behandlar ämnet fingerad arbetsbrist och frågeställningen som diskuteras är om dagens praxis som berör fingerad arbetsbrist skyddar arbetstagare tillräckligt mycket.
Fingerad arbetsbrist föreligger när en arbetstagare blir uppsagd på grund av arbetsbrist men där den verkliga orsaken är personliga skäl. En förklaring till att detta existerar i den svenska arbetsrätten är att uppsägningar på grund av arbetsbrist är enklare för arbetsgivare att företa än uppsägningar baserade på personliga skäl. Ett sätt för arbetsgivare att kringgå denna strängare... (More)
Denna uppsats syftar till att undersöka hur gällande svensk rätt reglerar felaktiga uppsägningar som baseras på arbetsbrist utifrån det rättsläge som primärt praxis har lett fram till. Arbetet behandlar ämnet fingerad arbetsbrist och frågeställningen som diskuteras är om dagens praxis som berör fingerad arbetsbrist skyddar arbetstagare tillräckligt mycket.
Fingerad arbetsbrist föreligger när en arbetstagare blir uppsagd på grund av arbetsbrist men där den verkliga orsaken är personliga skäl. En förklaring till att detta existerar i den svenska arbetsrätten är att uppsägningar på grund av arbetsbrist är enklare för arbetsgivare att företa än uppsägningar baserade på personliga skäl. Ett sätt för arbetsgivare att kringgå denna strängare reglering är således att fingera arbetsbrist.
Arbetsbrist utgör enligt prop. 1981/82:71 alltid saklig grund för uppsägning. Domstolen företar inte en prövning om arbetsbristen var företagsekonomiskt motiverad om inte arbetstagaren lyckas göra det sannolikt att uppsägningen berodde på skäl som var hänförliga till denne personligen. Detta förhållningssätt formulerades i AD 1976 nr 26 och kommer vara föremål för närmare analys och diskussion i uppsatsen.
Ur praxis som presenteras i detta arbete kan utläsas att arbetstagare väldigt sällan når framgång med att hävda fingerad arbetsbrist då domstolen istället konstaterar att arbetsbrist föreligger. På grund av läran om splittrad motivbild behöver domstolen inte undersöka de påstådda personliga skälen, då det är tillräckligt att arbetsbrist föreligger för att uppsägningen ska anses sakligt grundad.
En viktig slutsats som uppsatsen når är att domstolen bör skärpa till sin prövning gällande arbetsbrist och låta de möjliga personliga skälen få ett större inflytande i bedömningen. Om arbetsgivare också hade varit tvungna att visa att de försökt lösa arbetsbristen på annat sätt än genom uppsägning av en arbetstagare hade antagligen färre uppsägningar skett. Likaså om regleringen kring tillräckliga kvalifikationer sågs över. Detta är exempel på lösningar på den situation som praxis har resulterat i, där arbetstagares skydd mot fingerad arbetsbrist i nuläget inte framstår som fullgott. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Aas, Astrid LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20181
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
arbetsrätt
language
Swedish
id
8941363
date added to LUP
2018-07-09 16:29:08
date last changed
2018-07-09 16:29:08
@misc{8941363,
  abstract     = {This report aims to investigate how current Swedish legislation regulates inaccurate dismissals based on labor shortage from the judicial position that has emerged from case law. The topic of fictitious labor shortage is addressed and the question discussed is if today’s case law concerning fictitious labor shortage is sufficient protection for the employee.
Fictitious labor shortage exists when an employee is wrongfully dismissed on the basis of labor shortage, while the accurate reason is in fact personal. An explanation as to why this appears in Swedish labor law is because dismissals based on economic reasons are easier for the employer to justify than dismissals based on personal reasons. A way for employers to circumvent the stricter regulations tied to dismissals due to personal reasons is thus to fabricate labor shortage.
According to Proposition 1981/82:71, labor shortage is an objective reason for dismissal. The court will not review if the dismissal was economically justified unless the employee can prove that the dismissal happened as a result of personal reasons. This approach was formulated in AD 1976 nr 26 and will be subject to further analysis and discussion in this report.
From case law presented in this report, employees seldom reach success when they claim fictitious labor shortage since the court often states that there are actual economic reasons for the dismissal. Based on Swedish doctrine, the court is not obliged to examine the alleged personal reasons. Consequently, the existence of labor shortage is a sufficient reason for the dismissal to be considered an objectively acceptable dismissal.
A vital conclusion of the report is that the court should apply a more strict approach in terms of labor shortage and enable potential personal reasons to have a greater impact. Also, if employers were legally bound to prove that they had attempted to solve the issue of labor shortage in other ways than dismissal of the employee, there would most likely be fewer dismissals. This would further have been true if the regulation of the sufficient qualification requirement was reevaluated. These are examples of possible solutions for the situation that case law has resulted in, where protection from fictitious labor shortage for employees is currently not considered enough.},
  author       = {Aas, Astrid},
  keyword      = {arbetsrätt},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Fingerad arbetsbrist - en undersökning i rättspraxis av arbetstagares rättsliga skydd},
  year         = {2018},
}