Advanced

Inflytande, på arbetsgivarens villkor - En studie om arbetstagares rätt till inflytande på det psykosociala arbetsmiljöområdet i förhållande till arbetsledningsrätten

Nordström, Joel LU (2020) LAGF03 20201
Department of Law
Faculty of Law
Abstract (Swedish)
Denna rättsdogmatiska uppsats undersöker arbetstagares rätt till inflytande över den psykosociala arbetsmiljön och arbetsgivarens rätt att leda och fördela arbetet (arbetsledningsrätten), samt hur dessa rättsliga koncept förhåller sig till varandra. För att göra detta utgår uppsatsen ifrån följande frågeställningar:
1. Grundläggande begrepp
a. Vad innebär arbetsledningsrätten?
b. Hur har de arbetsmiljörättsliga regleringarna av psykosocial arbetsmiljö utvecklats i Sverige?
2. Hur har arbetstagares möjlighet till inflytande gällande den psykosociala arbetsmiljön implementerats i myndighetsföreskrifter?
3. Hur förhåller sig de arbetsmiljörättsliga regleringarna av psykosocial arbetsmiljö till arbetsledningsrätten?
Genom de inledande... (More)
Denna rättsdogmatiska uppsats undersöker arbetstagares rätt till inflytande över den psykosociala arbetsmiljön och arbetsgivarens rätt att leda och fördela arbetet (arbetsledningsrätten), samt hur dessa rättsliga koncept förhåller sig till varandra. För att göra detta utgår uppsatsen ifrån följande frågeställningar:
1. Grundläggande begrepp
a. Vad innebär arbetsledningsrätten?
b. Hur har de arbetsmiljörättsliga regleringarna av psykosocial arbetsmiljö utvecklats i Sverige?
2. Hur har arbetstagares möjlighet till inflytande gällande den psykosociala arbetsmiljön implementerats i myndighetsföreskrifter?
3. Hur förhåller sig de arbetsmiljörättsliga regleringarna av psykosocial arbetsmiljö till arbetsledningsrätten?
Genom de inledande kapitlen framkommer att arbetsledningsrätten har en historiskt etablerad central och strukturell position i det arbetsrättsliga systemet, en slags rättspolitisk förutsättning. Arbetstagares inflytande i det psykosociala arbetsmiljöarbetet har däremot stegvis införts i lagstiftningen i takt med forskningen och samhällsdebattens fortskridande. Implementeringen av detta inflytande har präglats av stora politiska och rättsliga motsättningar. I analysen undersöks dessa motsättningar. Det argumenteras för att arbetsledningsrätten i praktiken begränsar hur stort inflytande arbetstagare kan ges. Den arbetsrättsliga lagstrukturen bygger på en ojämlikhet mellan arbetstagare och arbetsgivare, och förändring av denna för systemet grundläggande relation låter sig svårligen göras. Detta kan till viss del förklaras med att ökat arbetstagarinflytande är politiskt kontroversiellt, men det handlar till väsentligt större del om det strukturella motståndet från ett system uppbyggt kring arbetsgivares makt, och ansvar, mot försök att införa ökat arbetstagarinflytande.
Den föreskrift, AFS 2015:4, som skulle förtydliga lagens skrivningar om den psykosociala arbetsmiljön implementerar arbetstagarnas inflytande som något arbetsgivaren styr över.
Vidare argumenteras det för att Arbetsmiljölagens ramlagskaraktär och den samförståndsanda som genomsyrar hela det svenska arbetsrättsliga systemet gjort det svårare att implementera de kraftigt politiserade skrivningarna om arbetstagares inflytande. (Less)
Abstract
This paper, which is based on the legal dogmatic method, explores the two concepts of the right of employees to influence over their psychosocial work environment and the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative, and how these two legal concepts relate to each other. To enable this the following research questions were formulated:
1. Basic concepts:
a. How is the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative defined?
b. How have regulations of the psychosocial work environment evolved in Sweden?
2. How has the employee’s opportunity to influence the psychosocial work environment been implemented in Swedish Work Environment Authority provisions?
3. How do the regulations of psychosocial work environment relate to the legal... (More)
This paper, which is based on the legal dogmatic method, explores the two concepts of the right of employees to influence over their psychosocial work environment and the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative, and how these two legal concepts relate to each other. To enable this the following research questions were formulated:
1. Basic concepts:
a. How is the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative defined?
b. How have regulations of the psychosocial work environment evolved in Sweden?
2. How has the employee’s opportunity to influence the psychosocial work environment been implemented in Swedish Work Environment Authority provisions?
3. How do the regulations of psychosocial work environment relate to the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative?
In the initial chapters it is shown that the managerial prerogative has a historically established, central and structural position in the Swedish labour law system, a kind of legal political presupposition. The field of psychosocial work environment, however, has been developed gradually as the research and public debate has evolved. The implementation of workers’ influence in this area has been characterised by strong political and judicial divisions. In the analysis these divisions are examined. It is argued that the managerial prerogative, in practice, limits the scope of the possible influence of the employees. The structure of the labour law system is based on an inequality between employees and employers. The inequal relationship is a fundamental part of the system. Therefore, it cannot be easily changed. To some extent, this can be explained by the fact that the issue of increased employee influence is politically controversial. In the paper, however, it is argued that it is mainly a result of the structural resistance from a system based on the employers’ powers to attempts at increasing the influence of employees.
The Swedish Work Environment Authority provision, AFS 2015:4, that was supposed to clarify the formulations on the psychosocial work environment in the Work Environment Act, states that the employer has the prerogative to interpret the concept of employee influence.
Furthermore, it is argued that the framework law nature of the Work Environment Act in combination with the norm of consensus that permeate the field of Swedish labour law have hampered the process of implementing the considerably politicised wordings on employee influence. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
Nordström, Joel LU
supervisor
organization
course
LAGF03 20201
year
type
M2 - Bachelor Degree
subject
keywords
Arbetsrätt, Arbetsmiljölagen, arbetstagarinflytande, arbetsledningsrätt, strukturellt motstånd, Labour law, Work Environment Act, Employee influence, managerial prerogative, structural resistance
language
Swedish
id
9010610
date added to LUP
2020-09-17 20:48:17
date last changed
2020-09-17 20:48:17
@misc{9010610,
  abstract     = {This paper, which is based on the legal dogmatic method, explores the two concepts of the right of employees to influence over their psychosocial work environment and the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative, and how these two legal concepts relate to each other. To enable this the following research questions were formulated:
1.	Basic concepts:
a.	How is the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative defined?
b.	How have regulations of the psychosocial work environment evolved in Sweden?
2.	How has the employee’s opportunity to influence the psychosocial work environment been implemented in Swedish Work Environment Authority provisions?
3.	How do the regulations of psychosocial work environment relate to the legal regulation of the managerial prerogative?
In the initial chapters it is shown that the managerial prerogative has a historically established, central and structural position in the Swedish labour law system, a kind of legal political presupposition. The field of psychosocial work environment, however, has been developed gradually as the research and public debate has evolved. The implementation of workers’ influence in this area has been characterised by strong political and judicial divisions. In the analysis these divisions are examined. It is argued that the managerial prerogative, in practice, limits the scope of the possible influence of the employees. The structure of the labour law system is based on an inequality between employees and employers. The inequal relationship is a fundamental part of the system. Therefore, it cannot be easily changed. To some extent, this can be explained by the fact that the issue of increased employee influence is politically controversial. In the paper, however, it is argued that it is mainly a result of the structural resistance from a system based on the employers’ powers to attempts at increasing the influence of employees.
The Swedish Work Environment Authority provision, AFS 2015:4, that was supposed to clarify the formulations on the psychosocial work environment in the Work Environment Act, states that the employer has the prerogative to interpret the concept of employee influence.
Furthermore, it is argued that the framework law nature of the Work Environment Act in combination with the norm of consensus that permeate the field of Swedish labour law have hampered the process of implementing the considerably politicised wordings on employee influence.},
  author       = {Nordström, Joel},
  keyword      = {Arbetsrätt,Arbetsmiljölagen,arbetstagarinflytande,arbetsledningsrätt,strukturellt motstånd,Labour law,Work Environment Act,Employee influence,managerial prerogative,structural resistance},
  language     = {swe},
  note         = {Student Paper},
  title        = {Inflytande, på arbetsgivarens villkor - En studie om arbetstagares rätt till inflytande på det psykosociala arbetsmiljöområdet i förhållande till arbetsledningsrätten},
  year         = {2020},
}