Rätten att visa sympati – En rättsdogmatisk undersökning av för- och nackdelar med en begränsning av sympatiåtgärder i form av en proportionalitetsprincip
(2025) JURM02 20251Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- I ljuset av den pågående Tesla-konflikten har debatten angående en begränsning av sympatiåtgärder åter blivit aktuell. Denna uppsats behandlar rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder i Sverige och belyser de för- och nackdelar en begränsning i form av en proportionalitetsprincip kan medföra.
Rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder följer av 2 kap 14 § RF och 41 § 1 st. 4 pt. MBL. Rätten tillkommer arbetstagarorganisationer, arbetsgivarorganisationer och enskilda arbetsgivare. Enligt svensk rätt är sympatiåtgärder som huvudregel tillåtna oavsett om det finns ett gällande kollektivavtal eller inte. Detta förutsätter att sympatiåtgärder syftar till att stödja en lovlig och pågående primärkonflikt. Utöver detta ska sympatiåtgärder bland annat beslutas om... (More) - I ljuset av den pågående Tesla-konflikten har debatten angående en begränsning av sympatiåtgärder åter blivit aktuell. Denna uppsats behandlar rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder i Sverige och belyser de för- och nackdelar en begränsning i form av en proportionalitetsprincip kan medföra.
Rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder följer av 2 kap 14 § RF och 41 § 1 st. 4 pt. MBL. Rätten tillkommer arbetstagarorganisationer, arbetsgivarorganisationer och enskilda arbetsgivare. Enligt svensk rätt är sympatiåtgärder som huvudregel tillåtna oavsett om det finns ett gällande kollektivavtal eller inte. Detta förutsätter att sympatiåtgärder syftar till att stödja en lovlig och pågående primärkonflikt. Utöver detta ska sympatiåtgärder bland annat beslutas om i behörig ordning och vara av tillfällig natur.
Även internationella källor berör rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder. Avseende ILO:s konvention nr 87 har ILO:s övervakningsorgan tolkat konventionen på så sätt att sympatiåtgärder bör vara tillåtna och att ett förbud skulle innebära ett ingrepp i föreningsfriheten. Av praxis från Europadomstolen följer att rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder omfattas av artikel 11 i EKMR, men att den dock inte är absolut. Av artikel 28 i EU:s rättighetsstadga tillförsäkras rätten att vidta kollektiva åtgärder. EU-domstolen har ännu inte kommit att pröva ett mål avseende endast sympatiåtgärder.
En proportionalitetsprincip finns inte i svensk arbetsrätt, vilket fastslogs i AD 1998 nr 17 (Kellerman-målet). Detta är dock något som finns både inom EU och i flera andra länder. Med anledning av detta görs en internationell utblick till Danmark, Finland och Tyskland. Samtliga av dessa länder har en proportionalitetsprincip vid bedömningen av sympatiåtgärders lovlighet.
Ett införande av en proportionalitetsprincip genom en begränsning av rätten att vidta sympatiåtgärder skulle innebära en nackdel för arbetstagarorganisationer på så sätt att ett viktigt medel i arbetsmarknadskonflikter skulle försvinna. Fördelen innebär en stärkt fredsplikt och förhindrande av oproportionerligt stor skada för tredje part. (Less) - Abstract
- In light of the ongoing Tesla conflict, the debate regarding restriction of sympathy actions has once again become subject of renewed discussion. This paper addresses the right to undertake sympathy actions in Sweden and highlights the advantages and disadvantages that a limitation in the form of a proportionality principle may entail.
The right to undertake sympathy actions derives from 2 kap. 14 § RF, together with 41 § 1 st. 4 pt. MBL. This right is granted to both employee organizations, employer organizations and individual employers. Under Swedish labour law, sympathy actions are permitted both during the term of a valid collective agreement and outside such agreements. This is subject to the condition that the sympathy action is... (More) - In light of the ongoing Tesla conflict, the debate regarding restriction of sympathy actions has once again become subject of renewed discussion. This paper addresses the right to undertake sympathy actions in Sweden and highlights the advantages and disadvantages that a limitation in the form of a proportionality principle may entail.
The right to undertake sympathy actions derives from 2 kap. 14 § RF, together with 41 § 1 st. 4 pt. MBL. This right is granted to both employee organizations, employer organizations and individual employers. Under Swedish labour law, sympathy actions are permitted both during the term of a valid collective agreement and outside such agreements. This is subject to the condition that the sympathy action is intended to support a lawful and ongoing primary conflict. Such actions must, among other things, be decided upon in a procedurally correct manner and be of temporary nature.
International sources also address the right to undertake sympathy actions. Regarding ILO Convention No. 87, the ILO supervisory bodies have interpreted the convention to mean that sympathy actions should be permitted and that a general ban would constitute an infringement of the right to the freedom of association. According to case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the right to undertake sympathy actions falls within the scope of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, although it is not an absolute right. Furthermore, Article 28 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights guarantees the right to take collective action. The Court of Justice of the European Union has not yet ruled on a case concerning sympathy actions alone.
With regard to a proportionality principle, such principle is not currently part of Swedish law, as established in AD 1998 nr 17 (Kellerman-målet). However, it is present within EU law and in several other countries. For this reason, a comparative outlook is taken towards Denmark, Finland, and Germany. All of these countries currently use a proportionality principle when judging the legality of sympathy actions.
In conclusion, the limitation of the right to undertake sympathy actions through a proportionality principle would constitute a disadvantage for workers’ organisations, as it would remove an important means of industrial conflict. At the same time, the advantage would be the strengthening of industrial peace and the prevention of disproportionately large harm to third parties. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/9189269
- author
- Ulfvinger, Agnes LU
- supervisor
- organization
- alternative title
- The Right to Show Sympathy – A Legal Dogmatic Analysis of the Advantages and Disadvantages of Limiting Sympathy Actions through a Principle of Proportionality
- course
- JURM02 20251
- year
- 2025
- type
- H3 - Professional qualifications (4 Years - )
- subject
- keywords
- Arbetsrätt, Stridsåtgärder, Sympatiåtgärder
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 9189269
- date added to LUP
- 2025-06-18 09:06:14
- date last changed
- 2025-06-18 09:06:14
@misc{9189269,
abstract = {{In light of the ongoing Tesla conflict, the debate regarding restriction of sympathy actions has once again become subject of renewed discussion. This paper addresses the right to undertake sympathy actions in Sweden and highlights the advantages and disadvantages that a limitation in the form of a proportionality principle may entail.
The right to undertake sympathy actions derives from 2 kap. 14 § RF, together with 41 § 1 st. 4 pt. MBL. This right is granted to both employee organizations, employer organizations and individual employers. Under Swedish labour law, sympathy actions are permitted both during the term of a valid collective agreement and outside such agreements. This is subject to the condition that the sympathy action is intended to support a lawful and ongoing primary conflict. Such actions must, among other things, be decided upon in a procedurally correct manner and be of temporary nature.
International sources also address the right to undertake sympathy actions. Regarding ILO Convention No. 87, the ILO supervisory bodies have interpreted the convention to mean that sympathy actions should be permitted and that a general ban would constitute an infringement of the right to the freedom of association. According to case law of the European Court of Human Rights, the right to undertake sympathy actions falls within the scope of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights, although it is not an absolute right. Furthermore, Article 28 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights guarantees the right to take collective action. The Court of Justice of the European Union has not yet ruled on a case concerning sympathy actions alone.
With regard to a proportionality principle, such principle is not currently part of Swedish law, as established in AD 1998 nr 17 (Kellerman-målet). However, it is present within EU law and in several other countries. For this reason, a comparative outlook is taken towards Denmark, Finland, and Germany. All of these countries currently use a proportionality principle when judging the legality of sympathy actions.
In conclusion, the limitation of the right to undertake sympathy actions through a proportionality principle would constitute a disadvantage for workers’ organisations, as it would remove an important means of industrial conflict. At the same time, the advantage would be the strengthening of industrial peace and the prevention of disproportionately large harm to third parties.}},
author = {{Ulfvinger, Agnes}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Rätten att visa sympati – En rättsdogmatisk undersökning av för- och nackdelar med en begränsning av sympatiåtgärder i form av en proportionalitetsprincip}},
year = {{2025}},
}