Opposition parties failed to postpone the Parliament’s decision by
one year, and have promised to tear up the new ‘Laval law’ if they win
parliamentary elections this autumn. They say the law limits the
right to take industrial action in a way which goes further than what
is stipulated in EU law, and that this would have serious consequences
for Sweden’s labour market model.
The intention is that the parties to the labour market also in
future will be able to make sure foreign companies bringing foreign
workers to Sweden provide wages and working conditions in accordance
with Swedish collective agreements.
There will be no law imposing a minimum wage nor a system for a
universal collective agreement. The main change is a reduction in trade
unions’ powers to take industrial action to force foreign companies to
sign up to a collective agreement, should they fail to do so
voluntarily.
Four conditions must be met:
- expected conditions must reflect conditions in a central and
national collective agreement - the conditions can only cover minimum wage or other minimum
conditions covered by the Swedish law on the posting of workers - and they must be more beneficial for the posted workers than the
conditions laid down in the law on the posting of workers - But – and this point has received the brunt of the criticism – even
if these three conditions are met, no industrial action will be allowed
if the employer can show his employees enjoy ‘essentially’ the same
benefits as granted in the Swedish collective agreement.
This last condition, critics say, means employers can protect
themselves against industrial action simply by entering a sham
contract, allowing them to finish the job and send the workers back
home before the unions have had time to gather evidence of a false
deal. At that stage it is of course too late to try to secure working
conditions reflecting a Swedish collective agreement.
There is also criticism against the fact that industrial action is
not allowed even in cases where foreign workers have joined a Swedish
trade union. This means unions will not be able to look after the
interests of their own members.
So Swedes are still arguing over what should and must be done, more
than two years after the judgement of the Court of Justice of the
European Union. This is in stark contrast to the situation in Denmark,
where a similar case was solved within months with all parties agreeing
on the outcome.
Furthermore, even the judges in Sweden’s Labour Court disagreed when
making the Swedish Building Workers´ Union and the Swedish
Electricians’ Union liable to Laval for damages incurred as a result of
the industrial action at the school project in Vaxholm – which turned
out to be illegal according to EU law, yet legal according to Swedish
law.
