sou · H6B340 · 2018-06-08 00:00:00 — •limit the right to take industrial action for purposes other than to regulate conditions in collective agreements (except for sympathy action and industrial action to recover unpaid wages), and •change the provisions on peace obligations in situations where an employer who is bound by a collective agreement with an employee organisation is subjected to industrial action by another employee organisation. In this part of its remit, the Inquiry was especially instructed to examine whether a board should be established that, when necessary, can take decisions on coordinating collective agreements and on peace obligations resulting from a collective agreement. The Inquiry has decided to present legislative amendments in both of these parts. In the part of its remit dealing with the right to take industrial action against employers already bound by collective agreements, an alternative proposal is presented alongside the main proposal. The Swedish labour market model and the collective agreement The Swedish labour market model is characterised by the fact that the social partners themselves regulate matters concerning wages and other conditions of employment in collective agreements. For the model to function in a satisfactory , collective agree- ments must cover as large a proportion of the labour force as - possible. The model’s legitimacy requires that the majority of employees organise themselves and so are covered by collective agreements. For the model to function, employers must either sign collective agreements themselves or be bound by such agreements by joining an employer organisation that has a collective agreement with an employee organisation. Industrial action is the ultimate means available to employee organisations to exert pressure on employers to sign collective agreements. The peace obligation that follows from a collective agreement is in itself an important incentive for employers to sign collective agreements. By signing an agreement of this kind, it is sometimes said that the employer is purchasing industrial peace throughout the collective agreement’s period of validity. Demarcation between different collective agreements There are a number of central employee organisations in the Swedish labour market, most of which are members of one of the three main organisations: the Swedish Trade Union Confederation (LO), the Swedish Confederation of Professional Employees (TCO) and the Swedish Confederation of (). The central employee organisations negotiate at central level on collective agreements with an approximately equal number of organisations on the part of employers. There are some 670 central collective agreements in the Swedish labour market. Questions as to which of these collective agreements should be applied to certain jobs, certain categories of employees or certain activities, are generally handled by the employee organisations themselves. The way such matters are handled depends in part on the organisations between which the question has arisen. The fact that employee organisations themselves resolve demarkation issues means that an employee organisation seldom makes demands for collective agreements of an employer that is already bound by an applicable collective agreement with a different employee organisation. However, this can happen, for example when the employee organisations in an individual case have not reached consensus or when the employer does not accept the organisations’ demarcation. Brief comments on the right to take industrial action and on peace obligations Under Chapter 2, Article 14 of the Instrument of Government, employee organisations, employer organisations and individual employers have the right to take industrial action in the labour market. This right may only be limited through laws or agreements. For example, limitations the right to take industrial action are found in the Employment (Co-determination in the Workplace) Act. The basic premise is that employers and employees that are bound by collective agreements in relation to one another are also bound by a peace obligation. A peace obligation means that an industrial action may not be taken if it is intended to bring about a change in the agreement or implement a provision that will apply after the collective agreement is no longer valid. The extent to which a peace obligation applies in an individual case depends on the substantive content of the collective agreement and its area of application. Industrial action taken in contravention of a peace obligation is considered unlawful. A peace obligation also includes the premise that it is not permitted to take industrial action intended to exert pressure in a conflict over a collective agreement’s validity, existence or its correct interpretation, or in a conflict as to whether a particular action is contrary to a collective agreement or the Employment (Co-deter- mination in the Workplace) Act. This type of conflict is usually called a ‘conflict of rights’. The organisations’ responsibilities regarding a peace obligation Employee and employer organisations have a responsibility for a peace obligation in that they are not permitted to organise or participate in unlawful industrial actions. An organisation that is itself bound by a collective agreement is obliged to try to prevent a member of the organisation from taking part in an unlawful industrial action. Under applicable law, the right of an employee organisation to take industrial action is in principle not affected by the fact that the employer already has an applicable collective agreement with another employee organisation. In such cases, an industrial action may only be declared unlawful if it is intended to attack the existing relationship regulated by the collective agreement, called the ‘’. However, the does not prevent an employee organisation from taking industrial action solely for the purpose of reaching a collective agreement that regulates the conditions for the organisation’s own members. Competition between several applicable collective agreements If an employer, either voluntarily or after industrial action has been taken, signs a collective agreement that or partially has the same area of application as an existing collective agreement, certain legal principles exist for dealing with the situation. In principle, in a situation of this kind, an employer is obliged to apply the conditions concerning wages and other conditions of employment regulated by the first collective agreement concluded. If the collective agreement concluded later contains different conditions, it follows that these conditions usually have no effect. However, under certain circumstances, the employer may be liable to pay damages to an employee organisation that has signed the latter collective agreement. In other respects, the collective agreement concluded at a later date has the same legal effect as the first collective agreement concluded. This means that the collective agreement gives the employee organisation the special right of negotiation and the right to information that, under the Employment (Co-determination in the Workplace) Act, follows from the fact that the organisation is bound by a collective agreement with the employer. Another example is that the employee organisation has the right to appoint trade union representatives under the conditions specified in the Trade Union Representatives (Status at the Workplace) Act. Industrial action in conflicts of rights will be unlawful In the report, it is proposed that it should be possible to declare taking industrial action for the purpose of exerting pressure on the opposite party in conflicts of rights unlawful. It is proposed that, unlike today, the regulation should also apply outside relationships regulated by collective agreements and also in conflicts of rights based on agreements other than collective agreements and acts other than the Employment (Co-determination in the Workplace) Act. The proposal means that industrial action should not be permitted when a conflict can ultimately be decided by a court of law or through other legal or administrative procedures that public authorities have placed at the disposal of the parties for that purpose. In the Inquiry’s opinion, it is not reasonable to permit industrial action when such procedures are available. It should be possible to declare an industrial action unlawful if it is in some way intended to exert pressure on the opposite party in a conflict of rights. Accordingly, it should be irrelevant if the industrial action also has a warranted purpose. In principle, the proposal is expected to only have significance outside of relationships regulated by collective agreements. There is currently a broadly held perception among established parties to collective agreements in the labour market that industrial action should not be used to assert one’s position in a conflict of rights. As a rule, these parties are also bound by main agreements and agreements on negotiation procedures that contain conditions on how to deal with conflicts of rights. Expanded industrial peace obligation of collective agreements General comments on the proposal and the Inquiry’s basic premises The fact that an employer is bound by a collective agreement normally means that the employee who out work covered by the agreement has conditions such as those that usually apply in . In such cases, the employer has joined the Swedish collective agreement system. It can then be expected that trade unions in general would be less interested in other employee organisations regulating the conditions in a collective agreement compared to if the employer has no collective agreements whatsoever. If an employer cannot depend on a peace obligation being in effect throughout a collective agreement’s period of validity, there is a risk of reducing the incentive to sign a collective agreement at all. This in turn would risk jeopardising the Swedish labour market model. The proposal presented protects conditions regulated under collective agreements throughout the agreement’s period of validity in a different way than at present. The proposal is expected to strengthen the position of collective agreements as an instrument of industrial peace and so safeguard the function of the Swedish labour market model. The design of the proposal means that account is taken of the interests of trade unions in achieving a relationship regulated by collective agreements even with employers who are already bound by collective agreements. does the proposal affect the right to take industrial action for the purpose of regulating the conditions for members of employee organisations when the existing collective agreement does not maintain a sufficiently high level for the employees. In this part of the remit, particular consideration is also given to the way employee organisations manage demarcation issues linked to application of collective agreements. Expanded industrial peace obligation of collective agreements as the general rule The report contains a proposal of what can be called an expanded industrial peace obligation of a collective agreement. This kind of expanded peace obligation means that a collective agreement as the general rule will entail a peace obligation even for employee organisations other than the organisation that is itself bound by the collective agreement. This refers to the industrial peace obligation pursuant to Section 41, first paragraph of the Employment (Co- determination in the Workplace) Act. limitations to a peace obligation that the parties to a collective agreement have themselves agreed are not covered by the extended industrial peace obligation. The extended industrial peace obligation will only cover matters considered to be regulated by the collective agreement, i.e. the same scope as that which applies for the organisation that is itself is bound by the collective agreement. will a peace obligation apply outside a collective agreement’s scope of application. Accordingly, there will be no regulation preventing an employee organisation from taking action to regulate conditions for work that is not covered by a collective agreement with the employer. Exceptions from the extended industrial peace obligation of a collective agreement A number of exceptions from the extended industrial peace obligation of a collective agreement are proposed. One basic condition is that an employee organisation that takes industrial action against an employer already bound by collective agreements may only do so in order to reach a collective agreement of its own. The exceptions operate as alternatives. This means that it will be sufficient for an employee organisation to cite one of the exceptions. An exception for being a party to a collective agreement The extended industrial peace obligation will not prevent taking industrial action for the purpose of signing a collective agreement that corresponds with the existing collective agreement. In addition, the period of validity for the required collective agreement must be at least as long as that of the existing collective agreement. Accordingly, an employee organisation may organise industrial action for the purpose of bringing about a relationship regulated by collective agreements with the employer. In this way, the organisation can obtain the special rights in relation to the employer that, under Swedish law, follow from such a relationship regulated by collective agreements, e.g. the special right of negotiation and the right to information under the Employment (Co-determination in the Workplace) Act, and the right to appoint trade union representatives under the Trade Union Representatives (Status at the Workplace) Act. An exception for established relationships regulated by collective agreements The general rule on an expanded industrial peace obligation will not prevent industrial action for the purpose of reaching a collective agreement if the organisation that organises the action normally negotiates and concludes collective agreements on wages and other conditions of employment with the employer. Accordingly, in such situations the employee organisation will not need to take greater account than at present of the fact that there already is an applicable collective agreement for the work concerned. The purpose of this exemption is primarily to avoid disrupting customary collective wage negotiations between what can be termed established parties to collective agreements. An exception for situations where the existing collective agreement does not correspond to what usually applies If the existing collective agreement does not contain conditions for employees that at least correspond to what, under collective agreements, usually apply for the work concerned or the relevant category of employee in , the extended industrial peace obligation will not prevent a different employee organisation from taking industrial action for a collective agreement that regulates wages and other conditions of employment. The purpose of the exception is to prevent employers from invoking a peace obligation in relation to others than the employee organisation that is party to a collective agreement that contains poorer conditions than those which usually apply in corresponding situations in . The aim is also to facilitate industrial action where the existing collective agreement is applicable and where the level may be considered normal for the employees, but where a different collective agreement is usually applied for a certain category of employee. When assessing whether the conditions specified in the exception provision are fulfilled, particular attention should be given to any common perception that the relevant employee organisations have regarding which conditions under collective agreements usually apply in corresponding situations. Accordingly, any demarcation agreements between the employee organisations or decisions on demarcation by a main employee organisation will have an impact in relation to the proposed regulation. The extended industrial peace obligation in situations with international connections The extended industrial peace obligation of a collective agreement will not apply when industrial action is taken due to working conditions to which the Employment (Co-determination in the Workplace) Act is not directly applicable. This means that the regulation will not be applied e.g. when industrial action is taken against a foreign-flag for the purpose of regulating the conditions for the ’s crew. The matter of establishing a board The Inquiry considers that there should not be a special board established in that can decide on coordinating collective agreements or industrial peace obligations of a certain collective agreement. The report presents an alternative proposal stating that industrial action against an employer that already has an applicable collective agreement may only be taken when the purpose is to sign a collective agreement on one’s own behalf that entails a peace obligation between the parties. Exceptions from the rule will apply in matters of sympathy action, political action and industrial action to recover unpaid wages. The difference in relation to the main proposal is that an employee organisation will still be allowed to organise industrial action aimed at enforcing conditions that deviate from the regulations in an existing collective agreement. As is currently the case, when a future agreement is concluded, there will be a question of competition between collective agreements as to which agreement should be applied in the activity. The aim of the alternative proposal is that it should ultimately be possible for a court to examine whether the purpose of an industrial action actually is to conclude a collective agreement that entails a peace obligation between the parties. If, from the circumstances in the individual case, it can be established that a collective agreement regulation that provides a peace obligation is not the true purpose of an action, it will be possible to declare it unlawful. Industrial action for the purpose of exerting pressure on the opposite party in conflicts of rights will also be prohibited in situations where the provision is applicable. The proposals in relation to ’s international commitments and the Instrument of Government is bound by several international commitments that concern protection of the right to take industrial action, freedom of association and the right to negotiate collectively. Convention on Human Rights, Social Charter and Conventions 87 and 98 are the most relevant in this context. The Inquiry considers that the proposals presented are compatible with these international commitments. The proposals are also considered to be compatible with the Instrument of Government. 1.1Förslag till ändring av lagen (1976:580) om medbestämmande i arbetslivet Härigenom föreskrivs i fråga om lagen (1976:580) om medbestämmande i arbetslivet dels att 41 och 42 a §§ ska ha följande lydelse, dels att det i lagen ska införas en ny paragraf, 42 b §, med följande lydelse. Arbetsgivare och arbetstagare som är bundna av kollektivavtal får inte vidta eller delta i arbetsinställelse (lockout eller strejk), blockad, bojkott eller annan därmed jämförlig stridsåtgärd, om avtalet har ingåtts av en organisation och denna organisation inte i behörig ordning har beslutat åtgärden, om åtgärden strider mot en bestämmelse om fredsplikt i kollektivavtal eller om åtgärden har till ändamål 1.att utöva påtryckning i en tvist om ett kollektivavtals giltighet, bestånd eller rätta innebörd eller i en tvist huruvida ett visst förfarande strider mot avtalet eller mot denna lag, 2.att åstadkomma ändring i avtalet, 3.att genomföra bestämmelse, som är avsedd att tillämpas 1.att åstadkomma ändring i avtalet, 2.att genomföra bestämmelse, som är avsedd att tillämpas 1Senaste lydelse 1993:1498. sedan avtalet har upphört att gäl- sedan avtalet har upphört att gäl- 4. att stödja någon annan, när 3. att stödja någon annan, när denne inte själv får vidta strids- denne inte själv får vidta strids- får inte vidta eller delta i en strids- åtgärd som har till ändamål att utöva påtryckning i en tvist röran- de ett avtals giltighet och bestånd eller angående innebörden och till- lämpningen av avtal eller lag. Stridsåtgärder som har vid- Stridsåtgärder som har vid- tagits i strid mot första stycket tagits i strid mot första stycket betecknas som olovliga. betecknas som olovliga. ma gäller stridsåtgärder som till någon del har haft sådant ändamål som avses i andra stycket. Första stycket hindrar inte arbetstagare att delta i en hindrar inte arbetstagare att delta blockad som har beslutats av en i en blockad som har beslutats av ordning och som har till ändamål behörig ordning och som har till att utverka betalning av klar och ändamål att utverka betalning av förfallen fordran på lön eller på klar och förfallen fordran på lön någon annan ersättning för ut- eller på någon annan ersättning fört arbete (indrivningsblockad). för utfört arbete (indrivnings- En sådan stridsåtgärd är inte är inte olovlig. Bestämmelserna i 42 § första Bestämmelserna i 42 § första stycket ska inte tillämpas när en stycket och 42 b § ska inte till- organisation vidtar åtgärder med lämpas när en organisation vidtar som denna lag inte är direkt lag inte är direkt tillämplig på. 2Senaste lydelse 2017:321. Trots första stycket ska 42 § första stycket tillämpas när åtgärder vidtas mot en arbetsgivare som är etablerad inom Europeiska ekonomiska samarbetsområdet eller och som utstationerar arbetstagare i enligt lagen (1999:678) om utstationering av arbetstagare. Trots första stycket ska 42 § första stycket och 42 b § tillämpas när åtgärder vidtas mot en arbetsgivare som är etablerad inom Europeiska ekonomiska samarbetsområdet eller och som utstationerar arbetstagare i enligt lagen (1999:678) om utstationering av arbetstagare. En arbetstagarorganisation får, utöver vad som följer av 42 § första stycket, inte anordna eller medverka vid en stridsåtgärd i fråga som omfattas av fredsplikt enligt 41 § första stycket 1–3 till följd av ett kollektivavtal som arbetsgivaren är bunden av i förhållande till en annan arbetstagarorganisation. En arbetstagarorganisation får trots första stycket vidta stridsåtgärd mot arbetsgivaren i syfte att träffa kollektivavtal om 1.kollektivavtalet i fråga om villkoren i tillämpliga delar överensstämmer med det kollektivavtal som avses i första stycket och har minst samma giltighetstid som det avtalet, 2.arbetstagarorganisationen brukar förhandla om och träffa kollektivavtal om lön och andra anställningsvillkor med arbetsgivaren, eller 3.det kollektivavtal som avses i första stycket i fråga om lön och andra anställningsvillkor inte i allt väsentligt för arbetstagarna minst motsvarar vad som enligt kollektivavtal i brukar gälla för det arbete eller den kategori arbetstagare som stridsåtgärden avser. Vid bedömningen av om förutsättningarna enligt andra stycket 3 är uppfyllda ska särskilt beaktas en eventuell gemensam uppfattning i frågan hos de arbetstagarorganisationer som avses i första stycket. Är arbetstagarorganisationerna medlemmar i samma huvudorganisation ska med en gemensam uppfattning jämställas ett i behörig ordning fattat beslut i frågan av den organisationen. 1.2Alternativt förslag till ny 42 b § i lagen (1976:580) om medbestämmande i arbetslivet Härigenom föreskrivs att det i fråga om lagen (1976:580) om medbestämmande i arbetslivet ska införas en ny 42 b § med följande lydelse.