Law on Employment Protection reviewed

employment law affects everyone
pic: hungarianinsider

The government’s commission to assess the current Law on Employment Protection (lagen om anställningsskydd, better known as “las”) came out with its report yesterday, and no one in the government is happy.

There are basically two reasons a person in Sweden can be fired: for lack of work, and for personal reasons. Under current rules, if employees need to be terminated due to a lack of work (and if they basically have the same qualifications) it has to be done in accordance with last-in, first-out rules. If two employees were hired at the same time, the younger one has to go first. Also, when a person is let go for these reasons, they must also be hired back first, if there is work available within nine months or so of being let go (given that they have given notice that they are interested in being rehired).

There are some legal exceptions to this rule. For employers with a certain number of employees, a certain number of exceptions to this last-in, first-out rule may be made. In other words, if an employer has an employee they think is really good, they can make this person their exception and someone who has been there longer can be asked to leave instead.

Furthermore, if a person is let go they can have a long wait before they actually stop working where they have been let go, depending on how long they have worked at the company. The wait time for having to leave can be several months during which time the employee is paid per normal. This has been made a rule so that an employee has some time to make the adjustment if the termination comes as a shock.

For a person to be let go for personal reasons – if they are really messing up their job due to, for example, negligence, difficulties working with others, refusing to do the work, if they’re harassing other people – the rules are strict. The employer basically has to do every possible thing in their power to keep on a person, even if the person can’t really do the job for which they were once hired to do. In general, a employee can only be let go after a thorough investigation into all other possibilities for this person to remain in their job or at the company. If they aren’t getting along with the other employees, the company is obligated to see if the person can be moved to another department, for example. This also prevents employers from being able to fire workers who happen to land on their employer’s wrong side for some random reason.

Among other things, the commissions suggestions include allowing more exceptions to the last-in, first-out rule. From around two exceptions for a ten-person company, for example, five exemptions could be made. Furthermore, companies with less than 15 employees will not have to give personal reasons (negligence, etc.) for firing a person. For the employee, on the other hand, an employer is required to increase the amount of on-the-job training and education (kompetensutveckling) to keep the workforce up to date with changes in the field.

The main fear of these changes is that the conditions for the employee will be less secure, and that they will open up for discriminatory firings. For the employer, there would be more freedom to keep the employees they want to keep and to let go the ones they don’t think are a fit.

The commission’s report was not an unexpected event. In fact, it was a condition for the support of the Liberal and Center parties for the Social Democrats to remain in power. Back in the fall of 2018 when no party won a clear majority, the Center and Liberal parties agreed to support the Social Democrats as long as they began an investigation into changing the las-laws.

In reality, a change in these rules is that last thing the government wants to be responsible for. The first-in, last-out rules are almost engraved in stone in Social Democrat ideology and it would be devastating for them to have the rules changed, especially if they are not unequivocally positive for the worker, especially if the changes are made during their watch.

As luck would have it, maybe, the yearly negotiations between various unions under the umbrella of the Swedish Labour Organisation (LO) and the employers’ representation (Svensk näringsliv), which were put on hold due to Covid, are soon to resume (see this post for more info). If the two representatives can reach an agreement, then the commission’s report will be moot. If they can’t though, it will remain to the government to enforce the commission’s report.

Unfortunately for them, the Left party has vowed to bring a no-confidence vote to the floor if the government does just that. The Sweden Democrats have said they would back that no-confidence vote, and even the Moderates and Christian Democrats might go along with it, if only to bring down the Social Democratic government. This would pretty much be the height of irony since the Moderates, Christian Democrats and the right parties currently supporting the government have been pushing for these changes to las for a long, long time. The Moderates and Christian Democrats would be bringing down the government because of changes they have pushed for for years.

On the other hand, if the Social Democrats refuse to enact the changes, their supporting parties the Liberals and the Center parties may renege on the January agreement – which would also bring the government down. So far, the government hasn’t made a lot of progress on the 73-point plan that was the backbone of the Liberal and Center parties’ January agreement (januariavtalet). This would be another blow to the agreement, coming on the back of their failure to reform the Swedish Employment Agency (Arbetsförmedlingen) which was also one of the 73 points. This failure was largely due to Covid, but still, it doesn’t look good.

Everyone will be hoping that the negotiations between LO and Svensk naringsliv will be fruitful. Not only because these negotiations have kept Swedish labor unrest at a minimum and have therefore increased the attractiveness of the Swedish market, but also because there are enough problems in Sweden and the wider world already. Still, even LO is split these days (see this post, again), so who knows if the negotiations mentioned above will be honored by the unions who have bowed out of LO.

It’s all very messy, but that’s politics.

28 Dec. – Swedish course participation

start cracking the dictionary?
pic: glosbe.com

One of the 73 points in the Policy Agreement between the Social Democratic, Center, Liberal and Green parties – aka the January Agreement (januariavtalet) – back in the beginning of 2019, was that some Swedish language criteria would be implemented for citizenship, and even for financial social assistance (försörjningsbidrag). A proposition (lagförslag) specifying language course participation has now been sent out to various authorities, agencies, departments and bureaus for their consideration and comments (remissvar).

In point 40 of the agreement, under the somewhat disconcerting heading Integration and Honor-related Violence (integration och hedersvåld), the agreement states that “Sweden has an integration problem. Those who get a residency permit should quickly be given the opportunity to become a part of our country, stand on their own two feet and learn Swedish.” Later on in point 40, it states that they have agreed to “implement a duty of language (språkplikt) for the person who seeks asylum or who receives social assistance.”

The proposition that is being sent out proposes that the law on social services (socialtjänstlagen) is changed so that a person seeking social assistance should have to participate in language training or SFI if the authority deems it necessary. “If you are going to be able to support oneself in the long run, you need a job. And if you are going to try and get into the job market, you need knowledge of Swedish” Minister for Health and Social Affairs, Lena Hallengren, said in a statement. “It is therefore reasonable to require participation in a basic course in Swedish in order to receive social assistance (SvD.se).

At the moment, different municipalities have different requirements to receive assistance. Some require participation in a language course, others don’t. The idea behind the proposition is that language course participation requirements for social assistance eligibility will be the same for the whole country.

This does not mean, however, that a certain level of Swedish is required to be eligible for social assistance. The premise (utgångspunkten), Hallengren stated, is that it will be “a duty to take Swedish language training if Swedish language knowledge is considered to be lacking.” “Assistance is only supposed to be temporary” she continued. “In the end, one has to find a way to support oneself, and for that, language is absolutely necessary” (SvD.se).

Comments, questions and concerns on the proposition will be received until the 27th of March, 2020. The law is expected to go into effect sometime in 2021.

By the way, point 41 in the January agreement discusses a language requirement – as in passing a language test – as well as some kind of civics test, for citizenship eligibility. The current proposal, above, is not there, but can be seen, perhaps, as a step in that direction.