This paper explores employer responsibility regarding “breaches against the Swedish Work Environment Act” (“brott mot arbetmiljölagen”) and “violations of the Swedish Work Environment Act” (“arbetsmiljöbrott)”. The rules and regulations governing employer responsibility is overly complex and hard to interpret. By highlighting and analyzing relevant aspects of existing rules and regulations, the paper aims to clarify the meaning of employer responsibility.  There are also a range of different workplace environment circumstances that can lead to either a breach against the Work Environment Act or a violation of the Work Environment Act. Neglecting to make the necessary improvements of a workplace environment may constitute a breach against the Work Environment Act even if an accident does not occur as a result of the failure to act. If, on the other hand, an accident does occur, the same negligence could get an employer charged for a violation of the Work Environment Act.  The objective of this paper is to examine what responsibilities employers have according to the Swedish Work Environment Act (SFS 1977:1160), systematic work environment management (AFS 2001:1), organizational and social work environment (AFS 2015:4), the swedish penal code (SFS 1962:700), as well as the difference between a breach against the Workplace Environment Act and a violation of the Work Environment Act. To reach objectives, we apply a legal dogmatic method and, drawing from the relevant legal sources, define what constitutes established law. A legal analytic method has also been applied to analyze the material from a wider perspective.  The results show the employers have a wide and varied responsibility, where many different areas need to be considered. To understand the full extent of employer responsibility, there needs to be an understanding of both law and complementary regulations. Regarding violations of the work environment act, there are some necessary conditions that need to be fulfilled for a person to be convicted. This includes gross negligence and a causal connection between an act and the incident. When it comes to breaches against the Work Environment Act, the Swedish Work Environment Authority represents the first instance. If they uncover any wrongdoings or flaws in the work environment, they have the authority to issue an order or a prohibition. To ensure employers rectify noted issues, the order or prohibition can be complemented by a fine. The fine represents a means of pressure to ensure employers comply with the Work Environment Act and its complementary regulations, and, by doing so, work preventatively against unhealthy environments and accidents.

<p>This study deals with work environment from a legal perspective. The study includes legislative history, legislation today and one empirical study. The legislation that concerns work environment (health and safety) in Sweden today is found in the Swedish Work Environment Act (WEA), the Work Environment Ordinance (WEO), Provisions issued by the Work Environment Authority, related legislations and also collective agreements. The WEA, passed by the parliament in 1977, came into force on the 1st of July 1978 and it defines the framework for Provisions issued by the Work Environment Authority, which is an authority superintended by the Swedish government. These Provisions contain more detailed stipulations and obligations with reference to the working environment. The WEO contains certain supplementary rules. The Work Environment Authority supervises the obedience to the legislation.</p><p>The first work environment act was created in 1889 because of too many work accidents. By the year of 1929 the work environment act was focused on work diseases in consequence of dangerous substances such as asbestos and silicosis. Partly because of the legislation, there are no big problems in the physical work environment today. Sweden has one of the most physically safe work environments in the world today. The present problem is instead the psychosocial work environment because it is experienced individually.</p><p>An empirical interview study shows that employers and employees are satisfied with the work environment at Karlstad University.</p>

This study deals with work environment from a legal perspective. The study includes legislative history, legislation today and one empirical study. The legislation that concerns work environment (health and safety) in Sweden today is found in the Swedish Work Environment Act (WEA), the Work Environment Ordinance (WEO), Provisions issued by the Work Environment Authority, related legislations and also collective agreements. The WEA, passed by the parliament in 1977, came into force on the 1st of July 1978 and it defines the framework for Provisions issued by the Work Environment Authority, which is an authority superintended by the Swedish government. These Provisions contain more detailed stipulations and obligations with reference to the working environment. The WEO contains certain supplementary rules. The Work Environment Authority supervises the obedience to the legislation. The first work environment act was created in 1889 because of too many work accidents. By the year of 1929 the work environment act was focused on work diseases in consequence of dangerous substances such as asbestos and silicosis. Partly because of the legislation, there are no big problems in the physical work environment today. Sweden has one of the most physically safe work environments in the world today. The present problem is instead the psychosocial work environment because it is experienced individually. An empirical interview study shows that employers and employees are satisfied with the work environment at Karlstad University.

Bemanningsföretagen har sedan legaliseringen 1993 fått fäste på den svenska arbetsmarknaden. Bemanningsbranschen innebär en förändring av det traditionella anställningsförhållandet som vanligtvis är tvåpartsrelation till att bli en trepartsrelation. Det har skapat viss problematik, då arbetsrättslig lagstiftning främst är anpassad efter den tvåpartsrelation som ännu anses vanligast. Den reglering som styr arbetsmiljöfrågor är främst Arbetsmiljölagen, vilken kom till då trepartsförhållande var främmande för den svenska arbetsmarknaden. Därmed väcktes frågan om vilken aktör som bär arbetsmiljöansvaret vid uthyrning av arbetskraft samt om arbetsmiljöansvaret skiljer sig vid anlitandet av entreprenad.Syftet blir därför att, genom den rättsdogmatiska metoden, utreda gällande rätt och därigenom få djupare förståelse för komplexiteten kring ämnet. Stora delar av uppsatsen är av deskriptiv karaktär, en beskrivning av rådande rättsläge. För att få en internationell koppling berörs även International Labour Organizations konvention nr. 181 i syfte att utreda vilken inverkan den har för arbetstagare som hyrs ut av bemanningsföretag och deras arbetsmiljö.I mina slutsatser konstaterar jag att skyddet för den”traditionella arbetstagaren” är omfattande, medan skyddet för en arbetstagare i en trepartsrelation är betydligt mer komplex. Arbetsmiljöansvaret vid uthyrning av arbetstagare är i behov av ett förtydligande, vilket enligt mig borde ske genom lagstiftning. Till skillnad från personaluthyrning råder det ingen tvekan om ansvarsfördelningen vid anlitandet av entreprenad i Arbetsmiljölagen men enligt mig finns det ett behov av en definition av begreppet entreprenad. Definitionen bör syfta till att förebygga feltolkning av begreppet, då arbetssituationen, i vissa fall, kan bidra till att ett annat rättsförhållande skapas och att arbetsmiljöansvar då förskjuts till kundföretaget. International Labour Organizations konvention nr. 181 har ingen direkt inverkan på arbetsmiljöansvaret för uthyrda arbetstagare, då Sverige valt att inte ratificera konventionen. / Recruitment companies have since legalization in 1993 gained a foothold on the Swedish labour market. The staffing industry is a change from the traditional employment relationship which usually is a bilateral relationship to become a trilateral relationship. This has created some problems, when labour legislation primarily is adapted to the bilateral relationship, which still is considered most common. The regulations governing health and safety issues at the working place are mainly found in the Work Environment Act, which was written before the trilateral relationship appeared on the Swedish labour market. Thus, the question arose as to which player has the safety responsibility for rented labour and if the work environment responsibility differs in the employment of subcontracted employees.The aim of this thesis is therefore, through the legal dogmatic method, to investigate the law and thereby gain a deeper understanding of the complexity of the subject. A large section of my paper is of descriptive character, a description of the current legal position. To get an international connection, I also refer to the International Labour Organization Convention 181 in order to investigate what impact it has on rented labour and the work environment.In my findings, I conclude that the protection of the "traditional worker" is extensive while the protection of a worker in a trilateral relationship is much more complex. Work environment responsibility for hiring of workers is in need of clarification, which according to me, should be by legislation. Apart from rented labour, there are no uncertainties regarding work environment responsibilities for subcontracted employees in the Working Environment Act. However, according to me, there is a need of a definition of the term outsourcing. The definition should aim to prevent misinterpretation of the concept. In some cases the work conditions can contribute to the fact that a different legal relationship is created and work environment responsibilities are shifted to the client company. International Labour Organization Convention 181 has no direct impact on the work environment responsibility for rented labour since Sweden decided not to ratify the Convention.