When a person gets unemployed there is a possibility to apply for unemployment benefit, and if a person gets sick they can apply for using  the mandatory sickness insurance. At first sight this can seem beneficial for individuals, but when taking a closer look at the regulations for the two insurances it is possible to see that that is not always the case. The insurances affect each other in such a way that if a person uses one of the insurances the other insurance cannot be used at the same time. Because if a person is sick they are supposed to use the sickness insurance, and if they are unemployed they are supposed to use the unemployment insurance. Although there is a situation where an individual is neither unemployed nor sick regarding to the regulations. That is the case when a person has received sickness benefit for 180 days. In that situation the Social Insurance Agency is supposed to do an assessment of the person´s possibility to work compared to the whole labor market. If in this case, the Social Insurance Agency finds that the person has a possibility to work, the right to the sickness benefit is withdrawn, even if the person has a medical certificate saying the person is still sick. When the person then turns to the unemployment agency, no unemployment benefit will be granted, since the person is sick and therefor has no possibility to work. The result is that the person is not sick enough according to the sickness insurance, but to sick according to the unemployment insurance. Thus, the person has no right to any of the two insurances.                       The situation mentioned above is the focus for this essay, and the integration between the two regulations will be examined by using different sources of law. In that way it is possible to take different aspects into consideration. The first part of the essay will focus on the regulations and the requirements for receiving benefit. After that the motives to the regulations will be examined, followed by cases illustrating the actual application of the regulations. Analyzes and conclusions will be found in the different chapters of the essay, and they will be put together in a final chapter. The result of the analyze is that the regulations are not applied in a way that is consistent with the motives to the regulations, and the purpose they are supposed to fulfill. Therefor a harmonization of the regulations is needed, so that individuals do not risk being without benefit when they are not able to work and therefor need financial support, which is the purpose with the insurances.

It is required that there is a factual basis for termination when an employer terminates an employee. Provoked dismissals occur if an employer acts contrary to good practice in the labor market or improperly. The dismissal is provoked if it is made by the employee but prompted by the employer. In Swedish law, unprovoked dismissal is not regulated, which means that legal practice has a significant part. A provoked dismissal is considered a dismissal from the employer's side, even though the employee submitted his own resignation. The employer's behavior may be such that the employee submits his own resignation or that the person should have realized that the incident could lead to this. It is not permitted for the employer to act passively in situations where the employee has been exposed. Violence and threats are not acceptable on the part of the employer, but the employee can easily prove that the dismissal is justified. In the form of harassment, the proof becomes significantly more difficult and this is not something an employee should be subjected to, it can be grounds for a provoked dismissal. Reassignment can also be a factor in a provoked dismissal. If an employer has reassigned an employee to a lower position or worse working hours, the employee can resign and this can then be seen as a provoked dismissal.

Studiens syfte var att undersöka det eventuella, prediktiva förhållandet mellan de psykosociala arbetsmiljöfaktorerna krav, kontroll och stöd, psykisk ohälsa och intentioner till egen uppsägning (IEU) bland socialsekreterare anställda i en medelstor kommun i södra Sverige. Studien är av kvantitativ art och har utgått från en tvärsnittsdesign. Genom en webbaserad enkät som skickades till samtliga socialsekreterare i kommunen samlades data in angående de aktuella variablerna. Efter bortfallsanalys uppgick den totala svarsfrekvensen till 37% vilket innebar att 102 respondenters besvarade enkäter inkluderades i studien. Insamlade data analyserades genom en hierarkisk multipel regressionsanalys vars resultat visade att krav positivt predicerade IEU medan kontroll, stöd och högre ålder predicerade IEU negativt, samt att psykisk ohälsa inte predicerade IEU. Noterbart var att stödet hade ett avgörande, prediktivt förhållande till IEU. För vidare forskning föreslogs longitudinella studier för att bekräfta den aktuella studiens prediktiva förhållanden.