Section 25-27, i.e. the rights of priority of the Employment Protection Act, is a form of post-employment protection which exists to support those employed on a part-time basis and former employees. When a vacancy arises an employer should first and foremost offer part-time employees employment at a higher level of occupation or offer employment to former employees. The various types of employment contracts, other than those valid for an indefinite term, have increased during the last decades on the Swedish labour market. Labour hire has become more common and therefore we find it interesting to investigate how the rights of priority apply. The purpose of this thesis is to describe and analyze the law with regards to labour hire when people with rights of priority are available. We have formulated the following questions: what differentiates an employee and an assignee , to what extent is it possible to utilize labour hire rather than re-employ someone with rights of priority in accordance with Section 25 of the Employment Protection Act or offer a part-time employee employment at a higher level of occupation in accordance with Section 25a of the Employment Protection Act and are the possibilities for an employer in the public sector different from the possibilities for an employer in the private sector to utilize labour hire rather than re-employ someone with rights of priority in accordance with Section 25 of the Employment Protection Act or offer a part-time employee employment at a higher level of occupation in accordance with Section 25a of the Employment Protection Act? There is no sole criterion that defines whether a person is an employee or an assignee. Instead, all existing circumstances in each particular case must be observed. However, there are two fundamental requirements that must be present in order for a person to be regarded as an employee. The first requirement is that the relationship between the two parties (the employer and the employee) is based on an agreement between the two. The second requirement is that the agreement has to encompass one party providing labour for the second. With this in mind, an employee in a labour hire organisation cannot be regarded as an employee in the company which has hired labour as in this case there is no contractual relationship between the employee and the company to whom the labour is provided. For an employer to be looked upon as bypassing the rights of priority rules in a prohibited fashion a number of criteria must be fulfilled. Firstly, the employer must have disregarded the rights of priority and furthermore this act must be proved. Secondly, the employer must have consciously intended to do so. Ultimately, the action, with all specific circumstances taken into consideration, must be seen as tortious. There has been no ruling where labour hire has been determined as an act of prohibited bypassing of the rights of priority but the Labour Court has concluded that it cannot be excluded as a possibility. The rights of priority can only be applied when new staff are employed. Therefore, it is our opinion that an unlawful bypassing of the rights of priority rules could potentially occur when the hiring of an assignee is regarded as a new employment. For this to take place the “assignee” must be regarded as an employee. However, we find it difficult to see how hiring labour from a labour hire organization could be regarded as an unlawful bypassing of the rights of priority rules. Although the rights of priority differ in some ways for employees in the public sector we still consider that the possibility to utilize labour hire for employers in the public sector, when there are people with rights of priority available, is in principle unchanged in comparison to employers in the private sector.

Syftet med vår uppsats är att redogöra för en kommunal arbetsgivares möjligheter och handlingsutrymme att tillgodose det tillfälliga arbetskraftsbehovet. LAS är tydlig med att tillsvidareanställningar är huvudregeln i ett anställningsförhållande och tidsbegränsade anställningar är undantaget. Enligt LAS går det att tidsbegränsa en anställning genom allmän visstidsanställning, vikariat, säsongsanställning, när arbetstagaren fyllt 67 år samt vid provanställning. Vid allmän visstidsanställning finns det för arbetsgivaren inga speciella krav. Vid vikariat krävs det att anställningen är kopplad till en viss arbetstagares lediga anställning eller viss bestämd ledig befattning. Dessa två anställningsformer har en bortre gräns, med detta menas att anställningen övergår till en tillsvidareanställning när arbetstagaren arbetat mer än två år under en femårsperiod. När arbetsgivaren är i behov ny arbetskraft måste hänsyn tas till 25§ LAS. En arbetstagare har företrädesrätt till återanställning inom den verksamhet där arbetstagaren tidigare varit anställd. Rätten avser tillsvidareanställda vid uppsägning på grund av arbetsbrist. Företrädesrätt föreligger även vid avslut av tidsbegränsade anställningar. Den gäller från dagen då uppsägningsbesked lämnades och nio månader framåt från den dagen anställningen upphör att gälla. Syftet med företrädesrätten är att förhindra att arbetsgivaren kringgår turordningsreglerna i LAS. En stor del av uppsatsen handlar om kommuners möjlighet att hyra in arbetskraft. En arbetsgivare har möjlighet att tillgodose ett tillfälligt behov av arbetskraft genom att hyra in personal. Det är viktigt att den inhyrde arbetstagaren i faktisk mening är att anse som uppdragstagare enligt det tvingande uppdragstagarbegreppet. En viktig förutsättning för om inhyrningen är en tillåten åtgärd är att det inte får röra sig om ett avtal av permanent karaktär. Detta innebär att inhyrningen främst får täcka ett tillfälligt behov av arbetskraft. En arbetsgivare kan utan hinder hyra in tillfällig arbetskraft som har speciella sakkunskaper för en arbetsuppgift som finns hos företaget. När arbetsgivaren anlitar inhyrd personal fast det finns personer som har företrädesrätt till återanställning som åsidosätts uppstår frågan om det är ett kringgående av 25§ LAS. Här blir arbetsgivarens syfte med åtgärden avgörande. I de fall arbetsgivaren kan motivera inhyrningen med att det har ett företagsekonomiskt syfte är åtgärden enligt Arbetsdomstolen godtagbar, däremot är det inte tillåtet om syftet är att kringgå LAS. I de domar som vi använt oss av behandlade Arbetsdomstolen inte vad som menas med företagsekonomiskt syfte samt vad som gäller om det finns andra syften till åtgärden. Den berörda arbetstagarorganisationen har enligt 39§ MBL rätt att lägga in veto i situationer när en arbetsgivare tänker hyra in personal, dock måste det finnas starka skäl för ett sådant ingripande. Vidare får enligt LOU inte kommunen hyra in personal från oseriösa uthyrare. Vi har genomfört en empirisk undersökning hos vård- och omsorgsförvaltningen i Karlstad kommun för att se hur de har tillämpat gällande rätt angående anställningstrygghet för att uppnå kravet på kompetens och kvalifikation enligt SoL och HSL. De har valt att ge de tillsvidareanställda med vårdnära arbete inom Kommunals avtalsområde möjlighet att själva välja sin sysselsättningsgrad. Detta har gjort att de fått ett minskat behov av vikarier. Vidare har vissa enheter personalpool där det arbetar tillsvidareanställd personal. Det är härifrån det i första hand hämtas vikarier när sådant behov uppstår. Rekryteringen av vikarier måste göras på ett noggrant sätt i och med den bortre gränsen för vikariat. / The purpose of this essay is to account for an employer’s options, and possible actions, to meet the demands of temporary labour. LAS state that that nontenured appointments are the principal rule when it comes to the various types of employments and temporary jobs are the exception. According to LAS you can put a time limit on a position by general temporary employment, substitutes, seasonal employment, when a worker has turned 67 and also to employment with a trial period. During a general temporary employment there are no special demands on the employer. For a substitute there has to be a connection between a certain employee’s position which is unoccupied or a certain vacant post. These two forms of employment do have a time limit. It occurs when the employee has worked for two years during a five year period, then the statues of employment turn in to a permanent position. When an employer has the need for new labour, he/she must consider paragraph 25 of LAS. A former employee has preferential right to be rehired within the field of work where he/she was formerly employed. This applies to former permanently employed that was discharged due to lack of work. It also applies to employees with temporary employments that have ended. It is effective from the day the employer gives notice of dismissal and nine months forward from the day when the employment ceases to exist. The purpose of this paragraph is to prevent the employer from evading priority rules. A big part of this essay is about the municipality’s different options to hire manpower. An employer has the option to satisfy the need of temporary labour by hiring manpower. It is important that the hired manpower is indeed considered the commissioner in accordions to special paragraphs. One important condition for this type of manpower to be an accepted measure is that it does not involve a permanent position. This means that hiring manpower is mainly to cover a need for temporary labour. An employer can without any problem hire manpower with a specific competence for a work task at the company. When the employer hires manpower, even though there are people with preferential right to be rehired, the question arises as to whether or not this is an evasion of paragraph 25 of LAS. The employer’s purpose with this measure is of vital importance. If the employer can justify the hiring of manpower, with the fact that it is of business administrational purpose, then the measure is, according to AD, valid. However, it is not allowed if the purpose is to evade the paragraphs of LAS. In the verdicts we have used AD did not consider what business administrational purpose meant, neither what would apply if there were other purposes of the measure. The concerned union has according to paragraph 39 of MBL the right to veto a situation when an employer hires manpower. Although they have to have a strong case to intervene. Furthermore, the municipality can not, according to LOU, hire manpower from agencies that are not legitimate. We have also conducted an empirical inquiry at the healthcare administration in Karlstad municipality to see how they have applied existing law when it comes to employment security to reach the demand of competence and qualifications according to SoL and HSL. They have chosen to give their permanent employees, in healthcare within Kommunals agreement, the right to choose their level of occupation. This has reduced their need for substitutes. Furthermore, some have staff units with permanent employees. The substitutes primarily come from these units when needed. Because of the rules concerning substitutes, like the time limit for these types of employments, they have to be real careful when they recruit new personnel.

My essay is on the subject of teachers work environment with focus on noise and communication. In the essay questions are raised on how a teacher can influence his or hers noisy work environment. A school is a large work place with many employees and is owned and administered by the county municipality which is an even bigger workplace. How big an acting space does a teacher have in such a large organization? My methods of research on these questions have been to conduct interviews and analyzing documentation from The Swedish Work Environment Authority. The Swedish Work Environment Authority inspects workplaces and conducts work environment inquiries by inspecting and discovering misdoings/abuses. They put high demands on workplaces by imposing a high fine. I have investigated a preschool and an upper secondary school that have had problems with their noise environment. The result of the research is that a teacher, to a certain extent, can influence his or hers work environment, but that the teacher needs support from The Work Environment Authority in order to achieve real change. When the employee has risen the issue of a noisy work environment there has been no immediate response from the board of directors in the municipality. In the upper secondary school there were no major changes despite The Work Environment Authority imposing a large fine.

Missbruk av alkohol utgör ett stort problem i dagens samhälle. Inom arbetslivet är personer som missbrukar alkohol ett problem för såväl arbetsgivare som arbetskamrater. I denna uppsats har vi, från ett arbetsrättsligt perspektiv, undersökt under vilka omständigheter en arbetsgivare har saklig grund att säga upp en arbetstagare som missbrukar alkohol. Enligt rådande anställningsskyddslagstiftning måste en arbetsgivare ha saklig grund för att säga upp en arbetstagare. Vid prövning av huruvida en uppsägning är sakligt grundad skall en samlad bedömning av olika omständigheter i fallet göras, där en intresseavvägning mellan parterna ingår. Sjukdom skall i regel inte kunna utgöra saklig grund för uppsägning. Detta kommer av det förstärkta anställningsskydd som tillkommer en sjuk arbetstagare, det förstärkta anställningsskyddet innebär att arbetstagarens misskötsamhet skall ställas i förhållande till hans sjukdom. Om arbetstagaren däremot inte kan utföra något arbete av någon betydelse och sjukdomsprognosen är dålig samt om arbetsgivaren har fullgjort sitt omplacerings- och rehabiliteringsansvar, kan detta ligga till grund för en uppsägning. / Abuse of alcohol is a large problem in today’s society. In the sphere of the working life, a person who abuses alcohol is a problem for employers as well as for employees. In this essay, from a labor law point of view, the possibilities for an employer to terminate an alcohol abusing employee are analyzed. The main question the employer ought to answer is; when has an employee’s abuse of alcohol led to such trouble for the employer that it is inadequate to let the employment remain? According to existing labor law an employer needs valid reasons for terminating an employment. When inquiring whether a termination is of valid reasons or not, a complete judgement of different circumstances in the case should be done, where the different parties interests are weighted against each other. Sickness should in general not constitute valid reasons for terminating an employment. This comes with the strengthen employment security that is due to a sick employee, the strengthen employment security that belongs to a sick employee makes his or hers neglect to work a problem that has to be put in relation to his or hers sickness. However, if the employee is no longer capable of doing any work of importance for the employer, the prognosis of the sickness is bad. Then if the employer has completed his transfer- and rehabilitation responsibilities, this can be sufficient reasons for a termination of the employment.

This dissertation explores the role of the regulations regarding seniority with respect to employee layoffs. The main focus of this inquiry is to explore the degree to which the regulations protect the groups of employees for which it is intended. The main area of interest is § 22 of the law regarding employment protection concerning protections for employees with long periods of employment and older workers. It contains an examination of the regulatory framework and an empirical survey of how these regulations were applied at a number of workplaces. The survey consists of thirty workplaces and illustrates how the protectionist purpose of the legislation can be minimized or enhanced as a result of the different decisions made by employers or labor unions and the deliberations behind the decisions. The empirical survey also roughly shows the outcome of the application of these regulations with respect to the surveyed groups at the workplaces. / digitalisering@umu

This thesis explores the role played by law in the current breakdown of the employment pension system, focusing on the legal status of pension plans within the employment relationship, and on the way lawmakers have defined, shaped and enforced employee pension rights. It traces the legal status of employment pensions from their 19th Century characterization as gifts to reward employees for long and faithful service, to their current 21st Century construction as terms of the contract of employment. The thesis argues that Canadian lawmakers within all three legal regimes structuring rights and obligations within the employment relationship – the common law, collective bargaining law and statute law – have contributed significantly to the overall dysfunction of the system by cultivating both substantive and procedural legal rules that locate critical issues concerning the scope, design, durability and distribution of employee pension rights within the control of employers. Predictably, Canadian employers have used that control to shape pension plans to meet their distinct business needs, needs that frequently collide with worker needs and expectations for good pensions. Even in the heyday of the ‘Fordist’ work structures that fostered employment pension plans, the system delivered benefits very unequally, privileging the interest of elite workers who fit the ‘male breadwinner’ mould, and failing to provide adequate and secure pensions for the majority of Canadian workers. Changes in the organization of work in Canada, including trends towards more precarious work, will continue to exacerbate the problems inherent in the system, escalating its distributional inequalities. In the current round of pension law reform, Canada’s policy makers should abandon the effort to repair a system which is flawed at its core, and should instead seek a new foundation for pensions outside the employment relationship, a foundation which will not subordinate the pension interests of workers to the business interests of employers.

This thesis explores the role played by law in the current breakdown of the employment pension system, focusing on the legal status of pension plans within the employment relationship, and on the way lawmakers have defined, shaped and enforced employee pension rights. It traces the legal status of employment pensions from their 19th Century characterization as gifts to reward employees for long and faithful service, to their current 21st Century construction as terms of the contract of employment. The thesis argues that Canadian lawmakers within all three legal regimes structuring rights and obligations within the employment relationship – the common law, collective bargaining law and statute law – have contributed significantly to the overall dysfunction of the system by cultivating both substantive and procedural legal rules that locate critical issues concerning the scope, design, durability and distribution of employee pension rights within the control of employers. Predictably, Canadian employers have used that control to shape pension plans to meet their distinct business needs, needs that frequently collide with worker needs and expectations for good pensions. Even in the heyday of the ‘Fordist’ work structures that fostered employment pension plans, the system delivered benefits very unequally, privileging the interest of elite workers who fit the ‘male breadwinner’ mould, and failing to provide adequate and secure pensions for the majority of Canadian workers. Changes in the organization of work in Canada, including trends towards more precarious work, will continue to exacerbate the problems inherent in the system, escalating its distributional inequalities. In the current round of pension law reform, Canada’s policy makers should abandon the effort to repair a system which is flawed at its core, and should instead seek a new foundation for pensions outside the employment relationship, a foundation which will not subordinate the pension interests of workers to the business interests of employers.

The prevention of age discrimination in Sweden did not have any solvent grounds until directive 2000/78/EG was implemented into Swedish law. Today age discrimination has been banned for just over two years. This ground of discrimination has, compared to other existing grounds of discrimination in Swedish law, a lot more opportunities to make exceptions from. Given the fact that the exemption rules are vague, it is difficult to determine whether the protection against age discrimination is in fact a protection at all. The purpose of this essay is to describe what the law regarding age discrimination means. Is the protection against age discrimination appropriate or are the prohibitions against age discrimination deficient? Both Swedish and EU-law applies in this essay, since the Swedish Discrimination Act has been influenced by EU-law. From the prohibition of age discrimination there are a few exemptions which are permissible under Swedish and EU-law. There are three possibilities to make exemptions to the age discrimination ban in Swedish law, one of which can be made in individual contracts and collective agreements as regards the right to pension- survivor - or invalidity benefits. The other two exemptions are more general and vague and therefore do not provide much guidance. Consequently, the main question is whether or not the Swedish Discrimination Act provides a protection with no actual effect, since the preparatory works mention situations where exceptions to the prohibition of age discrimination are considered to be permitted. In 2001 a mandatory rule came into force in the Employment Protection Act (LAS) which gave employees the right, to remain in their post until the month in which he or she reaches the age of 67. The issue however occurs after the employer has reached this age and whether or not this rule constitutes a direct discrimination by law.

Section 25 of the Swedish Protection of Employment Act states that an employed person who gets his job cancelled because of shortage of work has a right to get re-employment within a certain period of time. The purpose of this regulation is to give employees a protection of employment. But it is frequently criticized by employers, claiming that the regulation restricts their right to lead and distribute the work in a way that is most profitable for the business. This means that the regulation must be applied in a way that accommodates the employees’ needs for a secure employment as well as the employers’ needs of efficiency and flexibility within the business.  There are different approaches used by the employers to avoid the application of section 25. Some of the approaches are acceptable by The Swedish Labor Court and some are not. The main question is therefore if the approaches that are accepted by The Swedish Labor Court in some way collide with section 25 of the Swedish Protection of Employment Act. If so, how can the judicial system be altered to better correspond with the Swedish legislation?

Klädkoder förekommer på många olika typer av företag och påverkar ett stort antal arbetstagare. Vissa har sin grund i lagstiftning, andra i avtal, personalpolicies eller liknande. Rättsområdet rörande klädkoder är dock relativt oklart och det finns en brist på relevanta, aktuella rättsfall. De regler som har faktisk effekt verkar mer bygga på rättsprinciper och sedvana än på uttrycklig lagtext. Syftet med denna uppsats är att söka utreda detta rättsläge för att utröna vad arbetsgivaren har för möjligheter att genomdriva och upprätthålla en klädkod samt att undersöka arbetstagarens rättigheter. Arbetsgivaren är förpliktigad att tillhandahålla kläder om dessa är en nödvändighet ur säkerhetssynpunkt och även i vissa andra fall. Det åligger även arbetsgivaren att iaktta god sed på arbetsmarknaden vad det gäller klädkoder. Denne har långtgående friheter att leda och fördela arbetet enligt arbetsledningsrätten som gäller för arbetstagare inom gränserna för dennes arbetsskyldighet. Vägran att följa arbetsgivarens order kan få stora konsekvenser då det kan anses utgöra arbetsvägran. I vissa fall kan ett upphörande av anställningsförhållandet vara motiverat. Klädkoder på arbetsplatserna kan regleras genom avtal, men utomobligatoriskt så härleds stödet främst från arbetsledningsrätten men inte uteslutande då även arbetstagarens lojalitetsplikt har viss inverkan. Arbetstagarens rättigheter på området är relativt svaga, i princip finns skydd mot godtycklighet, agerande som kan tolkas som en provocerad uppsägning samt diskriminerande åtgärder, men skyddet är inte mycket mer omfattande än så. Lojalitetsplikten kan även ha inverkan på arbetstagarens privatliv.