Items of News
| DOI | 10.1177/002085236803400411 |
| Published date | 01 December 1968 |
| Date | 01 December 1968 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
ITEMS OF NEWS
-CONTENTS-
ARTICLES (pages 389 to 391)
Sweden : Collective Bargaining and Lawful Strike in the
Civil Service
TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION (pages 391 to 392)
Argentina, Cameroon, Colombia, Iran, Netherlands, Niger,
Philippines, Somalia, United Kingdom, United States, Vene-
zuela
NEWS IN BRIEF (pages 392 to 396)
ASEAN, Congo (Kinshasa), Ghana, IFC, India, Italy,
LAFTA, Netherlands, Peru, United Kingdom, United
Nations, United States
CHRONICLE OF THE INSTITUTE (pages 397 to 407)
SWEDEN
wages. As a matter of fact, Parliament never
failed to confirm what had been agreed by the
Minister and the Unions. In many respects
this
Collective Bargaining
way of bargaining resembled closely what
takes place in the British National Whitley
and Lawful Strike
Council when the Official Side and the Staff
in the Civil Service
Side negotiate about the pay of the civil service.
In 1966, Sweden took the final step towards
Collective bargaining systems for settling the
a fully developed system of collective bargain-
pay levels and related matters of civil servants
ing in its civil service.
Since then, a civil
exist in most countries nowadays. Usually,
servant has been acknowledged to have the
however, they are not fully developed: a halt
full right to be a member of a union and to
is made halfway by not including the civil
engage in activities in its behalf.
No civil
servants’ right to strike. Until 1966, such a
servants have been limited in the exercise of
half-developed system was applied in Sweden.
that right. For instance, the justices of the
The civil servants’ unions thus negotiated col-
supreme courts, the under-secretaries of State
lectively with the Minister of Civil Service
and the heads of the central agencies may be,
Affairs in close contact with the Minister of
and usually are, members of the unions. It
Finance. The negotiations did not, however,
should be recalled that the Swedish Ministries
result in any contract, but merely in a signed
are relatively small units with policy planning,
record of what was held to be the unanimous
budget preparation and legislative matters as
opinion of the negotiators. It then rested with
their main tasks.
Public administration is
Parliament to decide whether the agreement
delegated to functionally independent agencies
should be applied or not as a basis for the
and local boards, of which there are about
year to come with regard to the civil servants’
seventy.
390
It was decided, moreover, that civil service
In Sweden, many doubted the advisability
pay should, in future, be settled by negotiation
of strikes in the civil service and they still
between a special central agency, the National
arouse much scepticism. Some thought that
Bargaining Agency, organized for the purpose,
the right to strike did not matter much, since
and the civil servants’ four main unions. The
it would never be used but just hover in the
agency is largely staffed by civil servants from
background. Their illusions were soon shat-
the former negotiating unit in the Department
tered. Already in the autumn 1966, a series
of Civil Service Affairs. No bargain is binding
of negotiations concerning pay levels for
until it has been approved by the Cabinet,
teachers at the universities and the upper
which in its turn has to secure Parliamentary
secondary schools failed, and the main union
approval for civil service pay. The unions
to which the teachers belonged declared a
are, in addition, granted an enforceable right
strike not only for the teachers involved but
to negotiate and the civil servants a legal right
also for its other members, among whom were,
to strike on the initiative of their union. Cor-
for instance, civil servants in the ministries,
respondingly, the Bargaining Agency was ac-
the provincial governments and central agen-
corded the right to use the lock-out as a means
cies and even judges and public prosecutors.
of emphasizing its claims when negotiations
For most of them the strike did not, however,
are unsuccessful.
last more than three days. For the academic
and administrative staff of schools and univer-
The negotiatory reform was endorsed in a
sities, the civil servants in the ministries, and
new Civil Service Act of 3 June 1965, which
the national and regional boards of education,
also contains rules governing the management
the strike was construed as a work-to-rule
of the civil service, e.g. appointments, the
strike and lasted about three weeks.
The
duties of a civil servant, disciplinary proceed-
National Bargaining Agency retorted by de-
ings, removal from office, and retirement.
claring a lock-out for the teachers who belong-
Negotiations and bargaining about these mat-
ed to the strike-declaring union but had not
ters are expressly forbidden. Measures be-
taken part in the strike.
longing to the management of the civil service
The experiences of the events clearly show-
are determined unilaterally by the competent
end that the greatest sufferer in conflicts on the
authority.
But this does not exclude dis-
cussions between the
public labor market is the
authority and
public, in the case
a union.
in
It has, for
question the
instance, been prescribed that such
youth that was left without
instruction
discussions shall take
during the conflict. The strike’s
place in connection with
influence on the Government was
dismissals, if the union of the civil
mainly in-
servant
concerned
direct, through public opinion which claimed
so requests.
that the service functions should be restored.
But, of course, it also meant problems for
There is nothing alarming in collective ne-
instance for the Ministries which were left
gotiations and bargaining as such in the public
without many of their civil servants. It caused
service.
But a right to strike may seem in-
delays in the preparation of the budget and
credible, particularly for those who, like the
of legislation. Thus the strike also exercised
late President Roosevelt in his famous letter
a direct influence on the Cabinet.
It is also
of 1937, maintain that militant tactics have no
worth mentioning that numerous dispensations
place in the functions of any organization of
from the strike were allowed by the union to
Government employees, and that an action
civil servants in key positions. The effects of
aiming at the paralysis of Government by those
the strike were thus kept within tolerable
who have sworn to support it is unthinkable
limits, although sometimes with difficulty. No
and intolerable. Strikes...
To continue reading
Request your trial