Some Features of Swedish Collective Labour Law1
Author | A. Adlercreutz |
Date | 01 April 1947 |
Published date | 01 April 1947 |
DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2230.1947.tb00044.x |
SOME FEATURES OF
SWEDISH
COLLECTIVE LABOUR LAW
IN
Sweden the broad outline of industrial relations is much the
same
as
in England. Both countries have large organisations
of employers and workers which deal with one another on the
basis of collective bargaining
;
in both countries State inter-
ference regarding the basic terms of employment, particularly
wages,
is
kept within the narrowest possible limits
;
in England
as
well as in Sweden both parties in the labour market are
anxious to retain the right of direct action as an ultimate resort
in case of disagreement. Therefore it must be borne in mind
that though some features of the Swedish industrial relations
system described in the following paper differ considerably
from what prevails in this country, the functioning and the
results achieved are largely the same.
It
is
especially on the legal side, the side with which the
present paper is mainly concerned, that the differences are
pronounced. They are,
I
may say, due to a large extent to
the peculiarities of the English legal system. The English trade
union law bears in all essentials the impress of the fight of the
trade unions to secure
a
legal basis for their activity. The
principles
of
the common law, especially as laid down in the
doctrines of conspiracy and restraint of trade, were mainly
hostile to collective activity for trade purposes. The efforts
of
the trade union movement had to be directed towards the
problem of avoiding the consequences of various judicial
decisions founded on these doctrines. The way that was chosen
was-while conferring legal status on the trade unions-to
protect them by statute from the application particularly of
the said common law doctrines. The English trade union
legislation is mainly
a
fence, erected piece by piece as the need
arose, against the common law, which did not answer the
demands
of
the trade unions.
If
by the rules alluded to
(e.g.,
section
3
of the Conspiracy and Protection of Property Act,
1875,
concerning criminal conspiracy, and section
3
of the
Trade Union Act,
1871,
concerning restraint of trade) certain
1
An American book on the subject, which has been
of
great
help
to
me,
sllould
be mentioned:
?'he
Gowernnient
of
Labor
Relations
in
Sweden
(19.12).
bv
J.
J.
Robbins.
The
Legislative
Series
of
the
International Labour
Ofi&
contains translations
of
the sbatutes
dealt N-ith, hut
I
have
not
everywhere
accepted these translations.
137
138
MODERN
LAW REVIEW
VOL.
10
privileges, or immunities, can be said to have been granted
to the trade unions, this is, as far as
I
can see, entirely due
to
the fact that the common law is regarded as
a
more or less
fixed body
of
rules, which, though set aside by statute, still
‘exist
’,
and can be revived through the removal of the
statutory rules, and which have to be applied as soon as the
facts in
a
certain case are not strictly covered by the words
of the statute. But the English trade union legislation goes
a
step further. By section
4
of the Act of
1871
a
series
of
important matters is withdrawn from the jurisdiction of the
Courts. The term
‘
immunity
’
seems to me far more appro-
priate when used to describe this fact. While in the former
case of immunity certain rules
of
substantive law are made not
applicable to trade unions,
a
fact which in reality involves only
an amendment of the law, in this case the whole judicial system
is set aside, without special provisions for anything to replace
it. The result is that the relations between the organisations
of
the labour market are of
a
fundamentally extra-legaI
character.
So
there is no legal regulation concerning collective
bargaining and collective agreements (except for certain
industries). This gives the English trade union law system its
peculiar colouring.
In Sweden the starting-point, as well
as
the development,
has been rather different. The trade union movement has been
faced with fewer difficulties, especially on the legal side.
It
could perhaps be said without exaggeration that the Swedish
trade union legislation starts where the English legislation ends.
Before embarking further upon this proposition,
a
few
words must be said about the organisations in the labour
market. In Sweden
a
real trade union movement did not
exist until the last decades
of
the nineteenth century.
It
grew,
however, rapidly and steadily. Most trade unions are affiliated
to the Confederation of Trade Unions
(LO,
formed in
1898),
which includes
a
membership of more than one million out
of
a
total population of six-seven million, probably the largest
relative membership in the world. The other trade unions are
not
of
much importance. The employers’ associations that
arose as
a
reply to the trade unions have not reached the same
degree of unification. The largest organisation, the counter-
part to the
LO,
is the Swedish Employers’ Federation (SAF,
formed
in
1902),
which comprises employers mainly in industry
with
a
total staff of roughly
450,000
workers. There are other
fairly important employers’ organisations, which to a certain
extent co-operate with the SAF. The adoption by the
To continue reading
Request your trial