Response to interpellation 2023/24:437 on the reduction of working hours and the collective agreement
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
1 L argues that it is too early to draw conclusions about the new rules regarding "hyvling" (reduction of working hours) and that the government therefore does not intend to take any initiatives at the moment 1. 2 L is pleased with the new agreement on full-time norms and transition periods 2, emphasizes that the parties have a central responsibility for the conditions on the labor market 2 and that the new rules are well-anchored 3. 3 L argues that legislative measures are not appropriate now since rules on seniority already exist 3. 4 L sees it as problematic when people cannot work full-time and wants to reduce involuntary part-time work 4. 5 S considers it remarkable that the government does not want to act when workers become poor due to "hyvling" 5. 5 S considers that the deputy Minister for Employment should have a continuous dialogue with the parties 5. S argues that "hyvling" has increased stress, poverty, and led to more mental ill-health in workplaces.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! Ola Möller has asked Minister Johan Pehrson what measures the minister intends to take to ensure that the norm of full-time employment for permanent positions is better complied with. Ola Möller has also asked what measures the minister intends to take against so-called "hyvling" (leveling of wages). The work within the government is so distributed that it is I who shall answer the interpellation.
I thank you for the commitment to the issue.
The Employment Protection Act (SFS 1982:80) now contains rules stating that full-time is the norm in all employments. The Act has also received new rules regarding so-called "hyvling" (reduction of working hours). The rules on hyvling mean that offers of reduced employment levels shall be made in order of seniority and that employees who have accepted an offer of a lower employment level have the right to a transition period during which the employee retains their employment level and their employment benefits.
The aforementioned rules were added after an extensive reform of the Employment Protection Act and began to be applied on 1 October 2022. The new rules are part of the agreement on security, transition, and employment protection on the Swedish labor market between employer and employee organizations within the private sector.
It is too early to draw any conclusions about the effect of the new rules and the need for any measures. It is important to see how the application develops in the labor market and in case law. Against that background, I do not intend to take any initiatives in this area at this time.
Ola Möller (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you for the answer, Minister! It is pleasing that we both feel commitment to the issue. It is truly important.
It is said that it is about an offer of reduced working hours. I can, for one thing, wonder what kind of offer it is. You are thus letting people who have hours on their contract go down in working hours just because it benefits the company. It creates many problems.
When I visit and speak with H & M's trade unions, it is primarily women I meet - unfortunately, it is mostly women who work in retail. They are desperate. They have nothing to choose from. They have to take the offer. Jobs in retail do not grow on trees.
A single mother who lives some distance from her workplace and has had 30 hours on her contract is suddenly offered 15 hours, but she still has all the same fixed costs. It is just as far to work, the rent is the same, and the food costs just as much. It creates an enormous amount of stress.
Many actors in the Swedish labor market have started with this now. It is not only H & M that is doing it, even though much has been said about them when it comes to this. It means that others also stand there with few hours. It leads to a third of all employees in stores, within retail, living below the poverty line. They have a wage that is below the poverty line.
It creates stress in the workplace. Handelsanställdas förbund has conducted a survey on H & M specifically. It is noted that 78 percent of those affected by H & M's layoffs have poorer motivation at the workplace. Just as many feel more stress at the workplace. The same applies to the workload; 78 percent feel that the workload has increased.
They have much more hunting for hours, which also creates competition and breaks down the solidarity within the staff group. If someone takes an hour, it means that someone else looks askance at them because they didn't get that hour. But both have costs for rent.
Mental illness is a rampant disease in our country and today the largest expenditure item in the health insurance. It is about women's mental health. It has increased by 75 percent in H & M's workplaces.
It is frightening that we have legislation in this country that allows for an increase in people's mental ill-health by 75 percent. And then we wonder why we have problems with queues to psychiatry and rising costs in health insurance and why the sick leaves are becoming longer!
We have had new legislation in place for some years now. It is of course a step forward that it is included that one gives notice about this and states that it will take place. But it does not help.
The big problem is that we have a situation where the legal provisions stating that fixed-term employment should be full-time as the norm are not being followed. I agree with the Minister for Employment that this must be followed. We must see where it leads – but now we are starting to see the results. They are stated in black and white in report after report from Handelsanställdas förbund, and other trade unions also point to the consequences.
I wish that the Deputy Minister for Employment had gathered the parties and spoken about this, because the employer side does not care that three exceptions from Las can be made. They are applied. But they ignore the other provisions regarding full-time as the norm for permanent employment. We must discuss this. Here, politics must step in and ask why the intentions of the legislation are not being followed and what we politicians can do to help. Are there any initiatives that the minister could consider taking?
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister responds to this interpellation by stating that she does not intend to act or take any initiatives whatsoever. I find that to be a very remarkable answer when we have a labor market where employers choose to make those who work poor by giving them a wage that is not livable.
One can work and have an employment in Sweden today and be poor. A third of those who work in shops and are members of Handelsanställdas förbund have low wages because the working hours are being reduced. But the Minister answers that she does not intend to take any initiatives whatsoever.
The least that should be done by the Deputy Minister for Employment is to speak with the parties in the Swedish labor market and have a continuous dialogue on how to follow the legislation in Sweden. The Minister for Employment should speak with them about why they act in this way and do not follow the legislation which states that full-time should be the norm. Not even that does the Minister intend to do! I find that to be very noteworthy.
How far is this going to go? How many will become poor despite working and wanting to do the right thing? They get up in the morning and want to do the right thing but cannot live on their wages. This often concerns women, and I can imagine that it will be low priority again because it concerns women specifically. Why does the Deputy Minister for Employment, who is also the Minister for Equality in this government, choose not to act at all when she sees this happening, day in and day out? I think it is very unworthy in many ways.
After the debate, I truly hope that the Minister ensures that they fill their calendar with a few more conversations, meetings, and dialogues with the parties in the Swedish labor market to do something about this. It cannot be like this. This Minister should not think so either.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! I understand that the individual individuals who consider themselves forced to accept offers of lower employment levels in connection with downsizing face difficult transitions and economic trials, not least in the economic situation we find ourselves in.
But again: Now we have rules regarding the order of priority during restructuring. The employer cannot freely and arbitrarily choose who should have their working hours reduced, and this means an enhanced protection and a supplement compared to how it looked previously. These new rules are based on the parties' principle agreement and are therefore well-anchored in the labor market. The Government respects that agreement and the fact that these are rules that have only been applied for 16 months.
The parties can also, in collective agreements, agree on even better employment protection during layoffs. It is up to the parties to negotiate.
Based on this, I can state that it is not appropriate at this time for the government to take legislative measures. We must first see how the new agreement turns out. But I can reassure Member Sofia Amloh that the government has a continuous dialogue with the labor market parties to ensure that we have a functioning labor market.
I want to highlight that the proportion of fixed-term employment and the proportion of part-time employees decreased during 2022 compared to the previous year. I can also state that the development between 2012 and 2022 is such that the proportion of part-time workers has decreased significantly within health and social care and also within the education sector. It is therefore a consistent trend that the proportion of part-time employees is decreasing. During the last decade, the proportion of part-time employed women has also fallen steadily.
The Government assesses that the developments in the area, together with the reform of labor law, create conditions for a working life that meets both the employees' and the employers' needs for both flexibility and security.
Ola Möller (S)
Madam Speaker! I still think it is interesting that the government is not entirely consistent when it comes to legislation. We did implement a change called the security pension, which means that more people over 61 years of age are given the opportunity to remain in the sickness insurance instead of entering the pension system.
That reform gave the government, almost immediately after its appointment, ISF, the Swedish Social Insurance Inspectorate, a mandate to investigate. This is being done before there is even any court practice regarding how it should function. The government has no problem appointing investigations into its own legislation where it concerns legal regulation. But when it comes to this, which is partly legislation and partly contains party interests, it can take 16 months. One should not act there.
Not much evaluation is also being done of other things, for example, visitation zones. In those cases, it goes so fast that one can discuss the requirement for preparation in the Swedish Riksdag. The argument that we should follow up on this when enough time has passed therefore falls somewhat.
It is great that the Minister for Employment mentions that the employment rate has increased in the public sector, i.e., within education, healthcare, and elderly care! That is good, because it means that Kommunals' fantastic work for the right to full-time - or full-time as the norm, as it is now called - has been successful. It is thanks to trade union comrades in trade union and political cooperation throughout the municipalities who have ensured that the employment rate has been raised. But what we are talking about now is primarily Handels' area. Handels has chosen not to join the main agreement, because this is a core issue for them.
If we want a model for the Swedish labor market where all parties are interested, we should actually do what we can to get as many unions as possible behind the main agreement. It is a running point when it comes to the negotiations surrounding the members of Handels. For them, the reality is being stuck at a job between three in the afternoon and seven in the evening – at best. They might even have fewer hours. They cannot work anywhere else and must work where they are, because the employer has said that from three months from now they will not have the 30 hours that were first agreed upon, but only 15 or 20 hours.
It is strange that when it comes to this group, it is acceptable that one is thrown into poverty even though one does everything right. We say that everyone who can work shall work. That is a self-evident matter. That is what we agree with the government on. Then we may have different methods to reach that, but it is clear that they shall do so. These are people who have done everything right, but the companies choose to act in such a way that they cannot do right and actively make them poor.
I was actually at H & M's meeting last year and asked the question why the company is doing this when one is a party and has signed the main agreement. How can one ignore agreements that one has signed oneself? I received some rambling answer from the CEO about efficiencies and the global market situation. Then they run another round of reorganization so that 75 percent experience increased mental ill-health.
Does the Assistant Minister for Employment have any comment on how the companies are acting? Does she think it is right that the companies are acting in this way? Is it the Assistant Minister for Employment's opinion that H & M is doing right when they slash their staff? It is a digital question; it is one or zero. Is it right to slash, or is it not right to slash? That is what I would like to know if the Assistant Minister for Employment thinks.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! The Minister says that 16 months have passed. Yes, they have. We must put into context that it has been incredibly tough for household finances during these 16 months. These are not just any 16 months.
During that time, that is, after this came into force, employees at H & M have been subjected to even more shaving of their working time. There have been big headlines about it, and I believe that many are aware of it - not least the workers who have been subjected to it.
How many conversations has the assistant Minister for Employment had with the employer party about how this might not be very appropriate of them and what they need to do in a different way to comply with Swedish legislation? Are these questions that have been asked?
When it comes to these regular meetings and conversations with the parties in the labor market, I am quite unsure whether the trade unions perceive that there have been regular conversations with the Minister regarding how things work in the Swedish labor market. Those are not the signals I am receiving, so I believe that needs to be developed. How regular are these conversations? How often does the Minister raise this issue in the Swedish labor market, that one must follow Swedish legislation and that we should not have workers who become poor and cannot manage on a job in Sweden today? That is a development that we Social Democrats absolutely do not want to see.
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! The Swedish model means that it is the parties in the labor market who have a central responsibility for the conditions in the labor market. This is, of course, something the Social Democrats know very well.
I am glad that this agreement was reached. We now have new rules regarding full-time norms, seniority, and transition periods when transitioning to a lower degree of employment.
Of course, I see that we still have problems in the Swedish labor market. There are still many who work part-time. There are still many who have difficulty making ends meet when they cannot work full-time even though they would like to.
It would, however, be inappropriate of the government not to wait for the result of this reform. One cannot believe that a situation turns on a five-cent piece. We need to give the agreement a chance and see what the effects of it will be. When 16 months have passed with this agreement, it would not be serious of the government to tear it up and again begin changing the rules. We need to see how the development proceeds. But with that said, I clearly see that we still have problems on the Swedish labor market.
I also want to point out that as Minister for Equality, I see the equality aspect in this. It is primarily women who work part-time – involuntary part-time, I should say. But as I have previously stated, the proportion of employees on fixed-term contracts and part-time employees decreased during 2022 compared to the previous year. It was also the women who accounted for the entire reduction, which means that the difference between the genders has decreased.
We in the government will never lean back and think that this is not an issue for us. We are, of course, following the issue closely, but we will not take any initiatives so soon after new rules have come into force. We will see what the long-term effect of these rules will be and thereafter see if any further initiatives are required.
Ola Möller (S)
Madam Speaker! I can already tell you what the effects are. I have already explained that. It is 75 percent more at H & M's workplaces who have mental ill-health. It has increased the stress. It has increased the poverty.
But this does not only apply to H & M. This is also happening at many other companies within trade in Sweden. I recall that Akademibokhandeln has done it, and there are others. Coop started all of this, which one as a social democrat can be ashamed of.
We see the result. But I will actually give the Deputy Minister for Employment an offer. She can come with me to a union club, and then we can talk to the girls who have been "hyvlade" (shaved/cut) so that the minister herself can talk to them and hear how bad the situation is. I can arrange that, no problem. We can do it once a week if that's the case – travel the country on a tour to gather information on how the "hyvling" affects Sweden's retail employees. I am reaching out my hand here and now, because I believe the commitment is great.
But I also hear that the Minister refuses to review H & M. She does not want to take a stand on whether the companies are doing right or wrong, and I think that is a fundamental question here. Is it the government's view that "hyvling" is good or bad? Is the government prepared to act if the Assistant Minister for Employment, after our tour, discovers that this contributes to mental ill-health not only at H & M's workplaces but at all workplaces? What does the government think about the "hyvling"? Is "hyvling" good? Is it something we should have in the Swedish labor market, or is it something bad that we should eventually abolish?
Statsrådet Paulina Brandberg (L)
Madam Speaker! When listening to the debaters, one almost gets the impression that the issue of involuntary part-time work is something that has arisen since this government took office.
The reality is quite the opposite. Since October 2022 - that is, exactly the month when this government took office - we have had new rules in our labor market, including regarding a full-time norm.
From the government's side, we will always consider it problematic when people who want to work full-time do not have the opportunity to do so and are forced into involuntary part-time work. We also see, as mentioned, that there is an important equality issue in this. We will, of course, constantly look at what we can do so that everyone who wants and can work full-time can do so.
Again: One must let the new rules settle in and evaluate the effects after some time, once the new rules have been given a chance, before taking new initiatives.
With this said, I would like to thank you for today's debate and emphasize that the government will continue to keep its eyes on the issue to see how we can reduce the involuntary part-time work on the Swedish labor market.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.