Response to interpellation 2024/25:709 on yellow unions
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns yellow trade unions, i.e., organizations that are controlled and managed by the employer. L emphasizes that the Swedish labor market model is based on strong and independent organizations on both sides 1 2 3. L argues that it is in everyone's interest that employer-controlled trade unions do not exist 4. S argues that yellow trade unions are harmful to the Swedish model and can lead to a dumping of conditions 5 6. S expresses concern that this is an emerging trend, especially within the platform industry where collective agreement coverage is low 5 6. S asks whether the government sees reason to act to protect the workers' organizations 7 5.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! Adrian Magnusson has, against the background of reporting in the media, asked Minister Nina Larsson if she sees reasons to act in light of the developments regarding the emergence of yellow unions. The work within the government is so distributed that it is now I who shall answer the interpellation.
I would like to thank Adrian Magnusson for the question. Neither I nor the government can comment on an individual case. I would, however, like to point out that the Swedish labor market model is characterized by strong, independent organizations on both the employer and employee sides.
According to the Co-determination in the Workplace Act (1976:580), an employees' organization is defined as such an association of employees which, according to its statutes, shall safeguard the employees' interests in relation to the employer. The act's criteria must be met for an association to be considered an employees' organization.
In light of the fact that the platform industry is affected, I can mention that on November 21, 2024, the government decided that a special investigator shall propose how the so-called platform directive shall be implemented in Swedish law. The investigation shall be reported by December 31 this year at the latest (dir. 2024:116).
I and the government stand behind the Swedish parts model, and we follow the developments in the area.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Minister for Employment for the answer to the interpellation! As I said earlier, we will surely have reason to meet many times here in the chamber due to the Minister's important work.
The interpellation concerns yellow unions – which, fortunately, is a historically rather foreign phenomenon for Sweden and the Swedish labor market policy debate. We should be very happy about that. Since the 1930s and the signing of the Saltsjöbad Agreement, we have largely been spared yellow unions.
Then one can ask what a yellow union is. Yes, it is a union that the employer controls and exercises power and control over. You hear quite directly that it is something very bad that does not fit into the labor market. It is difficult to represent the opposing interest in the conflict between labor and capital if it is the employer who controls the workers' representation.
Madam Speaker! For a long time in this country, we have seen a shift in the balance of power in favor of the employer. We could reason for a long time about the causes of that, but I believe the vast majority could agree that this is the case on the Swedish labor market. Unemployment is higher than it has been many times historically and has stuck at high levels. The terms of employment have worsened, with not least ever-increasing insecure employment. It has simply become tougher in many ways to get a job and to have a job in Sweden.
The issue of yellow trade unions has flared up in various contexts in recent years. During 2024, a legal dispute arose regarding an organization which, according to its own statement, would organize those who "work within stage and cultural work" but which primarily organized people who worked at strip clubs. The newspaper Arbetsvärlden reported extensively on the case.
The Swedish Work Environment Authority, an agency under the Ministry of Employment, considered that this was not a trade union and took the matter to court. The organization's statutes were inaccessible, and the address for the organization was a P.O. box. The organization had a few members, and there were clear links to owners of the clubs that organized the employees. The court later concluded that this was not to be seen as a trade union within the meaning of the Co-determination Act.
Earlier this year, information emerged that owners of self-employment companies planned to start a trade union in order to be able to sign collective agreements with so-called gig workers, i.e., platform workers. Within the industry, discussions regarding the signing of collective agreements broadly have been ongoing for a long time. This has succeeded in part, but far from the entire sector is covered. However, collective agreements have been signed between Transport and parts of the Foodora employees. This shows, therefore, that it is possible to sign collective agreements even within the food delivery industry if the will exists.
This week, Arbetsvärlden was able to report that a trade union has now been formed where the objective is to organize self-employed individuals. The trade union is called Uppdragsarbetareförbundet, UAF, and is funded by the employer. So far, the trade union lacks members, but a collective agreement has been concluded with a completely newly formed employer organization. The trade union Transport states that this is an entirely yellow trade union.
Madam Speaker! Sweden has, through various conventions and recommendations, committed itself to protecting workers' organizations against interference from employers, for example through ILO Convention 98. Sweden has also, through ILO Recommendation 91, committed itself to not recognizing workers' organizations that are financed by or stand under the controlling influence of the employer side.
From the answer, it is not possible to discern how the government views the development in connection with the resolutions and recommendations that Sweden has ratified. My question to the Minister for Employment, in view of the answers that have been provided here, is therefore whether Sweden's obligations due to the ratified provisions make the Minister for Employment see reason to act.
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! Let me first, for the sake of safety, repeat that I and the government stand behind the Swedish model. Strong and independent workers' and employers' organizations are fundamental to that model, and we stand behind it. We have one of the highest union membership rates in the world, which demonstrates a great trust in the unions' work.
As the interpellor has pointed out, workers' right to organize has been relevant for a long time. Already in 1906, in the so-called December Compromise – which was an agreement between LO and SAF, what is now called Svenskt Näringsliv – the employers committed to respecting workers' right to organize. This model has been very successful for Sweden, and we must nurture and protect it.
That we have independent workers' organizations is important so that workers can receive a fair and independent representation of their interests towards the employers. Strong and independent unions also contribute to good working conditions for the workers.
Adrian Magnusson argues in his question that it is uncertain whether the creation of yellow trade unions is a beginning trend on the Swedish labor market. I have no data that the phenomenon is increasing, and I believe it is difficult for both myself and Adrian Magnusson to answer whether it is a trend or not. From time to time, situations have probably occurred where it has been questioned whether an association calling itself a trade union or a labor union is truly an employee organization that protects the interests of employees.
It was interesting that Adrian Magnusson raised the case from 2024 where the legislation was tested, if I understood it all correctly, and that the court then decided the issue by stating that it did not involve a trade union in the meaning of the law. I will not, cannot and may not comment on individual cases, but I expect that the example that has been raised here, if it is as Adrian Magnusson describes it, will certainly be tested in accordance with the legislation we have.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you to the Minister for Employment for the answer! I expected nothing else, but I am pleased to hear that there is continued solid and strong support for the Swedish model. It is always gratifying when one receives that type of confirmation that the Swedish model is worth protecting and defending.
Now, it is still the case that the Swedish model is under some pressure. I want to assert that. There are a number of actors challenging the Swedish model – not least through the self-employment phenomena that are spreading. People would rather not classify individuals as employees, but instead want to see them as contractors.
Regarding the growing platform economy mentioned in the government's response, there is an investigation looking at how to implement the platform directive. It is also a phenomenon that is putting pressure on the Swedish model.
When one sees that pressure is being exerted from different sides, one can – regardless of whether it is a trend or not – feel some concern that the Swedish model is being put under pressure. This also applies when this type of yellow unions are being created, according to the union Transport and other unions. I did not say that in my first post, but even unions such as Unionen and Journalistförbundet have expressed their strong criticism of this phenomenon and the newly formed union that was reported on earlier this week.
I perceive that the Minister agrees that it is fundamental in the Swedish labor market that we have trade unions that truly respect the employees' interests and that are clearly decoupled from the employers' authority and financial influence.
If we get an arrangement where this type of trade union spreads itself across the Swedish labor market, it will weaken the Swedish model. It is quite obvious. If we suddenly have a system where one side loses credibility because it is considered to stand on the same side as the employer, it will damage the Swedish model and noticeably weaken the parties' position. I would like to assert that it applies in both directions.
It can also lead to extensive dumping of conditions. If we get a situation where more and more yellow unions arise, it could mean that certain employers see a chance to dump conditions on the labor market. It is a problem.
The state, the government, and the Riksdag hold the legislative power and become a natural part of the Swedish model, even if they do not regulate working conditions in detail. The state also has a role to play in the Swedish model. It is important.
Another thing one can consider, and which I do not know if I will receive any answer to here today, is whether the Minister sees some kind of outer limit for when the government should act. The question of legislation aimed at somehow clarifying what yellow unions are occurs in some sense in the legal doctrine. I am thinking primarily of the legislative changes in 2019.
Among other things, the labor law researchers Niklas Selberg and Erik Sjödin have suggested that the provision in 6 § of the Co-determination Act should be clarified and defined through legislation. There, for example, it is described what is meant by an employee organization.
The courts have so far – in this case 2024 – made an interpretation of the legislation that ensures workers' interests are broadly protected. But we cannot see into the future.
My main question is whether the Minister sees a scenario ahead where it could become relevant for the government, and subsequently the legislature in the form of the Riksdag, to take action.
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! I will keep it quite brief. If we start with what Adrian Magnusson raised regarding the changes that occurred in 2019, those changes to the right to strike were made under the previous Social Democratic government. No work is being undertaken to change this regulatory framework.
One must remember that the changes implemented then serve an important purpose, namely to try to strengthen the peace-creating function of collective agreements. I know that the boundary for the creation of so-called yellow unions is discussed in this context.
I note that it is in everyone's interest – it concerns both the parties, the government, and society at large – that employer-controlled trade unions do not exist on the Swedish labor market.
Adrian Magnusson (S)
Madam Speaker! I am very pleased that the Minister for Employment is so clear that employer-controlled trade unions are a phenomenon that should not occur on the Swedish labor market. We are in complete agreement on this.
I hope that we do not see a development where employer-controlled trade unions spread across the Swedish labor market. As I have stated previously, I believe that this is deeply harmful to the Swedish labor market model and to the interests of Swedish wage earners. It would seriously damage a model that evokes admiration around the world if we were to see that this is an emerging trend and that it is spreading.
Even though the Minister in his previous contribution said that we have a high degree of organization in the Swedish labor market, this occurs in a sector where we do not have it. Self-employed platform workers are in a sector where collective agreement coverage is very low. It lies, in some way, in the nature of the matter.
If we see that this spreads, we will have reason to return to this issue here in the chamber. I am completely convinced of that. In that case, I will interpellate again – with pleasure, I was about to say. It is, however, my hope that we will not have to worry about this spreading.
Given the statements that have been made in the media by these representatives recently, I feel some concern that there is a risk that this is a beginning trend. It is, however, my quiet hope that it is not so.
Arbetsmarknadsministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! In order for us to have the processes clear for us, I just want to repeat that in the Co-determination Act there is a definition of what an employee organization is. It is ultimately a court that decides how that law shall be applied in an individual case. I can therefore not say anything about the examples or the example that has been raised here today, but I want to thank Adrian Magnusson for the question. I state again that the Swedish labor market model, on both the employer and employee side, shall be characterized by strong, independent organizations.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.