Response to interpellation 2025/26:347 on educational qualifications for scaffold builders
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
The debate concerns educational certificates for scaffold builders and the employer's responsibility for competence. L emphasizes that the employer is legally responsible for ensuring that employees have the correct education 1 and that the government has implemented reforms against crime in the workplace 2. L argues that Arbetsmiljöverket has received increased funding to tighten controls 3 2. S stands behind agency cooperation and the employer's responsibility 4, but argues that the Minister is disrespectful and neglects the issue by not taking measures to ensure the quality of the education 4 5 6. S demands binding rules for training within high-risk jobs with requirements for practical experience 7. SD argues that the profession is being devalued through the concept of educational certificates 8 and wants to combat cheating as well as illegal labor immigration 9.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Madam Speaker! Sofia Amloh has asked me if I intend to take measures to ensure that educational certificates via rapid web-based courses, which today can provide certificates for many risky work tasks on construction sites, shall include practical components. I would like to begin by thanking the interpellor for the question.
According to the Work Environment Act (1977:1160) and the Swedish Work Environment Authority's regulations, it is the employer who must ensure that employees have training at the level required for the work tasks. During the mandate period, the Government has taken a number of measures to address unscrupulous employers who do not follow applicable laws and regulations. I would particularly like to emphasize the improved opportunities to share information between authorities, increased resources for the Swedish Work Environment Authority, as well as the extended and reinforced mandate regarding inter-agency cooperation against crime in the workplace (A2024/01109).
The Swedish Work Environment Authority participates in and coordinates the work against crime in the workplace. The authority has been tasked with carrying out development work for a more accurate and risk-based supervision.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Madam Speaker! This so-called answer from the Minister for Employment is a textbook example of a non-answer. There was nothing in what we heard that answers the question I have asked.
Today, one can complete a web-based training where one can sit at a computer and answer questions. If one answers the questions incorrectly, one can answer several times to get the correct answer. After that, one can receive a certificate, a training certificate that one can perform risky work within the construction industry – without any practical components at all to ensure that one has the skills required during the actual execution.
In this case, we have raised the issue of erecting scaffolding at several meters high. We know that some of the most serious workplace accidents in the construction industry are fall and crushing accidents.
In the response from the Minister that we have just heard, there are several parts that are absolutely good – those concerning the exchange of information, agency cooperation against crime in the workplace, and the employer's responsibility for the employee's skills regarding the performance of work tasks. But no answer was given regarding whether one receives a certificate of education for carrying out risk elements at the workplace. Nothing was said about that.
This is not an answer, Minister. It is not an answer, Madam Speaker. It describes a lot of other good things being done, but it is not an answer.
When conducting inspections at workplaces, one looks, among other things, at whether there is a certificate of training. So one sees that there is a certificate – good. Then the holder has probably received a certificate to perform these work tasks. But still, nothing is said about this.
My question to the Minister remains: Are you planning to take any measures to ensure, among other things, that practical elements are included so that there is competence to perform this type of risk-related task in a workplace? And if you do not plan to take any measures to ensure that these training certificates actually prove that the holder possesses these skills, I ask: Why do you not plan to take any measures?
Magnus Persson (SD)
Madam Speaker! I also reacted when I read the article in Byggnadsarbetaren. I stand behind the criticism that Sofia Amloh puts forward regarding the setup concerning these educations, which are appearing everywhere within several occupational categories. It is not good.
Here, the Swedish Work Environment Authority has a great responsibility, which I expect them to take. I know that it is being looked into, as the criticism against these trainings has been very extensive.
What I strongly oppose, Madam Speaker, is that the interpellator speaks of "educational certificates for scaffold builders," which I consider to be a rather significant devaluation of the profession I have belonged to for 26 years and am still an active part of.
One does not become a scaffold builder through a morning course that provides qualification, Madam Speaker. To obtain a professional certificate, a long and solid education is required, which includes several components, for example, upper secondary education via the construction and civil engineering program with the specialization scaffold builder, followed by 30 months of qualification time as an apprentice employed in a scaffolding company, alternatively adult education (komvux) or labor market training with the specialization scaffold builder for approximately 12 months, followed by 30 months of qualification time as an apprentice employed in a company. We also have the traditional apprenticeship training as a company apprentice with approximately 12 months of basic training with theory and practice according to established industry requirements, followed by 30 months of qualification time in the form of continued employment in the relevant scaffolding company. In all cases, the qualification time takes place under the supervision of scaffold builders with a professional certificate, this already during the basic training.
The differences between a short qualification course and a full vocational education are therefore significant. Against that background, the phrasing "educational certificate for scaffold builders" can be perceived as reducing and devaluing the competence of the profession.
What the reporter in the report in question received was authorization according to the Swedish Work Environment Authority's regulations. That is where the problem lies. She definitely did not become a scaffolding builder. After the article, the criticism has been extensive, both from former colleagues, serious companies, and industry organizations, as it is believed that the image of the profession being painted is completely incorrect.
Yes, the profession can be dangerous, but for the most part, it does not depend on the trained scaffold builder but on other conditions. After all my years in the profession, I have seen that the incidents that have occurred, some with very serious consequences, for the most part depended on untrained persons, often from completely different professional groups, having interfered with the constructions, which created a dangerous working environment both for them themselves and for the scaffold builders.
Madam Speaker! I wish that Sofia Amloh and the Social Democrats' enthusiasm for the scaffold builders had started a bit earlier, as it is one of the professional groups within the construction sector that has been hit hardest by the revolving doors that previous governments have had regarding the immigration of labor. Both illegal and unskilled labor have contributed significantly to the scaffolding industry receiving the bad reputation that has been built up over a long period, with insecure workplaces and wage dumping as a result.
But I am very pleased, Madam Speaker, that we are raising the issue here today and that we can debate it. It clearly shows that there is work to be done within the Swedish construction industry, not just within the scaffolding industry. But the scaffold builders are a professional group that definitely deserves a better reputation than the one it has today.
Leif Nysmed (S)
Mr. Speaker! Thank you, Minister for Employment, for the answer! Before I proceed with my speech, I actually want to agree with Magnus Persson regarding the importance of education for all skilled workers within the construction industry. That education is important, and it is important that the industry takes a great responsibility to ensure that there are skilled construction workers of all kinds. The problem is only, as Magnus mentioned, that it works where there are serious companies. Here, however, it is opened up for the unserious entrepreneurs. That is what we are discussing today.
I agree with Magnus Persson that it is extremely important that we highlight all working professionals and stand on their side. We must ensure that our apprentices get employment when they complete the construction program – not as it is today, where it is only about 10 percent of the construction graduates who go out from the construction program. It is a betrayal of them. But that is another debate.
This debate is about how one is finished with the course, a general scaffolding training for two–nine meters, after only three hours in front of the computer. I am not saying that one becomes a scaffolder for that, but one receives a certificate that opens doors. One does not even need to get up from the sofa, it is described in the article. It requires essentially zero prior knowledge to pass the course in general scaffolding training.
Just as Magnus told, scaffolding construction is risky, mostly because one does not have a correct education. The employer has hired people off the street in an unprofessional manner. We are, as said, several in this chamber who can attest to that. I am myself an old construction worker, which the Minister for Employment knows from previous debates.
In theory, a person other than the one sitting in front of the computer could complete the training, even if BankID or another certification is used. That is because it is nothing that is checked.
This is problematic. The CEO of the contracting company Plus Montage says that they would never accept this education when they hire people. But she emphasizes that it is far too many unserious companies that thumb their noses at exactly what concerns the education. It is a catastrophe.
Often scaffolding is built incorrectly due to lack of knowledge and poor execution, and sometimes serious companies have to step in and rectify the whole thing, often after an accident has occurred.
What worries me most is that the minister even refuses Byggnadsarbetaren an interview. Instead, you send messages from the department stating that you do not intend to change the regulations, and in the response, the minister refers to the employers' responsibility and the administrative work.
Of course, the serious employers take their responsibility. It is the unserious ones we are talking about. At the migration agency, they perhaps do not work as much with auditing the certificates that have been issued, but they look more at this issue with illegal labor, as Magnus also pointed out. They devote a lot of time and effort to that.
When Arbetsmiljöverket conducts inspections, their focus lies primarily on the acute risks: fall risks, dust, or dangerous work elements. Verification of training certificates does not occur. If certificates exist, the requirement is considered met in the normal case, from their perspective. There is a lack of time, and there is a shortage of work environment inspectors who can undertake this.
There is a request from the industry for clearer and more binding rules for training within high-risk jobs, with requirements for practical training and independent knowledge tests.
Is the Minister prepared to introduce clearer and more binding rules for training for high-risk jobs? That is my question.
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! There is much in what has been raised in the discussion by both Sofia Amloh, Leif Nysmed, and Magnus Persson. I think that the latest submission and the testimonies regarding how the industry functions strengthen my conviction that we have a problem with unprofessional companies.
Then I still want to ask the question: Does Sofia Amloh or anyone else in this chamber think that we should change the regulatory framework so that it is no longer the employer who has the responsibility to ensure that the employees have the right competence to perform their work in a safe manner? That would be a completely different way to handle the issue. Then the follow-up question is: Who will then be responsible for it?
Let me nevertheless say something about what we are doing against unscrupulous entrepreneurs and crime in the labor market. The Government has taken a number of measures to address the problems that unscrupulous employers cause, because they do not follow laws and regulations. We ensure that it is easier to share information between authorities to conduct joint authority inspections. We have removed a number of confidentiality barriers. That is very important. Then, one might not check the validity of certificates or whether it is the right person who is at a workplace, but that is how we discover unscrupulous companies.
Unserious companies that are active in, for example, the construction industry and do not take the responsibility they have as employers surely also have other problems. We are making budget investments to strengthen the justice system. We have extended and reinforced the mandate regarding the akrimcenter and a lasting agency cooperation against crime against the working life until December 31, 2026.
We have also received the final report from the delegation against crime in the workplace, which is an important knowledge base for agency cooperation where the construction industry has been specifically studied as a branch of industry with a high risk of crime in the workplace.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Mr. Speaker! I want to first say that a background to this debate is that there are several occupations within the construction industry that are extremely important. It is important work that must be done to ensure that our construction sites are safe. It is never about in any way diminishing different categories within the construction industry. On the contrary, it is about strengthening the industry so that it becomes safe for everyone who is there.
Of course, a number of educations, experiences, and apprenticeship opportunities are required in order to be able to obtain the professional competence that is required. There is nothing in this debate that is about cracking down on the industry or on those who work within it.
I just want to clarify, regarding what Magnus Persson from Sverigedemokraterna said, that it was Sverigedemokraterna together with the government that laid down the investigation on means-tested labor immigration. The government did that directly when they took office. It was very unfortunate, because it would have been very useful to take measures based on that to deal with unserious actors in, among other things, this industry.
But let me return to the question that it all revolves around, which we still have not received any answer to. Will the Minister for Employment do something – does he intend to take any action – to ensure that the educations that issue certificates also live up to what one needs to be able to do? I agree with everything that has been said in the answer regarding the employer's responsibility, the need for agency cooperation, and other things. Much of this has been supported and also initiated by the Social Democrats. It is therefore not there that there are differences of opinion.
But the Minister is in the chamber today because he has chosen not to answer the newspaper Byggnadsarbetaren regarding the review of web courses that the newspaper has conducted. I think it is disrespectful. When the newspaper does that type of serious review in order to get to the bottom of this and serves it in the newspaper, we also need to take it to heart: Something perhaps needs to be done.
Here, the Minister has actively chosen not to even answer. It is disrespectful. The Minister needs to answer us in the chamber: Do you intend to take any action, or do you not intend to take action in this matter?
Magnus Persson (SD)
Mr. Speaker! Before I proceed, I would like to remind Sofia Amloh that her party for eight years constantly voted no to state labor market testing. You did this despite going to the election on this in 2014 and 2018. You promised Swedish construction workers that you would introduce state labor market testing, but you reached an agreement with Miljöpartiet on the issue of labor immigration, so you dropped it. I just want us to clear this up before we continue the debate here.
Mr. Speaker! I will not prolong the debate much further, but we see that there is much to be done not only within the scaffolding industry but also within many other industries. What we in politics can do is to clarify the mandate for the Swedish Work Environment Authority and combat fraud and illegal labor immigration while we join forces with the industry organizations, trade unions, and the companies, and they do their jobs.
When it comes primarily to the scaffolding industry, I want to highlight Ställningsföretagen, STIB, an industry organization that works towards the companies with certification and training and which does a very good job for safer workplaces and a safe working environment.
I want to conclude with a message to the scaffolding builders listening to this debate. I know that there are quite a few of you sitting in your offices today, as it has spread in the industry that we would be discussing this. Here is a small message from an old scaffolding builder: It doesn't matter how many training courses you have, if you cannot build Burton, you are not scaffolding builders.
Leif Nysmed (S)
Mr. Speaker! I do not think I am getting any answer from the Minister for Employment regarding how we ensure the quality of education, especially the web-based ones. I asked a direct question. The Minister for Employment has surely read about this in the newspaper Byggnadsarbetaren as well. Since they have been on him, it has surely been raised. If not, one of his staff members should have raised the issue for him.
I would like to have an answer: How do you view this, or are you ignoring it? It was half a year ago that we discussed training regarding asbestos. This question arises time and again when it comes to different types of training. How we ensure order and the working environment at workplaces is important for the safety of construction workers regardless of profession, but also for third parties. Scaffolding can collapse onto public areas. It happens at regular intervals. Asbestos can spread, even in riding stables where those who ride are affected because of people who do not have correct training. These are just a few examples that we have debated here in the chamber.
Doesn't the Minister for Employment see that he has some kind of responsibility to actually move this issue forward? This is also about ensuring that the jobs actually go to those who educate themselves, as we have talked about. Or is it, Magnus? It is they who should have the jobs. It is those who have correct educations who should build the scaffolding and who should remediate the asbestos, no one else. We should not have a lot of fucking fast lanes into the labor market that destroy our Swedish model with the vocational training system.
This undermines this. This is once again a betrayal of the construction industry. We have had four lost years. It is about unemployment, bankruptcies and work environment work – to name a few things.
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! I think it is very good that the discussion we are having today engages so much, because it is about people's safety. It is about those who work with these issues, just as Leif Nysmed pointed out. It is also about the third person.
I perceive that we are in complete agreement that it is the employer who has and shall have the ultimate responsibility for both the preventive work and a safe and secure working environment. We can also note that it is Arbetsmiljöverket that is the national knowledge center for issues regarding the working environment and that it is Arbetsmiljöverket that has the right to issue regulations. The authority also has the right to carry out supervision and inspections, and one must work to ensure that the regulatory framework within the area of activity for which one is responsible is followed.
I do not know if Leif Nysmed has noticed it, but I can mention that the Work Environment Authority in December 2025 was commissioned by the government to ensure that employees have sufficient knowledge to be able to handle asbestos safely.
Arbetsmiljöverket is carrying out ongoing development work that also covers areas other than asbestos, where quality assurance of training is now being highlighted.
Sofia Amloh (S)
Mr. Speaker! We have now debated this issue in the chamber, but we have still not received any answers on what is intended to be done. I note that nothing is intended to be done in this matter – that has become clear. I think it is extremely unfortunate that nothing is being done from the government's side.
I shall be extremely clear, so that I really know that we all have understood what this is about. The Government says that measures are being taken, but they are not measures to resolve this problem.
Mr. Speaker! I will give an example. Let us say that the police stop me for a routine check in traffic – one performs that type of supervision – and ask for my driver's license. I then present my valid driver's license, which is a proof that I am allowed to drive a car.
Now I am not going to simplify the issue, but it still has to do with this. When a certificate is presented during supervision, it is proof that one can perform just this specific work task based on what is intended.
There are no answers from the Minister for Employment. What we hear is that one actually does not intend to take any measures. Not taking measures is actually extremely negligent. Not giving any assignments, not looking further into the issue, and not doing anything is deeply disrespectful. When it comes to this issue for this industry and for people who are extremely important for the country, the Minister for Employment chooses to neglect the issue and look elsewhere instead of answering and giving assignments to resolve this problem. It is unfortunate.
Arbetsmarknadsminister och vikarierande klimat- och miljöministern Johan Britz (L)
Mr. Speaker! Arbetsmiljöverket has received increased appropriations to sharpen and streamline the control of the working environment so that fatal accidents and other serious occupational environment risks can be prevented. In 2025, they received 50 million extra. In 2026, they receive 75 million extra. And from 2027, they receive 100 million more per year.
In addition to the permanent funding of the work that the nine agencies covered by the assignment perform, the government has made several budget investments during this parliamentary term.
It has become clear during this discussion in the chamber that it is largely about unserious companies that do not take their responsibility as employers. The government has implemented far-reaching reforms to address that type of crime in the working life.
We return to the fact that it is the employer who has the ultimate responsibility according to the regulatory framework. I understand that there are no differing opinions on this. It is the employer who must ensure that all employees have sufficient knowledge about the work and the risks in the work so that ill health and accidents can be prevented and a satisfactory working environment can be achieved. It is the employer who must ensure that everyone who assembles, modifies, or dismantles scaffolding has the correct training and sufficient competence. That responsibility shall be taken by the employer.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.