[WSF-Discuss] Feminism is part of the class struggle, by Kvinnopolitiskt forum

Reinhard HELMERS reinhard.helmers at e-bostad.net
Wed Mar 18 18:51:03 UCT 2009



		EUROPEAN UNION and DISCRIMINATION
			in LABOUR  RELATIONS

     1 January 2001 the Swedish Government took 
the Presidency of the EU Council of Ministers. At 
this occasion, they arranged two conferences in 
Sweden. That one in Malmö, "WORK LIFE 2000", 22 - 
24 January 2001, was run by the Government agency 
"National Institute for Working Life" and most of 
the speaches were made by its officials. Mrs Anna 
Diamantopoulou, the EU-Commissionary responsible 
for Labour Relations participated in the meeting. 
According to the news, the Swedish Government are 
trying to introduce Swedish Labour Law into the 
EU. Their intention is a good reason to review 
essential parts of Swedish Labour Law:

  According to the attached report, this 
Government are systematically obstructing both 
the binding Directives of this very Council of 
Ministers concerning the forbidden discrimination 
and the ruling Community Law, now for years. 
While the ruling parties call themselves 
'feminists' and run propaganda against 
xenophobia, their Government are conducting 
salary discrimination against women and employees 
with foreign origin.

The EC-Commission connives at these violations of 
the Labour Law of the European Union and 
contrary to articles 155 and 169 of the EC-Treaty 
prevents the Directives of the Council of 
Ministers concerning the ban of  discrimination 
to become effective. Instead the EC-Commission 
tries "off the records" to make the arbitrary 
salary discrimination of the 'New Swedish Model' 
binding the entire EU.
Obviously, the rights of all employees of the EU 
("Equal pay for equal work") are in danger - see 
also the provisions of the I.L.O.-Convention.
Consequently, the well established discrimination 
in Swedish labour relations was a forbidden 
subject at the conference in Malmö.

The Art of Legal Misinformation:
How the essential contradictions of Swedish Labour Law
to the Community Law of the European Union are covered up.
by Reinhard Helmers, Lecturer

When Sweden was going to join the EU, the Swedish 
Labour Law had to be adjusted to the rules laid 
down in the Treaty of Rome and several judgements 
of the European Court of Justice concerning 
labour relations. Contrary to the Labour Law of 
continental Europe, Swedish Labour Law is not 
based on the rights of the individual employee, 
the working "citoyen", but presumes the minor 
subjects without judicial capacity. Legal party 
is almost entirely the narrow leadership of each 
union.
Collective contracts or decisions to go on strike 
are never legitimated by democratic decisions or 
polls of the members. Only approximately 5 % of 
the members participate in the elections of their 
leadership, these often already being the 
previous leaders and their close, favoured 
friends. Criticism by individual members is 
effectively suppressed at such meetings and the 
union press is controlled by the leadership. On 
the labour market, the unions possess a monopoly, 
e.g. by controlling the unemployment funds. 
Sweden has no unemployment insurance run by the 
State.

In cases where individual employees are in 
conflict with their employers, the support by the 
union is dependant on the arbitrariness of its 
leaders. They have signed the contracts; the 
individual member is by procedural law 
discriminated against. The Labour Court is 
composed of union leaders and representatives of 
the employers association - a typical corporative 
construction. While the union leadership can 
approach the Labour Court directly, the 
unsupported member must first pass the District 
Court and is charged high legal costs. Such 
members - like unorganised employees - are from 
the beginning stigmatised without a reasonable 
chance of winning in court.
One of the monopolist unions, the  syndicate of 
academicians, SACO, denies its members even the 
protection against notorious violations of Human 
Rights by the State. Members of foreign origin 
cannot expect support from a xenophobian 
leadership.  Employees who are not members of the 
union are not even entitled to claim the 
fulfilment of a contract.
Such conditions on the labour market and in the 
unions favour the  discrimination of minorities, 
such as persons with foreign origin, women, 
dissidents and political nonconformists. In 
reality, a system of "closed shops" with 
integrated discrimination rules the Swedish 
labour market.

  According to the judgement of 25 April 1996 of 
the European Court of Human Rights 
(Gustafsson/Sweden), the Swedish Government 
admitted their severe violation of Community Law 
namely that employees not being union members are 
discriminated in Sweden. The Minister, Björn 
Rosengren, a former white-collar union leader - 
admitted publicly on 25 February 1999 that 
persons  merely with foreign names are 
systematically discriminated against on the 
labour market.

The systematic 'salary discrimination' against 
employees with foreign origin was   investigated 
and proved by sociologist of Stockholm University 
( See Carl le Grand & Ryszard Szulkin: 
'Invandrarnas Löner i Sverige' , Arbetsmarknad & 
Arbetsliv, Nr.2/1999, S.89 - 110).  The Swedish 
news agency TT reports 14/3 2000 from a 
conference in Stockholm that the average salary 
difference for immigrants is about 30 %.

The Swedish press (DN 11.8.97) mentioned an 
OECD-report, according to which the employees in 
Swedish Public Service enjoy the lowest 
employment security of all 15 OECD-States.  85 % 
of all Swedish  public servants as opposed to 24 
% of their Italian colleagues consider their 
employment as insecure. This result reflects the 
ruling arbitrariness in labour relations  and the 
paltriness of the unions as  counterpart to the 
State as employer. 

When negotiating with the EU, the Swedish 
Government, however, pretended that those legal 
conditions against discrimination which are 
stated by Community  Law and the legal provisions 
of the other Members States  were  already 
granted by the unions and did not need to be 
legislated in Sweden. However, this is obviously 
not the case.


Simultaneously with the  negotiations, the 
Government introduced into their Public Service 
the salary discrimination as a Labour Law 
principle which they call fine-spoken an 
"individual salary system". Public Service covers 
about 40% of all employees. The salary 
discrimination permits the superiors to fix 
salaries of their employees on an arbitrary 
basis. The reasons - often libellous - are kept 
secret in order to prevent the employee from 
contesting the discrimination. Its arbitrariness 
makes  discrimination versatile and  covers not 
only females and citizens of other EU-States.
  This discrimination system is perfect: By 
keeping their reasons for discrimination secret, 
the Government and their authorities consider 
themselves safe   from any intervention from the 
European Commission.   '
  The principle of both I.L.O. and the EU, 'Equal 
pay for equal work', is no longer applied in 
Sweden's Public Service. Because the union 
leadership had agreed upon it without asking 
their members, no defence against secret libel 
and the consequent salary discrimination is 
possible. Non-union members are, anyhow, denied 
working contracts and negotiations on their 
salary. Such a dictatorial lowering of salaries 
is a disciplinary punishment without the employee 
being heard. It is a means to enforce conformity 
and surpress criticism.

Obviously for the purpose of creating acceptance 
for this 'Swedish Model' , some publications were 
issued. Three of the authors (Niklas Bruun, 
Anders Kjellberg and Kerstin Ahlberg) are 
affiliated with the Government agency, 'National 
Institute of Working Live' or NIW. One of them, 
Boel Flodgren, is the Government appointed 
President of Lund University with dictatorial 
competence. She was the pioneer in applying the 
salary discrimination  with secret reasons 
against  critical academic teachers as a 
punishment    just when her book was published:

Niklas Bruun, Boel Flodgren and Håkan Hydén: "THE 
NORDIC LABOUR RELATIONS  MODEL", Aldershot 
Dartmouth, 1992.

Anders Kjellberg:  in  "CHANGING INDUSTRIAL 
RELATIONS IN EUROPE", 2nd edition 1998, by 
Anthony Ferner and Richard Hyman. Blackwell 
Publishers Ltd, Oxford. ISBN 0-631-20551-9.
In a further publication, the members of this 
Government agency advocate that these collective 
labour contracts of the monopolistic unions with 
their salary discrimination against both members 
and unorganised employees be declared generally 
binding EU Labour Law  without the discriminated 
persons having any judicial remedy to defend 
themselves.  ( Kerstin Ahlberg and Niklas Bruun: 
"KOLLEKTIVAVTAL  I  EU", Stockholm 1996.)


The salary discrimination as the most 
characteristic achievement of the new 'Swedish 
Model' in labour relations is not mentioned in 
one single word in these publications, which are 
circulated among  European experts in Labour Law. 
This is no accident since the authors are 
familiar with the new model. Further precautions 
were taken to have the new 'Swedish Model' of 
labour law accepted by the EU. The former Swedish 
minister, Allan LARSSON, is responsible for the 
introduction of  salary discrimination  as a 
labour law principle.
The Government managed to get him into the 
EU-Commission. Directly under Commissioner 
Padraig FLYNN,  is he the influential expert in 
forming the EU's policy on Labour Law. He has 
already both concealed and quashed without 
investigation complaints against this violation 
of Community Law by his Government's and by his 
own invention. Mr. Larsson has been mentioned  as 
the successor to Padraig Flynn.


Salary discrimination obviously violates the 
principles of equal pay and treatment for equal 
work. (Art. 100 & 119 Treaty of Rome ). 
Discrimination is forbidden. In order to give 
effect to these provisions, the Council of 
Ministers had issued a repeated number of 
Directives. However, even the way in which 
discrimination is conducted, its secret reasons 
and the denial of remedies against it  are in 
conflict with these binding Directives. 
(75/117/EEC,article10, 10 February 1975; 
76/207/EEC, 79/7/EEC, 86/378/EEC, 86/613/EEC and 
92/85/EEC). These bind any Government to provide 
the discriminated employees with effective 
judicial remedies. The judgement of the European 
Court of Justice (case 248/83, Johnston/Chief 
Constable, 15 MAY 1986, § 18) explains this 
principle with reference to the European 
Convention on Human Rights as the binding base of 
Community Law.

By obstructing the implementation of these 
Directives into national law, the Swedish 
Government allowed themselves to introduce this 
salary discrimination into their entire Public 
Service. Victims remain mostly women and 
employees of foreign origin (EU-citizens). It is 
of course the legal duty of the Commission, in 
accordance with Articles 155 and 169 EX OFFICIO 
to control the implementation of the Directives 
into national law. In his key-position, Mr Allan 
LARSSON, the former responsible minister, 
protected his Government from this compulsory 
implementation from the very beginning.

Thus, the Swedish Government can just ignore the 
Directives of the Council of Ministers for the 
protection of employees against arbitrary 
discrimination in labour relations. The 
EC-Commission, 'Guardian of Community Law' , 
connives at this violation of Community Law. The 
Commission itself therefore violates Articles 155 
and 169 of the EEC-Treaty, according to which it 
has to control the implementation of the 
Directives into Swedish Labour Law. The 
Commission acts as an accomplice.

As a consequence, none of the many victims of 
discrimination has a chance of judicially 
defending himself against discrimination. This 
unlawful discrimination is safeguarded completely 
by a 'denial of justice' and a 'denial of access 
to court'. Although prohibited, this 
discrimination cannot be contested judicially.

Salary discrimination has caused discontent and 
envy instead of co-operation among the employees 
throughout the entire Public Service. Lacking 
co-operation has made the Swedish police 
ineffective in fighting crime. The educational 
crisis at universities and schools is further 
accentuated. The obstruction of the equal pay 
principle and the applicable parts of the 
Community Law of the EU is by the Government and 
its authorities considered as of such importance, 
that they even jeopardise the medical care of the 
citizens. In  public hospitals, they pay newly 
employed nurses up to 2000 SEK(155 £) a month 
more than  skilled nurses who had been employed 
for years.

Here is a recent, significant example. The 
Emergency Neurosurgery Department of the 
University Hospital of Lund is of vital 
importance for accident patients of Southern 
Sweden. Even there, in February 1999, State 
authorities insisted on  salary discrimination 
against those nurses who claimed 'equal pay for 
equal work'. With regard to the working climate 
and the care of the patients, even their 
head-physician had claimed the abolition of 
discrimination. However, the leadership of the 
nurses' union  had, against  the will of their 
members, agreed the discrimination. Therefore, 
the nurses had no access to the Labour Court and 
could only protest by resigning from their 
employment, which 25 of the 45 employed  did. Two 
weeks later, a further 15 of 60 nurses  at the 
intensive section of the same University Hospital 
followed because the politicians refused their 
claims for 'equal pay for equal work'.
  The nurses' protests  are spreading to other 
hospitals in the country. 50 nurses in 
Skellefteå in Northern Sweden resigned recently. 
In the meantime, this conflict has become typical 
for all Swedish hospitals from Luleå in the North 
to Ystad in the South. Patients are suffering 
from lengthening queues for operations. Instead 
of abolishing the salary discrimination, the 
politicians engaged private nurse-agencies with 
up to 3 times the costs of a nurse's salary. 
This was made public in a documentary by the 
Swedish TV on 27 September 1999: 'Revolt of the 
nurses. The nurses' fight for higher salaries - 
without support from their union'.
                                                                 ________

This salary discrimination is even made in 
respect to age and years of service: Older 
employees receive a lower salary than their 
younger colleagues. This variant was recently 
criticised by  the representative of the union of 
academicians SACO, Mr Gunnar Wetterberg 
(Sydsvenskan 28 October 2000). The leadership of 
SACO had from the beginning applauded the 
introduction of the discrimination. Mr Wetterberg 
is afraid that this age-related discrimination 
might on the long run jeopardise the salary 
discrimination defended by his union. During the 
years 1994 - 1999 (since Sweden's joining the 
EC!), the salaries of those up to 39 years old 
were raised with 47,7 %, of those in the range 
40- 65 years  however with only  18,9 %.
The motive for this  discrimination by the public 
employer is obviously the estimation that older 
employees certainly are more skilled and 
experienced than their younger colleagues.   But 
the latter could easily be formed and 
conditioned. Furthermore, the older colleagues 
could scarcely withdraw themselves from 
discrimination by changing the employer.

Long-lasting experience: -  Lower salary !
An example for the arbitrary salary 
discrimination:  At a public medical centre  two 
doctors are working with the same duties.They are 
payed monthly with 45 000: kr for the senior with 
25 years professional experience respectively 
with 60 000:- kr for a newly examined freshman 
("Dagens Nyheter" 3.nov.2000).
What a pitty for the patient, the pupil, the 
citizen, if he(she) is treated by a doctor, a 
nurse  , a teacher, a policeman or a judge whose 
working moral has been destroyed by the arbitrary 
salary discrimination !

While fairy-tales about Sweden's Labour Law are 
circulated among the experts  in Europe, the 
'grey eminence' of the EU-Commission  undermines 
the EU's own provisions on Labour Law by its work 
to have the new 'Swedish Model' accepted for the 
entire EU.
The EU-Commission knows that the xenophobic 
leadership of the unions together with the 
Government cause the discrimination against women 
and citizens of other EU-States.The EU-Commission 
knows that the Swedish Government intentionally 
obstruct the implementation of the Directives 
against discrimination into Swedish Labour Law 
(e.g.75/117/EEC,Art.10, 10. February 1975; 
76/207/EEC, 79/7/EEC, 86/378/EEC, 86/613/EEC and 
92/85/EEC).

Recently, by their decision 14 December 2000, 
-fil no.U2000/2008/UH - , the Government decided 
consequently the ruling Labour Law of the 
European Union and the forbidden discrimination 
to be without relevance to Sweden.

By approving the illegal discrimination, the 
EC-Commission tries to adopt this new 'Swedish 
Model' for the entire European Union. If the 
Swedish Government are permitted to break 
Community Law other Governments will follow.

   Dated 13-04-2000, Fil No. 467/2000/ME, the 
European Ombudsman, as the elected representative 
of the EU-Parliament, declared that he has no 
competence to reprimand the Commission for its 
violation of Articles 155 and 168 because this is 
"no maladministration but a political decision". 
The Council of Ministers seems so far to connive 
at the obstruction of its own, binding Directives 
against discrimination. 

This is a danger to all those European Labour 
Unions, who defend civil rights and the principle 
of 'equal pay for equal 
work'.                                      
The EU-bureaucracy in Brussels must be 
controlled. The Commission itself punished its 
official, van Buitenen, with salary 
discrimination because he had disclosed the 
corruption of the Commission  to the elected 
Parliament !

Reality overrules propaganda.

Both Government's Conferences in January at 
Norrköping and Malmö had the purpose , to 
advertise for the Swedish labour relations as a 
model for the entire EU. Not-with-standing their 
official discrimination, many talks were 
dedicated to the equality of women. Their salary 
discrimination was banned as a tpoic. This 
reminds more of George Orwell's 'equality' than 
of Swedish reality.
Just a week after the mentioned Government's 
Conference in Malmö with the EU-Commissionary 
Anna Diamantopoulou, the conference was overruled 
by reality on the spot: The local newspaper 
"Sydsvenskan" reports 5 February 2001 the salary 
discrimination at the recently State-founded 
Malmö College run by the State : "Women earn on 
an average  4700 SEK (approx. 500 £) the month 
less than men".

Recently, on 23 May 2001, the Labour Court as the 
supreme judicial instance declared in its 
precedent judgement No. 51-01 the EU principle of 
"Equal pay for equal work" and the EU's ban on 
discrimination as less relevant than undefined 
'market forces' assumed to rule even the civil 
service of the State. Unexpectedly, the syndicate 
of academicians SACO, which supports the salary 
discrimination in general, had sued the State on 
behalf of ten socialworkers. Thus, the Labour 
Court agreed upon the Government's salary 
discrimination , violating Community Law of the 
EU. 

See also: 
<http://www.labournet.de/diskussion/gewerkschaft/eurotarif/schweden3.html>
	<http://www.labournet.de/internationales/schweden.html>
                 <http://domino1.edvg.co.at/domdb/oegb/briefe>
       	 <http://www.lomb.cgil.it/rsuibm/fol.htm>
	 <http://fib.se/Swedish_Salary_Discrimination.pdf>
  	 <  http://attac.org/belgique/indexfr.html>
      	 Actualités,  Sweden: Salary dicrimination
      	 <http://simap.eu.int/forumcgi/get/SIMAP/237.html>

         
	 "Swedish Labour Law and European Union": 
        	CONTEMPORARY REVIEW, May 2000, p. 240 - 243

       	 "The Art of Legal Misinformation":
         	The Lundian, International Magazine, Lund, Sept. 2000

  	       "Arbeitsbeziehungen in Schweden - kein Modell für Europa.
         		"express" (Offenbach), Nr.4/2001

     *) Susanne Fransson: "LÖNEDISKRIMINERING"(Diss.) Uppsala 2000, 530 p.
ISBN 91-7678-455-X  with an English summary. In 
details and with amply references the irregular 
salary  discrimination of women on the Swedish 
labour market is described. However, the 
arbitrary salary discrimination in the entire 
Public Service not only touching women is not 
subject of this dissertation. This discrimination 
was introduced when Sweden joined the Community 
Law system of the European Union. For this 
discrimination the Government are directly 
responsible both for having signed the EC-Treaty 
and as the employer. The author shows that the 
Swedish Labour Court obstructs the ruling 
Community Law of the European Union.            

--


--
Reinhard Helmers
Univ.-lektor a.D.
SE-224 65 LUND/Schweden
Tel.: Int.+ 46 46 127833

-- 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openspaceforum.net/pipermail/worldsocialforum-discuss_openspaceforum.net/attachments/20090318/a6223e3b/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the WorldSocialForum-Discuss mailing list