[ad_1]
“We were incredibly close,” LO president Susanna Gideonsson told DN last night after negotiations broke down.
If the parties are unable to resume them but actually give way to the politician, the consequences could be dramatic.
one. The Swedish model is under threat, where the social partners in free negotiations determine wages and conditions in the labor market. In Brussels, the EU is currently discussing a European minimum wage, and the Swedish government is fighting for an exemption. The reason is our labor market model, which leaves the responsibility for salary training to the parties. It is considered to have reduced the number of strikes and disputes in the Swedish labor market.
If now the parties in this case do not take responsibility and despite many long attempts to redo the feat of 1938 when the Saltsjöbad agreement was signed, the model is undermined.
Such trends have already existed. For example, the government lobbied for a salary increase for teachers after taking office in 2014, and now there are several parties that want to increase police salaries politically.
The main agreement, negotiated by LO, the private employee bargaining cartel PTK and the Confederation of Swedish Companies, was intended to contain three parts: job protection, support for those needing to change jobs, and unemployment insurance under the auspices of the parts.
Now this is raised to the government and parliament. A full research proposal on labor law is expected, one that LO in particular strongly disapproves of.
two January collaboration can be broken. Liberals remain in collaboration like a loose tooth in a six-year-old. The party leader Nyamko Sabuni criticizes the recurring and questions its future.
Now the four parties to the cooperation will present a proposal for the liberalization of labor law. For the Center Party and the Liberals, it is important that it is precisely the latest investigation in its current form that is presented, with new exceptions in the priority rules.
C and L refer to the January agreement, which states that if the parties do not agree, the government will implement the research proposal.
But it is also stated in the agreement that all changes in the law must take place so that “a fundamental balance is maintained between the social partners”.
The latter took as entry the Minister of Labor Eva Nordmark (S) to reject the research proposal presented in June. “It’s a strong pro-employer bias,” Eva Nordmark said at the time.
Now he expects a battle between the January parties in which C and L will demand that the investigation be presented exactly as is, while S will try to improve it for employees. LO strongly pressures S not to accept the current proposal. If the government still fulfills its cooperation parts, it threatens a crisis in the relationship between S and LO. The links between them are important both for the identity and for the finances of the party.
If the government refuses to submit the research proposal, it instead threatens a crisis in January cooperation, which could lead to the defection of the Liberals.
3 Government crisis. The Left Party has promised to do everything possible to overthrow the government if it presents the investigation proposal. “The attitude and promises of the Left Party are firm. Stefan Löfven cannot remain prime minister if he intends to present the latest investigation proposal that would break job security for all employees in Sweden,” wrote the party leader Jonas Sjöstedt on Twitter this morning.
But it is not clear whether the Left Party will take over from the moderates, the Christian Democrats and the Swedish Democrats. The parties have different interests in this.
The moderates want a liberalization of labor law, and business organizations appear to be pushing for it. At the same time, the party wants to get rid of Löfven and take over the power of the government.
It is the opposite of what the Left Party wants. Sjöstedt’s goal is to stop the change in labor law and keep Stefan Löfven as prime minister.
It may well end in a government crisis, but the result is not obvious. The first step is for the Left Party to collect the votes of the moderates and Christian Democrats to generate a vote of no confidence, its own parliamentary mandate is not sufficient for such a vote.
Hans Strandberg: an outcome that all parties wanted to avoid
