Fundamental rights related to social partners

The participants agreed that the exceptional Swedish model for social dialogue was working very well and should be maintained. The state provided a legislative framework in the form of labour laws for this model, but they were not allowed to interfere in wage-setting. Social partners could be involved in discussing new legislation via expert groups or consultations with the authorities and in some cases, they could deviate from existing legislation through collective agreements. According to participants in that session, such involvement was crucial for maintaining the 'Swedish model'.

Participants explained that Swedish society was highly unionised, with a large network of unions establishing close contact with workers. Participants explained that the right to strike would not apply when a collective agreement wasin place.

Participants expressed concern over the EU Directive on minimum wages. The social partners clearly stressed that they needed to keep the ability to regulate wagesthrough collective bargaining, without which they believed that the 'Swedish model' would collapse.

One participant explained that there was a strong protection of consumer rights in Swedish law, but that enforcement and awareness of these laws was lacking. It was also explained that the Swedish authorities provided financial contributions to Swedish consumers to pay household bills, but it was unclear if, when and how any further contributions would be made during the current energy crisis.

Work-related crime – namely fraud, rule violations and crime in working life – wasraised as an issue as it could happen despite collective agreements being in place. It was explained that regional safety representatives, appointed by the trade unions, supervised safety measures in place at different 2/5 workplaces. Worry over the Swedish authorities possibly removing and/or weakening these representativesin the future was voiced.