According to the employer, Saco-S has not used the time that has been allocated for trade union work. This includes time dedicated to university board meetings, dialogue meetings with departments and operational support functions, as well as the university’s strategy days. The University of Skövde has therefore concluded that the current amount of paid working time allocated to such work does not reflect the time actually needed. A new collective agreement will now be negotiated during the three-month notice period, and this may result in the local Saco-S and OFR-S associations having different agreement terms. The current agreement will remain in force until 7 December.
Mikael Brisslert, a national officer at SULF, says he is both surprised and disappointed by the termination of the collective agreement. He calls the situation extremely unfortunate.
“The employer has made an assessment of our work and our priorities and is telling us what we should be doing during our allocated union hours,” he says. “That is unacceptable. Obviously we should try to attend all meetings that we are invited to and do as much as we can. But sometimes we need to prioritise our members. We’ve been saying for quite some time that we don’t have enough time available, and then they terminate the agreement because they think we have too much time and aren’t doing what we’re supposed to during the time allocated to our trade union work.”
Meanwhile, Angelica Lindlöf, a Saco-S representative at the University of Skövde, says that the local association is engaged in a constructive dialogue and process with the employer, but that following the major restructuring process at the university, they have not had enough allotted time to fulfil certain obligations.
“What the employer claims, that we have not carried out our duties, is not correct,” she says. “We’ve had to reprioritise and haven’t been able to attend certain meetings or carry out our duties. That was why the agreement was terminated.”
The aim is to put in place a more general agreement with less specific wording regarding duties and obligations. The workload for union representatives varies both throughout the year and from year to year. She believes that the previous agreement was too specific and that the reorganisation process has meant that the local Saco-S association has had to focus heavily on member issues.
“We want to have a constructive dialogue with the employer and don’t want to make the situation worse,” she continues. “Our hope is that drawing up a new agreement will be a relatively swift process.”
Mikael Brisslert says that what is happening in Skövde is damaging trust between the local trade union associations and the employer. He believes that what he calls an attack on the Swedish model is part of increasingly common trend.
“We’re seeing our local union representatives coming under quite a lot of pressure in the workplace. Because we stand up for the Swedish model and we value and safeguard labour law. The whole trade union climate has become harsher, with employers wanting to manage and organise work down to the smallest detail and then ignore the collective agreements and laws that are in place. It’s essential that we’re given the time we actually need to carry out our trade union duties and that we’re free to manage that time ourselves.”
Ulrika Dagman, Director of Human Resources at the University of Skövde, explains that they have had a local collective agreement that does not really reflect reality “for quite some time”. She tells Universitetsläraren that she has discussed this with the local Saco-S association several times, pointing out that the employer would like the union representatives to attend board and dialogue meetings, meetings that she describes as both forward-looking and important for relationship-building.
She emphasises that the University of Skövde wants, as she puts it, an agreement that reflects the reality of both parties. She has not experienced either outrage or disappointment from the local trade union association’s side and feels that they have had two very constructive meetings since the employer terminated the agreement.
“My impression is that we’ve had a positive dialogue,” says Dagman, “and we’ve been able to discuss these issues when we meet. We don’t want to dictate what work they do. We want an agreement that works for both sides.”
