What practical consequences resulted, according to Winroth himself, from applying this method? Like Schrevelius 30 years previously,Winroth was remarkably vague. It is true, as we have already noted, that he asserted that the worker’s open-ended duty of obedience and loyalty was both a legal prerequisite and a consequence of a master-servant relationship as well as of many free labour contracts. In support of his own opinions and established custom, in the form of a couple of decisions by the Svea Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court, Winroth exemplified what other “natural” parts from the masterservant relationship that ought to be applied to adjoining areas of law. For example, a master was entitled to transfer to another person his right to disposal, which meant that an employee was obliged to remain in service if a new master replaced the original one.The master was also entitled to reduce the servant’s salary, if the servant was negligent.244 Of special interest are the master-servant rules thatWinroth did not consider as natural. He discarded several sanctions that were prescribed in criminal law and police law legislation, such as penalties, the capturing of escaped workers and the employer’s duty to write a testimonial.245 This decreased control was partly balanced by decreased protection. He was considerably indistinct whether an employee should have the same protection of employment as an ordinary servant.246 He paid no attention at all to an issue which had bothered several other Swedish scholars, namely if the employer ought to remunerate the worker in case of the latter’s illness.247 Furthermore,Winroth used several pages of his analysis to explain why the servant no longer ought to be guaranteed seven c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n t r ac t 115 så torde man till denna del böra taga sin tillflykt till de rättsgrundsatser, som i allmänhet gälla inom obligationsrätten och för tjensteaftal.”Winroth 1878, p. 10. See also “efter läglighet hålla sig till legohjonsaftalets regler för tjänstelegans del ”,Winroth 1912, p. 54. 244 Winroth 1878, p. 10, p.V, fn 22. 245 Winroth 1878, pp. 118, 119, 138, XLI, fn 459. 246 Winroth 1878, p. 10 and p.V, fn 22. 247 Ref. NJA1875, p. 421.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=