p a r t i v, c h a p t e r 9 230 Furthermore, the employers aimed at maintaining a far-reaching right to use sympathy actions even when a labour agreement was still in force.466 In the light of the numerous and expensive work stoppages during the 1920s, the idea grew that legislation on mandatory arbitration was necessary. Furthermore, the workers had been considerably more willing to join a trade union.After a decline in the wake of the unsuccessful general strike of 1909, the number of union members increased.At the end of the 1920s, membership was around half a million workers.467 More and more demands were being made for a legal means that could regulate the contract of services as well as maintain industrial peace.468 As we have seen, the employers and the right-wing groups had changed their view on collectivist solutions from one of toleration, to recognition, and ultimately to efforts to integrate the organisations into the legal system.Around the turn of the century in 1900, the state and the employers had regarded the collective agreement as a feared weapon in the hands of the working masses.At the middle of the 1920s, it was appreciated as a means that could satisfy the employers’ need for a flexible workforce and a predictable system of production.This change of position was commented on by Birger Ekeberg (1880-1968) when he taught law at the Stockholm Faculty of Law in 1925: 466 The distinction between disputes of interests and legal disputes (disputes of rights) is discussed by Fahlbeck 2002, p. 125. 467 Westerståhl 1945, p. 31; Schiller 1974, pp. 316 ff. 468 Göransson 1988, pp. 210-227. 469 “Nu ser man stundom att rollerna är ombytta. De, som tillhöra den sida, där man förut reagerat mot kollektivavtalet, hålla nu starkt på att kollektivavtalet upprätthålles, för att det icke skall bliva fullkomlig anarki på arbetsmarknaden, vartill t. ex. tendenser varit synliga här i Stockholm.” Ekeberg 1925, pp. 248-249. “Today, one sometimes notices that the tables are turned.Those who belonged to the side where people were previously against the collective agreement now strongly support the collective agreement being maintained in order to prevent complete anarchy from emerging on the labour market, tendencies of which have been visible for example here in Stockholm.”469
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=