The proposals for industrial democracy did not lead to any legislation, and the Social Democratic members of parliament did not commence a struggle in this issue.532 The debate around the proposals, however, can be said to have deepened the discussion that developed before the proposed bills of 1910 and1911 where the employers had justified their prerogatives with reference to a fair distribution of risks, natural rights and society’s need for profitable businesses.The arguments returned in the parliamentary debate when confronted with the 1928 proposed bill on collective agreements and the establishment of a labour court.Would history repeat itself from the proposed bills of 1910 and1911 and would the proposed bills be defeated this time as well? During the years 1926-28, the temperature rose in the parliamentary debate on labour law, and the work on legislation was hastened. In January 1926, the Social Democratic minister of social affairs, Gustav Möller appointed a special delegation to further investigate certain issues of labour law.Among them was whether legislation ought to consolidate the “actual legal situation that has developed over time between the systems of the workers and employers regarding associations, negotiations and agreements”. He had previously argued many times that legislation on mandatory arbitration in legal disputes would be desirable in order to protect the important societal interest to create peace on the labour market.533 The Liberals Carl Gustaf Ekman (1875-1945) and Eliel Löfgren argued along similar lines, but with stronger demands for speedy legislation.They stated that industrial actions on the labour market not only damaged the parties involved but also society p a r t i v, c h a p t e r 9 264 532 Tingsten 1941, pp. 241 ff, 297 ff; Lundh 1982, p. 23; Lundh 1987, pp 368-371. 533 LU2 1926:18, pp. 9-10; Göransson 1988, pp. 204, 226. 9. 6 l i be rals urge labour law leg i slat ion 1926-1928
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=