faire via interventionism to corporatism.The legal regulation of the worker’s obligations shifted from a position partly within the public law’s legislation on the duty to work, punishment, fines and administrative means of force, to a position purely of private law and legally binding collective agreements, damages, cancellation, dismissal, mandatory arbitration and a statutory fixed industrial peace obligation. However, when looking at the emergence of the Swedish labour law, the meaning of “integration” appears to be problematic in at least three senses. First, was it, or was it not, an integration against the will of those integrated? The Swedish labour movement’s strong resistance to a regulation of the contract of employment was partly a result of the late introduction of universal suffrage.As in Great Britain, the industrial revolution and the trade union movement preceded the emergence of democracy. Accordingly, during the first three decades of the 20th century, the labour movement accustomed itself to relying on organisational strength and collective agreements rather than influencing the members of parliament to legislate. In this context, it is worth noting a striking trait in the legislative history of 1905-1928, namely, the continuity which was expressed on several levels. Hjalmar von Sydow, Herman Lindqvist, Arvid Lindman, Assar Åkerman and Eliel Löfgren were active debaters in1905 as well as around1930. von Sydow was even appointed to be a member of the labour court. Gunnar Huss and Henning Elmquist took part in the proposals of 1916 and the draft of 1927. In the latter task they were assisted by Arthur Lindhagen, who was the president of the central Board of Arbitration 1920-28 and who in 1929 became the first president of the labour court to apply the legislative text that he had contributed to formulate in 1927. p a r t i v, c h a p t e r 1 0 320 10. 2. 2 integrat ion and subordinat ion
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=