was given the predominant role in the making of the modern contract of employment. This leads us to the third, and most important, problematic aspect, namely what legal consequences followed in practice from the trade unions’“integration” into the legal system and of giving them representation in the labour court in 1928.What was the result of the legally trained judges’ decisive influence? From the Swedish legal history of 1885-1930 we can conclude that it was extremely difficult to use explicit rules for regulating the individual contract of employment or achieving peace on the labour market. The second chamber turned down several bills in 1910-1911, which prescribed that the employer’s section 23 prerogatives should be mandatory terms of each collective agreement or individual contract of employment. Barely more than 20 years later, most of the principal issues were legally regulated.Within a few years, 1929-1934, the labour court had reached conclusions which “interpolated” all of the employer’s section 23 prerogatives, as well as the worker’s right to associate, as natural components of each individual contract of employment as well of each collective agreement.The labour court’s case law of 1929-34 has often been regarded as satisfying most of the employers’ requests.603 At the same time as it recognised the worker’s duty of obedience, it placed a limit to the natural framework of the collective agreement in question. Against this background we can draw a conclusion on the second main issue of part IV.The making of the modern Swedish contract of employment into essentially an authoritative relationship of obedience was closely connected to the system of collective self-regulation. Even if the individual labour relationship was put in the background, established assumptions on this relationship flavoured lawmaking on the collective level.The labour court used “the nature of the collective agreement” to entrust the c o n t i n u i t y a n d c o n t r ac t 323 603 Geijer & Schmidt, 1958, p. 10; Sigeman 1977, p. 206; Sigeman 1984, pp. 880-881; Flodgren 1978, pp. 71, 101, 255; Malmberg 1997, pp. 373-375, 383-385.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjYyNDk=