the Workplace is inside in the change processes we only have seen the beginning of. Digitization, robotisering, a weakened fagbevegelse and global competition are some of the key words. It is a political responsibility to steer this development in a manner that protects the rights of employees and at the same time ensuring innovation and competitiveness. To continue to develop such a balance is no easy task, but there are heavy reasons to prioritize such work. The nordic model’s advantages is precisely that it unites the social security and reform.
In this sense are the recent verdict of the Supreme court in the Norwegian case is of considerable interest. The case had its origin in the pilot-the strike in 2015, when the pilots and kabinpersonell failed against their working conditions should be moved from the parent company Norwegian Air Shuttle to various subsidiaries. The employees feared that the organization was a part of utfase employees and rather basing the operation on hiring. Employers have claimed the right to organize the business for what gives the competitive edge.
Employees are required permanent employment in the parent company and won in the district court, but lost in the court of appeal and in the Supreme court. Our supreme court rejected the employee’s legal basis, and stated that the English do not engage in illegal hiring. Yet this is not the last word said in this case. The labour party, SV and Red have already announced that they will take the matter up in Parliament to change the law so that the one who has the real styringsretten also is the employer.
the Background is blue.a. the reasons the Supreme court has given for its decision. The court points out that new ways to organize business activities can challenge the working environment act purpose to ensure safe working conditions. Removal of the employment can actually be.a. have consequences for employees ‘ right to information, collaboration, and empowerment. The supreme court says it must be up to the legislature to decide whether it should be given rules that the trade unions have argued for.
It is a political responsibility whether the law should be changed to that the relationship between employer and employee becomes more clearly defined. Norwegian has responded vigorously to this opportunity and expressed that it is “scandalous” if the politicians do not respect a judgment from the Supreme court. It should not scare anyone. It is Parliament that passes the laws of the land, not the Bjørn Kjos and the other owners in English. Here there is a clear need for reform.