A better collective agreement did not cover employee

For about a month, a traffic warden on a part-time contract was guiding construction vehicles from the street to a construction site in Stockholm. He had only spent two days on the site as part of his training. 

Upon termination, the question was whether he should have had full-time employment with corresponding salary and benefits in accordance with the “Construction Agreement” through an accession agreement. Instead, he had been part-time under the “Transport Agreement”, which the company was also covered by because of another accession agreement.

The Labour Court concluded that traffic wardens are covered by the Transport Agreement, not the Construction Agreement. The Construction Agreement did not mention traffic wardens, which had never historically been covered. Traffic warden tasks did not have a natural connection with the Construction Agreement. The fact that the employee had spent two days at the construction site did not change the assessment.

IUNO’s opinion

Managing multiple collective agreements within the same workplace can be complex. To reduce the risk of disputes over salary, benefits, or other special terms, it's essential to clearly define which positions fall under each agreement.

IUNO recommends that companies operating under multiple collective agreements, including because of accession agreements, proactively clarify the scope. Breach of an agreement can trigger economic compensation and general damages.

[The Labour Court’s decision of 2 April 2025 in case no 17/25]