SAK claims Supreme Court plays increasingly political role

Download article in original language : FI9808173NFI.DOC

In August 1998, a SAK department head expressed concern about recent controversial Supreme Court decisions, including one concerning the employer's liability to compensate in a case of illegal redundancy.

Kirsti Palanko-Laaka, a department head at the Central Organisation of Finnish Trade Unions (Suomen Ammattiliittojen Keskusjärjestö, SAK), has expressed concern about Supreme Court decisions in disputes between the employer and the employee. She stated on 16 August 1998, at a seminar organised by the organisation of Finnish Democratic Lawyers, that the Supreme Court has filled the "power vacuum" in many recent decisions, typified by rulings in favour of changes in established practice to the detriment of the employees.

"As an example, the Supreme Court lowered indemnification liability considerably in a case of illegal redundancy. In another decision, the Court unilaterally lowered the employee's salary from what had been agreed upon. This is occurring at a time when organisations for small and medium-sized businesses are demanding dissolution of labour legislation in order to create jobs," she stated.

According to Ms Palanko-Laaka, the Supreme Court has been deliberately changing practices it had been following for decades. "In the light of Supreme Court decisions, the principle of protecting the employee, the basis for labour legislation, is not being realised. The Supreme Court does not presently have the trust it should have among wage earners as well. The political role of the Supreme Court must be put to an open social debate," she demanded.

Ms Palanko-Laaka also criticises the tripartite preparation of labour laws. In her view it has become more difficult in the political climate of the 1990s to pass legislation for labour reforms benefiting employees: "It seems that in a consensus society it is virtually impossible to put into effect legislative reforms for even those employees in the weakest position. Reforms have been realised only when the social partners have been able to reach common agreement. Even well-grounded reforms in labour legislation have come to a halt."