After several months of strife, the two parties are now in agreement. However, from a trade union perspective, one is not satisfied:
No, I do not think any of our members are, regardless of whether you voted yes or no, says the union's vice chairman Erik Helgeson to TT.
If you are not satisfied now, why was it still a yes after the vote?
I think many, just like the majority of the union board, have experienced that we have become stuck in a frontal confrontation that is locked in by prestige to a great extent. Trying to get out of that situation to get a better negotiating result, I think many will judge that it will take too long.
A mirror lockout
The agreement is the same as the one concluded in May between Sveriges Hamnar and Transportarbetareförbundet, and which resulted in a pay rise according to the mark. From the opposing side, one is critical:
"Now we have, for the fourth time, signed an identical secondary agreement with HF. This after a summer of unnecessary strikes that have caused thousands of lost working days", they write in a press release.
The background to the conflict is the strike notice for the whole country that was issued by Svenska Hamnarbetarförbundet in May to, as they described it, put pressure on the collective agreement negotiations with Sveriges Hamnar.
The employer side chose, however, to respond with a so-called mirror lockout. They have also sued the trade union in the Labor Court and called the counterpart "left-wing union".
Can return
Even if an agreement is now signed, Erik Helgeson sees it as possible that the union's demands will return.
This is not a survival struggle for us. We have room to take a step back and return to the issue during the contract period that comes, he says.
This leads to criticism from Sveriges Hamnar: "Unfortunately, there is nothing to suggest that HF will learn from this, on the contrary, they are already warning about how they plan to act in the next contract movement. It is therefore time for lawmakers to take their responsibility and put a stop to it before the next contract movement", they write in a press release.
Correction: In an earlier version of the text, there was an incorrect formulation about the background to the conflict.
