The Strasbourg Court Treats Trade Unionists with Contempt: <i>Svenska Transportarbetareförbundet and Seko v Sweden</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Svenska Transportarbetareförbundet and Seko v Sweden,1 Swedish trade unions took industrial action against a Norwegian owned ship flagged in Panama, which had docked in Sweden, unless and until the owners entered an International Transport Workers’ Federation (ITF) approved collective agreement, which paid ITF wage rates to the Polish officers and Russian crew.2 The owner made the agreement (though later reneged on it) and sued the unions in the Swedish Labour Court. The latter referred the case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), which held that the industrial action might infringe the Norwegian company’s freedom to provide services to another State (under the European Economic Area arrangements that duplicate Article 49, EU Treaty),3 following its jurisprudence in the Viking and Laval line of authority.4 On that basis, the Swedish Labour Court held that the proportionality of the industrial action therefore had to be examined (in accordance with Viking and Laval). It concluded that the wage rates in the collective agreement were excessive and therefore the industrial action illegitimately interfered with the Norwegian ship owner’s EU (or rather EEA) freedom to provide services. Substantial damages were awarded. The Swedish unions applied to the ECtHR claiming a violation of their right to strike and to bargain collectively protected by Article 11.5 The ECtHR (Judge O’Leary, a distinguished Irish EU labour lawyer, sitting alone) ‘found that the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention have not been met’ by the application.6 No further or other reasons were disclosed for its dismissal.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".