2023-12-192023/24:AU3 · p.5AULabour market
Labour market policy programs and measures
The Swedish labour-market model, active labour-market policy, and young people's entry into work
What's at stake: How the Swedish model and active labour-market policy are designed affects wage growth and the level of labour conflict, young people's chances of establishing themselves in working life, and how well the system of subsidised employment works for both job seekers and legitimate businesses.
Case texts and AI reasoning are AI-translated from the Swedish originals; the Swedish text is authoritative.
What the vote decides
The question is whether the government needs to take new initiatives to safeguard the Swedish labour-market model and tighten active labour-market policy — including by reintroducing education contracts and the 90-day guarantee for young people and cracking down on subsidised employment — or whether current policy and ongoing reforms are sufficient.
Yes Yes — the committee proposal
The committee shares the view that the labour-market parties should continue to take responsibility for labour-market conditions, but does not consider that the government's actions justify the committee taking its own initiatives, pointing instead to the entry-level jobs scheme and the transition study support as good examples of reforms rooted in agreement between the parties; the committee also disagrees that education contracts and the 90-day guarantee should be reintroduced for young people, emphasising instead the importance of education and that labour-market needs should increasingly steer the range of education on offer, and therefore rejects the motions.
No No — the reservations
Reservation 9 (S)
The reservation views the government's actions with great concern, including the drawn-out handling of the entry-level jobs scheme, and demands that the government clearly safeguard the Swedish model and pursue an active labour-market policy that both offers support and sets requirements; it calls for reintroducing education contracts and the 90-day guarantee for young people, reducing referrals to matching services, doubling participation in labour-market training with a more gender-equal offering, stopping abuse of subsidised employment, and requiring collective agreements from all employers using such subsidised jobs.
Summarised from the committee report. Party labels in the summary come from the report, not from the vote.
What do the votes mean here?
Yes The committee proposal: rejecting the motions (keeping things as they are).
No Backing the counter-proposal: reservation 9 by S.
Abstain The party marks a position of its own that is not one of the two final alternatives.
What each plan points to — and how the party voted
For each party: the vote its own election manifesto and party programme point to in this case, next to how the party actually voted. A plan can only point to Yes or No; a party can also abstain.
| Plan | Vote | Confidence | Evidence | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| V | No | Abstain 0/0/20/4 | departs from the plan | confidence: high | explicit |
| S | No | No 0/93/0/14 | follows the plan | confidence: high | derived |
| MP | No | Abstain 0/0/16/2 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| C | Yes | Abstain 0/0/20/4 | departs from the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| L | Yes | Yes 14/0/0/2 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| KD | Yes | Yes 16/0/0/3 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
| M | Yes | Yes 59/0/0/9 | follows the plan | confidence: high | derived |
| SD | Yes | Yes 61/0/0/11 | follows the plan | confidence: medium | derived |
Committee proposal
The Riksdag rejects the motions 2023/24:385 by Magnus Persson et al. (SD) amendment 13, 2023/24:441 by Ciczie Weidby et al. (V) amendments 1-9, 2023/24:943 by Dzenan Cisija (S), 2023/24:1539 by Johan Andersson et al. (S), 2023/24:1960 by Aida Birinxhiku et al. (S), 2023/24:1973 by Zara Leghissa et al. (S) amendment 2, 2023/24:2339 by Nooshi Dadgostar et al. (V) amendment 13, 2023/24:2464 by Jonny Cato et al. (C) amendment 5, 2023/24:2620 by Teresa Carvalho et al. (S) amendments 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, 17, 18 and 46-48 and 2023/24:2691 by Märta Stenevi et al. (MP) amendments 45 and 46.
Original (Swedish)
Riksdagen avslår motionerna 2023/24:385 av Magnus Persson m.fl. (SD) yrkande 13, 2023/24:441 av Ciczie Weidby m.fl. (V) yrkandena 1-9, 2023/24:943 av Dzenan Cisija (S), 2023/24:1539 av Johan Andersson m.fl. (S), 2023/24:1960 av Aida Birinxhiku m.fl. (S), 2023/24:1973 av Zara Leghissa m.fl. (S) yrkande 2, 2023/24:2339 av Nooshi Dadgostar m.fl. (V) yrkande 13, 2023/24:2464 av Jonny Cato m.fl. (C) yrkande 5, 2023/24:2620 av Teresa Carvalho m.fl. (S) yrkandena 2, 3, 8, 10, 11, 17, 18 och 46-48 samt 2023/24:2691 av Märta Stenevi m.fl. (MP) yrkandena 45 och 46.
Riksdag decision: The Riksdag rejected 90 proposals in motions concerning, among other things, the Employment Agency, labour market policy programs and measures, and unemployment insurance. The committee refers to the fact that work is already underway in the respective areas. All motions were submitted during the general motion period 2023.
Counter-proposals
- The counter-proposal wants a national competence supply plan, active state use of Lernia AB to meet green industry skill gaps particularly in northern Sweden, and government action to leverage artificial intelligence opportunities in the labour market. (S) — Reservation 9
Plan vs actual vote
Every party, in chamber order: what its own plan pointed to, how it voted, and the reasoning behind both. Highlighted rows are where the two differ — but a vote that follows the plan is a result too, so the reasoning is there for every party.
The plan is the only party's policy for full employment, demands collective agreements as a condition when public funds go to employers and wants to strengthen labour market training, while policy should respect the Swedish model.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan is the only party's policy for full employment, demands collective agreements as a condition when public funds go to employers and wants to strengthen labour market training, while policy should respect the Swedish model. The counter-proposal's demands for active labour market policy, doubled labour market training, fewer referrals to matching services and collective agreements for subsidized jobs address these commitments. The plan also speaks to the committee's reasons about the parties' responsibility.
Original (Swedish)
Planen är det enda partiets politik för full sysselsättning, kräver kollektivavtal som villkor när skattemedel går till arbetsgivare och vill stärka arbetsmarknadsutbildningarna, samtidigt som politiken ska respektera den svenska modellen. Motförslagets krav på aktiv arbetsmarknadspolitik, fördubblad arbetsmarknadsutbildning, färre anvisningar till matchningstjänster och kollektivavtal vid subventionerade anställningar svarar mot dessa åtaganden. Planen talar också till utskottets skäl om parternas ansvar.
- full employmentdecisive»Ändå är det bara ett parti i riksdagen som har en politik för full sysselsättning – Vänsterpartiet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Yet there is only one party in the Riksdag that has a policy for full employment – the Left Party.”
- collective agreements as condition»Vänsterpartiet ställer krav på kollektivavtal vid offentliga upphandlingar.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The Left Party demands collective agreements in public procurement.”
- strengthened labour market training»Kvalitativa arbetsmarknadsutbildningar« (party programme ↗)“Qualitative labour market training”
- respect the Swedish model»Men för att förhandlingarna ska vara rättvisa behöver politiken respektera den svenska modellen, där politiker inte hotar den ena parten med försämringar om den inte ger med sig.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“But for negotiations to be fair, policy must respect the Swedish model, where politicians do not threaten one party with worsening if it does not give in.”
The stance rests on the quoted commitment in the party's own documents; the actual vote deviated. Click the quote to verify it in the document.
The plan makes active labour market policy a core commitment in turbulent times, demands that jobs have Swedish wages and collective agreements and that abuse and unfair competition on the labour market be stopped.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan makes active labour market policy a core commitment in turbulent times, demands that jobs have Swedish wages and collective agreements and that abuse and unfair competition on the labour market be stopped. The counter-proposal's demands to protect the Swedish model, reintroduce training contracts and a 90-day guarantee, double labour market training and require collective agreements for subsidized employment follow from these commitments. The plan combines this with demands for activity, which the counter-proposal also does.
Original (Swedish)
Planen gör en aktiv arbetsmarknadspolitik till ett kärnåtagande i oroliga tider, kräver att jobben har svenska löner och kollektivavtal och att missbruk och osund konkurrens på arbetsmarknaden stoppas. Motförslagets krav på att värna den svenska modellen, återinföra utbildningskontrakt och 90-dagarsgaranti, fördubbla arbetsmarknadsutbildningen och kräva kollektivavtal vid subventionerade anställningar följer av dessa åtaganden. Planen kombinerar detta med krav på aktivitet, vilket motförslaget också gör.
- active labour market policydecisive»En aktiv arbetsmarknadspolitik för fler jobb är särskilt viktig i ekonomiskt oroliga tider.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Active labour market policy for more jobs is especially important in economically turbulent times.”
- collective agreements as condition»jobb med svenska löner och kollektivavtal« (2022 manifesto ↗)“jobs with Swedish wages and collective agreements”
- stop unfair competition»Det ska aldrig löna sig att begå brott eller skaffa sig konkurrensfördelar genom att försumma de anställdas rätt till en trygg arbetsmiljö.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It shall never pay to commit crime or gain competitive advantage by neglecting the right of employees to a safe working environment.”
- support and requirements»För att ingen ska fastna i passivitet behöver det ställas krav på aktivitet för att få försörjningsstöd.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“To prevent anyone from becoming passive, activity requirements must be placed on receiving subsistence assistance.”
The plan safeguards the Swedish model where the parties negotiate conditions through collective agreements and argues that what is socioeconomically most important is to give young people paths into working life, with a policy that gives everyone the opportunity to contribute according to their abilities.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan safeguards the Swedish model where the parties negotiate conditions through collective agreements and argues that what is socioeconomically most important is to give young people paths into working life, with a policy that gives everyone the opportunity to contribute according to their abilities. Education contracts, a 90-day guarantee for young people, more labour market training with equal provision and collective agreement requirements for subsidized employment align with these commitments. The counter-proposal's demands are therefore supported.
Original (Swedish)
Planen värnar den svenska modellen där parterna förhandlar villkoren genom kollektivavtal och menar att det samhällsekonomiskt viktigaste är att ge unga vägar in i arbetslivet, med en politik som ger alla möjlighet att bidra efter sina förutsättningar. Utbildningskontrakt, en 90-dagarsgaranti för unga, mer arbetsmarknadsutbildning med jämställt utbud och kollektivavtalskrav vid subventionerade anställningar ligger i linje med dessa åtaganden. Motförslagets krav stöds därför.
- safeguard the Swedish modeldecisive»Vi värnar den svenska modellen där arbetsmarknadens parter gemensamt förhandlar fram vad som« (party programme ↗)“We safeguard the Swedish model where the labour market parties jointly negotiate what”
- young people into working life»viktigast att ge unga människor vägar in i arbetslivet« (party programme ↗)“most important to give young people paths into working life”
- collective agreements as a condition»ska gälla på arbetsmarknaden genom kollektivavtal.« (party programme ↗)“shall apply on the labour market through collective agreements.”
- work according to ability for all»alla människor möjlighet att efter sina förutsättningar genom arbete bidra till samhället« (party programme ↗)“everyone the opportunity to contribute to society through work according to their abilities”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The counter-proposal wants to reduce referrals to matching services and require collective agreements from all employers using subsidised employment.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The counter-proposal wants to reduce referrals to matching services and require collective agreements from all employers using subsidised employment. The plan goes in the opposite direction: everyone must have the right to an effective matching service, it must become cheaper and easier to employ people far from the labour market, and laws and regulations must not override freedom of contract. The plan shares the counter-proposal's view that the parties must take responsibility for terms, but that does not support the concrete demands.
Original (Swedish)
Motförslaget vill minska anvisningarna till matchningstjänster och kräva kollektivavtal av alla arbetsgivare som använder subventionerade anställningar. Planen går i motsatt riktning: alla ska ha rätt till en effektiv matchningstjänst, det ska bli billigare och lättare att anställa personer långt från arbetsmarknaden, och lagar och regler ska inte köra över den fria avtalsrätten. Planen delar däremot motförslagets syn att parterna ska ta ansvar för villkoren, men det bär inte de konkreta kraven.
- right to matching servicedecisive»Matchningen måste förbättras. Alla ska ha rätt till en effektiv matchningstjänst och det ska bli lättare att hitta medarbetare inom alla yrken. Utbildningssystemet behöver i betydligt större utsträckning utgå från arbetsmarknadens behov.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Matching must be improved. Everyone must have the right to an effective matching service and it must become easier to find employees in all professions. The education system must to a much greater extent be based on the labour market's needs.”
- freedom of contract»bör lagar och regler inte köra över den fria avtalsrätten« (party programme ↗)“should laws and regulations not override freedom of contract”
- cheaper to employ»Det måste bli billigare och lättare att anställa, särskilt personer som står långt från arbetsmarknaden.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“It must become cheaper and easier to employ, particularly people far from the labour market.”
- employment line valued»Arbetslinjen måste värnas, och den som kan jobba ska inte leva på skattebetalarnas pengar.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“The employment line must be valued, and those who can work must not live on taxpayers' money.”
The plan takes no explicit position on what the committee actually decided — often because the committee's reason was procedural. The stance is derived and fully cited, but it does not show the party broke a commitment.
The plan wants the Public Employment Service's regulatory role to be separated from its role as service provider and that private, including industry-specific, actors develop matching – the opposite of reducing referrals to matching services.
Plan documents: party programme · 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The plan wants the Public Employment Service's regulatory role to be separated from its role as service provider and that private, including industry-specific, actors develop matching – the opposite of reducing referrals to matching services. The plan sees collective agreements as part of freedom of contract, not as a condition the state shall impose on employers. For young people, the plan's line is requirement for reciprocal obligation rather than restored guarantees and education contracts.
Original (Swedish)
Planen vill att Arbetsförmedlingens myndighetsuppdrag skiljs från utförarrollen och att privata, även branschspecifika, aktörer utvecklar matchningen – motsatsen till att minska anvisningarna till matchningstjänster. Planen ser kollektivavtal som en del av avtalsfriheten, inte som ett villkor staten ska påtvinga arbetsgivare. För unga är planens linje krav på motprestation snarare än återinförda garantier och utbildningskontrakt.
- independent matching actorsdecisive»även branschspecifika sådana, ska bidra till att utveckla matchningen på arbetsmarknaden.« (party programme ↗)“including industry-specific actors, shall contribute to developing matching in the labor market.”
- separated regulatory and provider roles»Arbetsförmedlingens myndighetsuppdrag ska tydligt skiljas från utförarrollen.« (party programme ↗)“The Public Employment Service's regulatory role shall clearly be separated from its role as service provider.”
- freedom of contract, not contract coercion»Den fackliga friheten och möjligheten till kollektivavtal är en viktig del« (party programme ↗)“Trade union freedom and the possibility of collective agreements is an important part”
- requirement for reciprocal obligation»Vi vill införa en ny dagersättning för arbetsföra personer med ett tydligt krav på motprestation i form av anvisat arbete, språkutbildning eller annan kompetenshöjande verksamhet.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“We want to introduce a new daily allowance for work-able people with a clear requirement for reciprocal obligation in the form of assigned work, language training or other competency-enhancing activities.”
The plan requires that there is a diversity of actors acting as employment brokers, which speaks against the counter-proposal's demand for reduced referrals to matching services.
Plan documents: party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The plan requires that there is a diversity of actors acting as employment brokers, which speaks against the counter-proposal's demand for reduced referrals to matching services. The requirement for collective agreements from all employers using subsidised employment contradicts the plan's rejection of state control of wage formation and the idea that conditions are shaped by the parties. That the plan values strong trade unions and the parties' responsibility is a counterweight, but does not support the whole.
Original (Swedish)
Planen kräver att det finns en mångfald av aktörer som agerar arbetsförmedlare, vilket talar mot motförslagets krav på minskade anvisningar till matchningstjänster. Kravet på kollektivavtal av alla arbetsgivare som använder subventionerade anställningar strider mot planens avvisande av statlig styrning av lönebildningen och mot att villkoren utformas av parterna. Att planen värnar starka fackföreningar och parternas ansvar är en motvikt, men bär inte helheten.
- diversity of employment brokersdecisive»bör finnas en mångfald av aktörer som agerar arbetsförmedlare« (party programme ↗)“should be a diversity of actors acting as employment brokers”
- no state wage formation»Statlig styrning av lönebildningen i form av inkomstpolitik avvisas.« (party programme ↗)“State control of wage formation in the form of income policy is rejected.”
- subsidiary employment policy»Arbetsmarknadspolitiken måste också utgå från« (party programme ↗)“Employment policy must also be based on”
- strong independent trade unions»Starka och partipolitiskt oberoende fackföreningar« (party programme ↗)“Strong and politically independent trade unions”
The counter-proposal wants to reintroduce guarantees and training contracts, reduce referrals to matching services and require collective bargaining by employers using subsidized employment.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto · party programme
Reasoning and quotes
The counter-proposal wants to reintroduce guarantees and training contracts, reduce referrals to matching services and require collective bargaining by employers using subsidized employment. The plan goes the opposite way: it wants to significantly lower the cost of employing the long-term unemployed, set full-time activity requirements and strengthen incentives to move from benefits to work, and assumes that independent actors can do the job as well or better than the public sector. The requirements therefore lack support in the plan.
Original (Swedish)
Motförslaget vill återinföra garantier och utbildningskontrakt, minska anvisningarna till matchningstjänster och kräva kollektivavtal av arbetsgivare som använder subventionerade anställningar. Planen går motsatt väg: den vill kraftigt sänka kostnaden för att anställa långtidsarbetslösa, ställa krav på heltidsaktivitet och stärka drivkrafterna att gå från bidrag till arbete, och den utgår från att fristående aktörer kan göra jobbet lika bra eller bättre än det offentliga. Kraven saknar därför stöd i planen.
- cheaper to employ without new conditionsdecisive»Kraftigt sänka kostnaden för att anställa långtidsarbetslösa« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Significantly lower the cost of employing the long-term unemployed”
- requirements rather than guarantees»Kräva aktivitet på heltid av den som lever på försörjningsstöd« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Require full-time activity from those receiving subsistence support”
- incentives to work»Införa en jobbpremie som gör det extra lönsamt för långtidsarbetslösa att gå från bidrag till arbete« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Introduce a job premium that makes it extra profitable for the long-term unemployed to move from benefits to work”
- independent actors in matching»Om något kan göras lika bra eller bättre av« (party programme ↗)“If something can be done as well or better by”
The counter-proposal wants to reintroduce education contracts and the 90-day guarantee for young people, double labour market training and set requirements for collective bargaining in subsidized employment.
Plan documents: 2022 manifesto
Reasoning and quotes
The counter-proposal wants to reintroduce education contracts and the 90-day guarantee for young people, double labour market training and set requirements for collective bargaining in subsidized employment. The plan, by contrast, wants to abolish ineffective labour market and integration programmes, rejects constructions such as new start jobs and introduction jobs and wants to stop public funds for fake jobs. Building out such programmes therefore goes against the plan, even though the plan shares the desire to defend the Swedish model.
Original (Swedish)
Motförslaget vill återinföra utbildningskontrakt och 90-dagarsgarantin för unga, fördubbla arbetsmarknadsutbildningen och ställa krav på kollektivavtal vid subventionerade anställningar. Planen vill tvärtom avskaffa ineffektiva arbetsmarknads- och integrationsprogram, dömer ut konstruktioner som nystartsjobb och introduktionsjobb och vill stoppa offentliga medel till låtsasjobb. Att bygga ut sådana program går därför emot planen, även om planen delar viljan att försvara den svenska modellen.
- real jobs before programmesdecisive»Istället för ineffektiva arbetsmarknadspolitiska konstruktioner som nystartsjobb, etableringsanställningar och introduktionsjobb, bör politiken verka för att skapa en större efterfrågan på riktiga jobb.« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Instead of ineffective labour market policy constructions such as new start jobs, establishment employment and introduction jobs, policy should work to create greater demand for real jobs.”
- abolish ineffective programmes»Avskaffa ineffektiva arbetsmarknads- och integrationsprogram som är skapade för att dölja arbetslöshet« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Abolish ineffective labour market and integration programmes created to hide unemployment”
- no subsidized fake jobs»Stoppa användandet av offentliga medel till låtsasjobb« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Stop the use of public funds for fake jobs”
- protect the partners' model»Försvara den svenska modellen« (2022 manifesto ↗)“Defend the Swedish model”
Share and embed
Sources and documents
- The committee report on riksdagen.se (2023/24:AU3)
- Committee report full text (HB01AU3)
- Per-MP voting data (API)
- Case status (API)
Documents under consideration
- Motion 2023/24:1069 — Rättvisa regler för pensionsålder av Åsa Karlsson och Helén Pettersson (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1259 — Arbetslöshetsersättning för arbetstagare och egenföretagare av Anders Ådahl (C)
- Motion 2023/24:1321 — En rättvis arbetslöshetsförsäkring av Jamal El-Haj (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1539 — Fackligt samråd vid arbetsmarknadspolitiska insatser av Johan Andersson m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1570 — Om stärkt trygghet för företagare av Mathias Tegnér och Jennie Nilsson (båda S)
- Motion 2023/24:1607 — En fungerande arbetsmarknad i hela Öresundsområdet av Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)
- Motion 2023/24:1634 — AI:s betydelse för framtidens arbetsmarknad och skola av Niels Paarup-Petersen (C)
- Motion 2023/24:1938 — Arbetsförmedlingens närvaro i hela landet av Heléne Björklund m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1960 — Stärkt arbetsmarknad för unga i Västsverige av Aida Birinxhiku m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1973 — Arbetsmarknadens utbildningsbehov för landets utveckling av Zara Leghissa m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1989 — En lokalt förankrad arbetsmarknadspolitik av Ida Karkiainen m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:1999 — En stark arbetslöshetsförsäkring av Linnéa Wickman m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:2027 — Bättre övergång från arbetslöshetsersättning till aktivitetsstöd av Fredrik Lundh Sammeli m.fl. (S)
- Motion 2023/24:2339 — En fungerande sjukförsäkring av Nooshi Dadgostar m.fl. (V)
- Motion 2023/24:2418 — Mätning och mål för andelen självförsörjande av Hans Eklind (KD)
- Motion 2023/24:2457 — Livskraft och framtidstro i Sveriges landsbygder av Muharrem Demirok m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2023/24:2464 — Arbetsmarknad av Jonny Cato m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2023/24:2467 — Socialförsäkringar och pensioner av Martina Johansson m.fl. (C)
- Motion 2023/24:248 — Indexering av inkomststöd för utjämning av Markus Kallifatides (S)
- Motion 2023/24:2620 — Utgiftsområde 14 Arbetsmarknad och arbetsliv av Teresa Carvalho m.fl. (S)
Source: The Swedish Parliament