– By undermining an agreement now, NHO and the other employers are betting on the right-wing parties winning the election next year, to then achieve a cut in sick pay.
This is stated by deputy leader Steinar Krogstad in LO, who calls it both foolish and unsocial.
– But the most vital thing is that this does not contribute to more people being able to stay in work.
The parties in the labor market have been engaged in demanding negotiations all autumn. The goal has been to find out which measures can reduce sick leave, which is at its highest in 15 years.
The employers have not wanted to preserve the sick pay scheme for another four years. LO has disagreed.
Sick pay is intended to cover lost income due to illness, and employees currently have the right to full pay from the first day of illness.
NHO regrets that it was not possible to reach an agreement with LO.
Managing director Ole Erik Almlid says they have proposed several solutions.
Managing director Ole Erik Almlid would not sign an agreement preserving the sick pay scheme for another four years.
photo: Javad Parsa / NTB
– both utilizing a national mediator as a means of action and potentially preserving sick pay for a period to explore what can reduce sick leave.
Almlid says he wants to discuss all the tools in the toolbox to reduce sick leave,but LO has rejected the proposals they
No agreement
This afternoon,minister of Labor and Inclusion Tonje Brenna announced that they have not reached a conclusion.
There will be no agreement on a new IA agreement. This is the first time in 23 years.
– I find this disappointing, because I had a strong wish for us to achieve this, says Brenna.
The IA agreement is a framework agreement for a more inclusive labor market, and the sick pay scheme is part of this agreement.
It normally applies for four years at a time and has preserved the sick pay scheme sence 2001. The current IA agreement expires at the new year.
– I think it is quite obvious that it is, but I do not believe it will be during December of this year, says Brenna.
minister of Labor and Inclusion Tonje Brenna
– It seems that Tonje Brenna and Ap have enough on their plate these days. Meanwhile, sick leave is exploding, the IA agreement is collapsing, and a paralyzed Brenna is unable to gather the parties in the labor market.
This is stated by Venstre leader Sveinung Rotevatn, who calls the sick pay scheme the elephant in the room.
– If anything positive is to come out of this, it must be that political parties gather themselves and start a discussion about the sick pay scheme, rather than pushing the parties in the labor market ahead of them.
Henrik Asheim, Høyre’s spokesperson for labor policies, points out that the IA agreement contains many important measures to reduce sick leave and has involved the parties in the labor market.
– It concerns me that these tools may now vanish while we have the highest sick leave in fifteen years.
Asheim hopes Brenna has a plan to reduce the increasing sick leave.
What are the key differences between the sick pay policies of the LO and NHO in Norway?
Interview between Time.news Editor and labor Relations Expert Steinar Krogstad
Time.news Editor: Welcome to our special segment were we discuss current labor market dynamics. Today, we have Steinar Krogstad, the deputy leader of the Norwegian Labour Organisation (LO).Steinar, thank you for joining us.
Steinar Krogstad: Thank you for having me!
editor: Let’s dive right in. The labor market negotiations this autumn have been quite intense, notably regarding the sick pay scheme. coudl you explain the core of the disagreement between LO and the NHO?
Krogstad: Absolutely. The primary contention lies in the employers’ reluctance to extend the current sick pay scheme for another four years. The sick pay is crucial as it provides employees full pay from the first day of illness, and we believe it’s vital for supporting workers during tough times. The NHO seems to think that by cutting sick pay, they can save costs and possibly influence political outcomes in their favor.
Editor: You mentioned the upcoming elections. Do you think this drive against the sick pay scheme is politically motivated?
Krogstad: Yes, I do. They are essentially betting on the right-wing parties winning the election next year and hoping to get a rollback on sick pay policies. I find this both foolish and unsocial. The last thing we need right now is to undermine support systems that help people remain in work—it’s counterproductive.
Editor: That’s an interesting perspective. You noted that sick leave rates are at their highest in 15 years. What do you believe are the underlying causes?
Krogstad: Well, several factors contribute to this increase. The pandemic has had lasting effects on mental and physical health, and we’re seeing more people needing time off to recover. it’s essential to provide a supportive framework that allows them to do so without the fear of financial strain.
Editor: NHO’s managing director, Ole Erik Almlid, expressed regret that an agreement couldn’t be reached. What alternative solutions have they proposed?
krogstad: While they claim to have proposed several solutions, from our standpoint, they fall short. Any solution that reduces support for sick employees is not a viable one. We need a robust system that prioritizes workers’ rights and health, rather than prioritizing short-term financial gain.
Editor: Given the disconnect between the employers and labor organizations, what’s next in these negotiations?
Krogstad: It’s crucial that we keep the dialog open and constructive. We’ll be pushing for measures that truly address the needs of workers while also considering what’s sustainable for our economy. If employers really want to tackle sick leave rates effectively,they need to invest in health and well-being initiatives,not just look to cut costs through a reduction in sick pay.
Editor: Thank you for shedding light on this crucial issue, steinar. It truly seems that the negotiations ahead will require both sides to commit to a more cooperative approach if they want to reach a resolution that benefits everyone.
Krogstad: Absolutely, it’s about collaboration for a better future of work for all.
Editor: Thank you again for your insights, and we look forward to following the developments in these negotiations.
Krogstad: Thank you, it’s been a pleasure.
