Sweden is a member of the European Union since 1995. The European Union issues directives that cover different areas. Member states must implement these directives into their national legislation. The European council issued in 1993 a directive that took action on the organization of working time, also known as the Working Time Directive. The full name is: Council directive 93/104/EC of 23 November 1993 concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time.

The aim of this paper is to explain and compare non-compliance of two EU-directives, ?the quality of bathing water? and ?the Working Time Directive?. This study answers the questions: Why didn?t Sweden implement the directive on bathing water quality and the Working Time Directive correctly? Are the reasons for non-compliance the same or different in the two cases? The paper is designed as a case study and with an explanatory attempt we explain why the two directives weren?t implemented correctly in Sweden. The theoretical approach is based on both general- and EU-specific implementation theories.

This thesis examines why working time preferences differ between workers and nations, and explains the effect of working time regulation and working time flexibility on negotiating work-life balance. In five separate sections the following working time issues are examined: the number of hours worked by workers in Europe; factors affecting individual working time preferences; how working time preferences are negotiated in the national industrial relations systems of Sweden, France and the United Kingdom; how the institutions of the European Union have influenced working time negotiations through the Working Time Directive; and the benefits and practices available to organisations implementing working time flexibility. Broadly this paper views working time preferences as being a highly personal and influenced by factors such as wages, taxation, culture (national and workplace) and non-work responsibilities. It is argued that negotiating a preferred working time pattern is essential to achieving work-life balance and when such a balance is achieved, workers are more healthy, motivated and committed to their employer. Essentially this provides an incentive for businesses to voluntarily implement working time flexibility beyond the regulatory standards..

The aim of this master-thesis is to investigate the emergence of bureaucratic drift in connection with implementation of EU-legislation in Sweden. To narrow it down I have chosen to look at the Swedish implementation of the Working Time Directive, directive 93/104/EG. To be able to fulfil the purpose of this master-thesis I have used two research questions; [1] How did Sweden implement the Working Time Directive into Swedish law? and [2] Why did Sweden omit to correct implement the Working Time Directive? To be able to understand and explain the situation I have used the principal-agent perspective as a theoretical framework. An analysis of motives has been used as analytical method.The results from the analysis show that Sweden, in order to keep the contractual model used on the labour market, which is a part of the well known Swedish model, shirked while implementing the directive and implemented as to be able to fulfil its own agenda.

Sweden became a member of the European Union in 1995. Consequently Sweden became obligated to implement the Working Time Directive 2003/88/EC (formerly termed 93/104/EC). At that time Sweden considered that their legislation already gave their employees as high level of protection as the directive prescribed. Instead they decided upon an adjustment of the collective agreements concerning working time. A particular EC-restriction was incorporated in the Working Hours Act (SFS 1982:673).

Sweden became a member of the European Union in 1995. When Sweden entered the Union the government also agreed on implementing every law, regulation and directive the Union have and will have in force. One directive the Union wants every country to implement is the Directive (93/104/EG) concerning certain aspects of the organization of working time. This directive includes regulations concerning the relationship between employer and employees. The regulations in the directive must be in force before January 1 2007.One of the main points in the directive is the possibility for the parties on the labour market to reach agreements through collective agreements that deviate from the legislation concerning work hours.

Today's labor market is characterized by flexibility. This applies to organizations, forms of employment and working time. Unregulated working time is such an adaptation and the main subject of this essay. The purpose of this study was to investigate the conditions that underpin unregulated working time, in relation to the Swedish legislation and to EU legislation. The intention has been to investigate the work environment impacts of unregulated working time, and what differences there are from a gender perspective.The conclusion is that workers who enter into agreements for unregulated working time have significantly different terms from traditional workers.

The Working Hours Act regulates the working time conditions and together with the Working Time Directive of EU both acts aim to protect the workers. However, with The Swedish Model it is possible to diverge from the law-regulations by collective agreement by the parts of the Swedish labor market. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the national and international law regulations and further on study a few selected Swedish central collective agreements to discover in which extension deviation from the law occur. The sections of the Working Hours Act?s that has been investigated is ordinary working time, daily rest, weekly rest periods, breaks and maximum weekly working time.

According to the national legislation concerning discrimination within labour law, it is prohibited to discriminate on the grounds of sex, ethnic belonging, religion or other religious belief, functional disability, sexual nature and part-time work or time-limited employment. The EC-law goes further and also prohibits discrimination on the ground of age. According to an EC-directive the member states must incorporate a national provision against age discrimination by the 2nd of December 2006 and the Swedish legislator is now in the progress to implement this into Swedish law.Even though national legislation does not contain any provision on the area, the EC-law directive has a certain influence at national law. Measures that are in breach of the purpose of the directive can for example not be taken. When the time for implementation has expired, the directive has direct effect and can be referred to within the member states.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.

The essay shows that temporary agency employees work in a complex business. Both labor and management differs from other businesses in the Swedish labor market. Regarding the unemployment insurance, they have previously been separated from other businesses through legislation. Based on the essay question regarding workers protection has the statutory rights for employees been strengthened. This by the implementation of the directive on manning into Swedish law and now covers all workers in the business.

The first aim of this study is to examine what the differences are between the Classic directive (directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts) and the Revised Classic directive (directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC) when it comes to social considerations in public procurement. The second aim is to examine if the revision of the directive has solved the prior existing problems regarding social considerations in public procurement. In this paper a traditional European legal method is used. The examinations show a number of things, including the Revised Classic directive involving codification of case law, references to other sources of law and some clarified rules as well as new provisions. The regulations regarding reserved contracts, technical specifications, and selection criterion are satisfied in the Revised Classic directive.