June: News from Ingenjören in English

Foto: Getty images

Dismissed on suspicion of security risk – five possible reasons

Engineers of Sweden are increasingly being contacted by members who have lost their security clearance. What could be the reason behind such a decision?

Ullika Dalén, lawyer at Engineers of Sweden, gives five general examples that can affect the requirement for loyalty, reliability and vulnerability:

• Dual or previous foreign citizenship. There may be a risk that the employee will be exposed to pressure from the regime in their home country. 
• Connections to criminal networks. 
• Security awareness. Can the person be trusted? Will they protect classified information correctly? Individual events can be significant for the security clearance if they are based on negligence, lack of security awareness or carelessness.
• Vulnerabilities. ​​For example, does the person have drug or alcohol abuse, financial problems, is there a need to keep personal circumstances secret or is the person in a vulnerable position in any other way? 
• Dissatisfaction. Are there reports that suggest that an employee feels ignored in the workplace or doesn’t get the appreciation that they believe they deserve? This can be a breeding ground for dissatisfaction with the employer and make the person vulnerable to pressure.

A security clearance clarifies whether the person is loyal and trustworthy from a security perspective. It is often carried out in connection with employment, but the security clearance is also updated continuously during the employment. 

How high the requirements are depends on the security classification of the position, but in a heightened security situation, the classification may change. This means that someone who previously passed the security clearance may no longer do so – and risk losing their job.

– We are receiving more and more cases regarding this and the number of members who have lost their security clearance has increased, says Ullika Dalén.

To learn that you are losing your security clearance often comes as a shock. For most times the employee doesn’t even get an explanation and there is currently no possibility to appeal the decision. However, if the employee loses their job, the dismissal in itself can be reviewed.

If the security classification decision is made by the employer, the decision in itself does not constitute objective grounds for dismissal. Instead, the employer must reassign the employee to a vacant position without a security classification. If there is no such position, however, there is a risk of dismissal.

However, if someone other than the employer has made the security classification decision, the decision constitutes objective grounds for dismissal. But even in this case, the employer must first reassign the employee to a vacant position without a security classification.

Here is the entire article in Swedish: Uppsagd efter misstanke om säkerhetsrisk – 5 möjliga skäl

“Digital surveillance in the office is more common than you think”

The ability for employers to monitor employees has increased as digital technology develops.

Some cases have already been highlighted in the media:

• At the beginning of 2024, AstraZeneca in Sweden began monitoring employees’ connection to the company’s internal network. The company has a policy of three days office presence a week and attendance is now controlled by collecting data on employees’ logins.
• The second-hand website Tradera allows all employees to work remotely. However, if they are not in the office, they need to be logged in to a digital meeting with the camera on throughout the working day.
• State-owned Telia wanted to introduce so-called “screen recording” of its employees and install a software on every computer that records what is happening on the screen. The local unions at Telia put their foot down and Telia eventually backed down.

Mattias Beimo is an IT expert and author. He believes that digital surveillance of ordinary office workers is more common than most people realize.

– Research from Europe and the US shows a widespread culture of surveillance in working life. As we see more global companies in Sweden we also see more international practices and there is nothing to suggest that digital surveillance is less common in Sweden, he says.

The problem arises when employers collect so much data that personal privacy is violated. And above all, when the collection is done secretly.

So far, there is no coherent set of regulations in Sweden that regulates digital surveillance and how the data collected may be used. These matters are primarily regulated by rules regarding personal data, labor law and collective agreements.

Mattias Beijmo would like to see a work environment legislation that also covers digital surveillance  – and wishes that the labour unions take these issues more seriously.

Heléne Robson, Chief Legal Officer at Engineers of Sweden says that they receive few questions from members about digital surveillance. But she believes that it will increase in the future.

– We need to ensure that our members are aware of the fact that everything is being more and more traceable. As long as you are appreciated by your employer, there is no problem. But if the employer wants to give you notice, the collected data can be used against you.

Read the entire article in in Swedish: ”Digital övervakning på kontoret är vanligare än många tror”fgdfgd

Do you need to ask the union a question? Try the chatbot Vektor 

If you have any questions about labor law or membership in Engineers of Sweden the chatbot Vektor can now give you the answer. You can ask questions in both English and Swedish.

– We’re not the first, but we’re still quite early among the labour unions to have a chatbot, says Jakob Lindmark, ombudsman at Engineers of Sweden and project manager for some of the union’s AI projects. 

He has developed the new chatbot Vektor together with colleagues and consultants. The work has largely involved testing different models and then making fine adjustments to find a balance between quality, response length and tonalty. A lot of work has also been done to ensure data quality. 

The Engineers of Sweden has chosen to make Vektor accessible to everyone, at a start. On the website, it appears as a pink bubble with three white dots in the lower right corner. 

Read the entire article in Swedish: Behöver du fråga facket? Testa chattboten Vektor   

From 6.3 to 17.5 – large differences in group sizes at government agencies

The number of people a manager leads varies greatly between government agencies. Of the 50 largest agencies, the spread is widest in universities and collegies – from 6.3 employees on average per manager at Karolinska Institutet, to 72.4 (!) at Mid Sweden University. 

On top of the list is KTH, where the average is 17.5 employees per manager. The group sizes at universities are affected by how much research the manager has. In addition, management at universities and higher education differs in part from management at other workplaces, in that, for example, a professor is relieved of a large amount of administrative support. 

Second on the list is FOI with 15 employees per manager. FOI has grown considerably and it is noticeable in the groups, says David Sundell, chairman of Saco-S at FOI.

– The unions and employers agree that some groups are too large. Some groups were up to 30–35 before they were divided. A large group makes it difficult for the manager and puts a strain on communication.

However, the issue is now being worked on and has been discussed in collaboration between the unions and employers.

Svenska kraftnät, SVK, has the smallest groups on average of the workplaces included in this list. They previously had large groups, but started to work with the issue few years ago.

SVK aims to have no more than 20 employees per manager.

– Some units are smaller because we know they will grow. This is advice to others: Try to think in advance, how big do I think the group will be? There should be room to grow.

The manager density is calculated based on data on the number of employees and managers that the authorities have reported to the The Swedish Agency for Government Employers, that Publikt, the trade union ST’s news site, has reported on.

Read the entire article in Swedish: Från 6,3 till 72,4 – så skiljer storleken på arbetsgrupper mellan myndigheter