Validity of provisions concerning partial general application of the Engineering Industry Agreement to the maritime construction industry
Supreme Court judgment of 5 March 2013, HR-2013-00496-A, (case no. 2012/1447), civil case, appeal against judgment
STX OSV AS, STX Norway Florø AS, Kleven Verft AS, Myklebust Verft AS, Bergen Group Shipbuilding AS, Ulstein Verft AS, Havyard Ship Technology AS, Aibel AS (Counsel Ingvald Falch) v. The state repr. by the Tariff Board (Attorney General repr. by Pål Wennerås)
By the Tariff Board’s adoption of Regulation of 6 October 2008 concerning partial general application of the Engineering Industry Agreement to the maritime construction industry - later superseded by corresponding Regulations of 20 December 2010 no. 1764 – unorganised and foreign employees acquired a right to wage and working conditions which are equal to those that Norwegian employees have within the scope of the wage agreement. A group of industrial companies filed a legal action to have the regulations found invalid. They argued that Article 36 of the EEA Agreement and Directive 96/71/EF relating to seconded employees prevent a general application of contract conditions relating to out-of-town allowance, working hours, overtime allowance and compensation for costs of overnight stays away from home.
The Supreme Court unanimously concluded that the conditions for a general application contained in the Act relating to the General Application of Wage Agreements were met, that the disputed provisions in the Regulations were compatible with Article 36 of the EEA Agreement and Article 3 of the Directive and that the Regulations were accordingly valid. Statements about the significance of advisory statements from the EFTA Court.
Reference: HR-2013-496-A, Case no. 2012/1447, civil appeal against judgment.