EU – Baltic States, Latvia, Legislation, Markets and Companies

The Latvian government's position has always been that trade unions have the right to collectively defend the rights of workers, but in this case, the union blockade was rather a move against the right of companies from other EU member states to provide their services within the common EU market, the Foreign Ministry said.

As reported, Laval un partneri on December 7, 2004, turned to the Swedish Labor Court, demanding that the Swedish unions' blockade of the company's construction site, started because Laval un partneri paid its Latvian workers less than the Swedish standard action, be ruled unlawful and halted, writes LETA.

On December 22, 2004, the Swedish court decided against passing an interim decision in the case that would order the unions to halt their boycott of Laval un partneri.

The Swedish Labor Court decided to turn to the European Court of Justice, asking whether the Swedish labor market's principles contradicted the EU principle of free movement of labor.

In December of 2007, the European Court of Justice ruled that the Swedish trade unions could not force a foreign company to observe local pay deals.

"Such action in the form of a blockade of sites constitutes a restriction on the freedom to provide services, which, in this case, is not justified with regard to the public interest of protecting workers," the European Court of Justice said.