The municipality of Vellinge knew that they had to lose the dispute with Lars Hemzelius in the Labor Court – and had to buy as cheaply as possible. That interpretation is made by Niklas Selberg, a researcher in employment law.
"This indicates that the municipality does not want to publicly wash its shroud, and they knew they would lose, anyway," he says.
"The Labor Court says that this dismissal must be rejected because the municipality has failed as an employer – and then it seems that there are additional mistakes when using taxpayers' money to buy it The municipality itself has created the problem – and then they solve it by throwing money on it ", says Niklas Selberg, researcher at labor law at the University of Lund.
Researcher Niklas Selberg, working at the University of Lund, is of the opinion that the agreement between the municipality of Vellinge and Lars Hemzelius falls within the framework of the system.
He has reviewed the case and points out that the Chief Protection Officer would receive 32 monthly salaries in accordance with the Employment Protection Act. Moreover, there is an economic compensation from the day he was discharged until the verdict of the labor court was terminated, if the question so far was asked.
– It can take a year or longer for a verdict to be pronounced, so there are twelve monthly wages. If the court says that he has been fired unjustly, he receives a general compensation. It usually amounts to more than 100,000 – if it concerns funeral conditions, this can amount to SEK 50,000.
In total, the costs incurred could have brought the final bill for the municipality of Vellinge to almost three million kroner – instead of the more than two million people now paying.
"The interpretation is that the municipality is absolutely certain that they are losing the court and are pretty sure that they do not want to give Lars Hemzelius back, they have sat and counted, so they said" we are paying ".
He also looked at the decision of the labor court, where the court finds that the municipality of Vellinge has not done enough to solve the problems of cooperation.
"The municipality did a good job – because they knew they would lose, then this would be cheap for the municipality, but then taxpayers – according to AD's decision this person should be in service." The municipality says, "We do not want it – we are willing to pay him for nothing. "One can really ask for the right way to use taxpayers in this way – to decide on the court's decision, says Niklas Selberg.
"In the verdict AD says that the municipality has been too passive – the municipality has done wrong, now taxpayers can pay for the municipality's inability to deal with its personnel policy.