Buustedt on the criticism: "Strives for a fair wage setting"

SVT Sport was able to reveal on Tuesday evening that the trade union club at the Swedish Ice Hockey Association in November sent out an official protest against the union's salary setting.

This is just the latest in the line of dark headlines around the union. But Secretary General Tommy Boustedt dismisses most of the criticism directed at them.

- When it comes to salary setting, it is part of the employment. When you are hired you will agree on a salary. Then there are no local wage negotiations with us, but it takes place centrally. But of course we strive for it to be a fair salary, we naturally strive for it to be a fair salary and strive for it not to be discrimination on grounds of, for example, age or gender or anything else. That picture is not right. In addition, we are conducting a thorough payroll survey which will show that we have an equal payroll.

But as I understand it, such a salary survey has not been done before. Why not?

- It's not a big workplace. We try to follow the salaries recommended in different categories. And we've never seen that need before. And the union has never in my 19 years pointed out that it is needed. But now they have done it, we agree with it and that is why we do it too. It started last fall and is largely completed in our finance department.

In this protest, the union takes up several examples in which women received a lower salary increase than men despite similar work assignments. Doesn't that look a little strange?

- I don't want to go into anything in detail, but it's not true. And our survey shows that those who have the lowest wages with us are actually men. And it is not discrimination either, but it is linked to what work you have and what expertise you have. And that in itself is in such cases a reverse discrimination. But we do not consider it, but believe that it is perfectly right according to what requirements we have.

So you think you have a fair salary?

- Yes, so fair a salary can be. There is no one hundred percent justice in society at all. I would like to say that the salary differences we have are less than what you have in your industry.

It has also been criticized how your salary calls are carried out. What do you say about that?

- Salary calls are information about salary. After all, a wage negotiation takes place centrally, between the employer alliance and the union. Then it's a salary call, and it's all about information. What the negotiation gives is then what the employees and members can then get to know. So there is a difference between salary negotiation and information.

There are more areas where you have been criticized for not following the laws that exist. For example, things that should be negotiated for MBL have not done so and that many feel compelled to work more overtime than you actually get. How do you look at it?

- We have annual working hours, the sport works that way. It's a lot in the winter and less in the summer. We have no one who works more than normal annual working hours. Periodically, everyone has more to do. If it's a tournament, for example, you work almost all the time you don't sleep. But during the summer months there are no tournaments or similar. Then you take it again. We do not have overtime, but it is common in sports that you do not have overtime right.

So if employees felt compelled to work more than you actually get, what do you say? Do they have a wrong opinion?

- I don't want to point fingers at how you perceive things. But in sports, you work a lot on a regular basis and during inconvenient working hours. But it is governed by the fact that you have an annual working time which is a certain number of hours which corresponds to a full time - and it will never be more than that.

You have been criticized for not handling the alleged sexual harassment as quickly as you should. How do you look at it?

- That's wrong. We conducted an investigation that started the day the incident happened, and it was finished after 14 days. According to the employers' alliance's lawyers, it is an investigation that is completely "by the book" and is done correctly according to the law, he says.

You can't feel that you should have informed more about what you did early in the process?

- When it comes to these types of investigations, they are classified because it is a lot of information. You have to protect the person and not have the right to go in and explain details and the like.

Information assistant Anders Feltenmark had to quit very quickly recently due to a lack of work. As I understand it, many believe it was a punishment for reporting the aforementioned incident and his professional work in general. How do you look at it?

- It is in this way that it is not possible to kick people anyway if you are employed. I have read that some think he was fired, and he has not. Without this, an agreement with the Union is central that has negotiated this with him, due to labor shortages. Anders has accepted and agreed to this agreement.

But can't you understand that it seems strange, both to outsiders and people inside the union, that only one person in a workplace may quit due to a lack of work when no one else has even been short-term leave?

- Yes, but it is in this way that we have an agreement with Anders. We cannot talk about any details of this agreement. And I won't do that either. We cannot act on what looks strange or not. And you have to understand that the Union at the central level is negotiating this and advises Anders that this is a very good agreement. So this has happened according to the Swedish model, completely "by the book".

Do you feel that there is a healthy working environment at the Swedish Ice Hockey Association?

- It depends on what you mean by a healthy work environment. It is high tempo, demands that you deliver. It's about performing and making good results. When it comes to the working environment, it is good at our office. I've been here for 19 years and this is the first time this is this kind of discussion. I haven't been to it before.

There are people who state that they feel oppressed and dare not say what they think of fear of what consequences it may have, how do you react to it?

- I have never felt that good, I have always thought that you should say what you think, and I also think that we have had a high ceiling in our discussions about things. But it also depends on what you say and don't say and how you express yourself. This is a very difficult matter to comment on.

But there are people who did not dare to talk to me on their work phones, but wanted to take all communication through their private phones for fear of what might happen. Is it really a healthy environment then?

- That's because ... I have no idea what the content of the conversations is, and I don't know how to monitor such a thing. I don't know who you talked to or what, so it's an almost impossible question to answer. Obviously it is not good if it is so, but I have a hard time imagining it would be this way.

Now that we have talked about all this, do you feel satisfied with how you handled everything or is it something you think you should have done differently?

- Of course ... If you come from the sport that I do you are never satisfied with anything. It is hardly that you are satisfied if you have won the series. You always want to do things better. I have a hard time seeing that we could have done so much differently. The payroll process looks the way it does, it is a central negotiation, we have followed the professional advice available. But what is difficult between people is communication. Perhaps it is that we would have found more effective ways of communicating. It's not really about doing right or wrong, it's not the most important thing. It is clear that it is important to communicate correctly, but it is also important to communicate messages in a good way. There we could have done better. But we have tried to follow the regulations and the laws that exist, but we may be better at telling you how it went.