Nordic Employment Law Bulletin - June 2026

Highlights from Denmark

• Pay transparency – implementation deadline approaching. The deadline for implementing the EU Pay Transparency Directive is approaching with EU member states required to implement the directive into national law by 7 June 2026. In Denmark, a draft bill to amend the Danish Act on Equal Pay has been published. According to the draft bill, the amendments would enter into force on 1 January 2027. However, the legislative process has been impacted by the recent general election. While it remains uncertain when a bill will be introduced in the Danish Parliament and when the amendments to the Danish Act on Equal Pay will take effect, it is clear that implementation will not be achieved by 7 June 2026.

• Government formation negotiations. Government formation negotiations are still ongoing, and this has been the longest government formation for the time being. As a result of the general election, there have been no legislative activities. Once a government has been formed, the legislative activities will resume. 

Morgenseminar om psysisk arbejdsmiljø

• På vores kommende morgenseminar den 25. juni kl. 08.30-10.30 deler vi vores erfaringer med, hvordan HR‑direktører og andre kan arbejde mere strategisk og robust med psykisk arbejdsmiljø – fra forebyggelse og ledelsesadfærd til håndtering af konkrete sager.
  Læs mere og tilmeld dig her: Morgenseminar om psysisk arbejdsmiljø | DLA Piper

Highlights from Finland

• Case “orange line”  – An employer terminated an employee’s employment contract without issuing a warning. According to the employer, the employee had taken numerous additional breaks during working hours, which was reflected in the working time monitoring reports prepared by the employer. The reports were compiled from two different systems that registered information on e.g. when work tasks were started and finished. If there was a gap of 30 minutes between the time logs, the systems formed an orange line that the employer claimed to be unauthorized breaks. However, the systems used were not meant as time tracking systems and employees were not informed of the purposes for which the systems would be used. Further, not all work was tracked by the systems and they did not take into account that not all work is performed on a computer but the employer did not investigate thoroughly if the orange lines could be explained. Based on among other the above reasons, the termination was considered unjustified. Especially in the AI era, the case reminds employers that all monitoring systems must be well planned, transparency is a must and in any event, the employer is responsible for the justifications of its decisions.

Highlights from Norway

• The Court of Appeal clarifies pay obligations in staffing agencies

  The Court of Appeal delivered judgment in LF-2025-203370 on 29 April 2026, concerning a wage claim after the end of employment in a staffing agency. The employee was permanently employed as a carpenter in an 80% position. After working more than his contractual percentage from 4 December 2023 to 28 January 2024, he received no further assignments and claimed wages and holiday pay for the period without work.

  The employer argued that the employment agreement validly allowed averaging of working hours under section 10-5 of the Working Environment Act, and that time between assignments was not payable if the 80% position was met over twelve months.

  The Court of Appeal rejected this. No plan for work and non-work periods had been prepared, so the employee did not know when he was free or required to be available. The employer could not unilaterally impose an immediate unpaid rest period because no assignments were available. Although the employment agreement included an averaging clause, section 10-5 required working time to be arranged in a clear, predictable and verifiable way, also for part-time employees in staffing agencies.

  The employer was ordered to pay the wage claim of NOK 36,998, plus interest from 26 April 2024, and NOK 92,887 in legal costs. The judgment was unanimous.

  The decision can be found (in Norwegian only) HERE. 

• Update of the National Insurance Basic Amount ("G")

  The National Insurance Basic Amount ("G") is increased annually on May 1. Effective May 1, 2026, the amount has been revised from NOK 130,160 to NOK 136,549, representing an increase of 4.91%. The basic amount is significant in several contexts of labour and employment law, for instance, the calculation of compensation for enforcing non-compete clauses (currently, the compensation is 100% of the employee's salary up to 8 G and at least 70% of the employee's salary for amounts exceeding 8 G and up to a total of 12 G). The basic amount is also utilised in the calculation of many of the Norwegian Labour and Welfare Administration's (NAV) payments, impacting, inter alia, retirement pension from the National Insurance Scheme, sickness benefits, work assessment allowances and disability benefits. Additionally, the basic amount affects the thresholds for pension accruals.

• Norwegian Supreme Court to review employment status in the Wolt case

  Further to the Wolt case discussed in the April issue of our bulletin, the Norwegian Supreme Court will now consider whether couriers working for Wolt should be classified as employees. The couriers claimed a right to permanent employment and initially won in the District Court. However, in February, the Court of Appeal ruled that they are independent contractors. The couriers appealed, and the case will now be heard by the Supreme Court.

  The Supreme Court will only decide the key legal question of whether the couriers are employees with a right to permanent employment or independent contractors. The hearing date has not yet been set.

Highlights from Sweden

• Storytel stumbles on consultation rules in redundancy process — Storytel’s 2024 workforce reduction has landed it in hot water with the largest white-collar union. After announcing plans to cut 45 roles, the company moved swiftly to secure voluntary severance agreements — so swiftly, in fact, that all affected employees had signed by the following day.

  The trade union Unionen argued that the process bypassed mandatory consultation under the Co-Determination Act. Storytel argued that it had met its obligations and was constrained by market abuse rules. The Court disagreed. It found that the agreements were effectively redundancies in disguise, leaving employees with little real choice. As such, consultation should have taken place before any deals were struck. The Court further held that the fact that the reorganisation constituted insider information did not justify any exception from the consultation obligation. Storytel was ordered to pay SEK 125,000 in damages for breaching its consultation duty, plus most of Unionen’s legal fees.

• No delay in sight: EU holds firm on Pay Transparency Directive — Sweden’s attempt to push for changes to parts of parts of the EU Pay Transparency Directive — and potentially buy time on implementation — has hit a dead end. The European Commission has made it clear that neither amendments nor postponements are on the table. The message comes as little surprise, but it leaves the Swedish Government with limited room to manoeuvre. Attention now turns to when a national legislative proposal will be presented — and how quickly implementation can follow. With the deadline of 7 June 2026 fast approaching, the pressure is mounting. Employers should therefore be prepared: the transparency era is coming, ready or not.

• Tesla truce: IF Metall eases off — at least in parts of Sweden — Sweden’s longest-running modern strike may be shifting gear, albeit cautiously. According to reports, IF Metall has instructed workers at Tesla facilities in Malmö and Uppsala to suspend industrial action and return to work after more than two and a half years of conflict. The union has declined to confirm the move, but has also not denied it—maintaining that it cannot comment on developments at this stage. They emphasised, however, that the dispute remains unresolved and that it is prepared to enter negotiations with Tesla over a collective agreement at any time. Since the strike began in October 2023, the parties have remained far apart. IF Metall continues to push for a collective bargaining agreement, while Tesla maintains that its existing employment terms are sufficient and that such agreements are voluntary. With mediation efforts exhausted and legal proceedings ongoing, the latest development suggests a tactical adjustment rather than any clear breakthrough.