> That is, unless you can gather a political majority behind a major upheaval of the current law, wh

But hasn't this already happened with recent reforms regarding the limiting of strike rights [1] and current LAS negotiations.

[1] https://www.arbetaren.se/2019/06/19/riksdagen-klubbade-inskr...

That's a pretty marginal change in the context of European labor practices. There is still an "obligation of peace" while a bargaining agreement is in place, for example. It will (initially at least) only affect sites where there is more than one union who are competing for the same category of members, which is not all that common.

> It will (initially at least) only affect sites where there is more than one union who are competing for the same category of members, which is not all that common.

It is abstractly a huge deal and practically a huge deal for Hamnen, SAC, Brandmännens Riksförbund and other alternative unions because it excludes all competition among unions and channels all reform through the internal political workings of those unions like LO/Kommunal. As the a laywer in Arbetaren explained (and others have explained elsewhere) previously, it allows for company (i.e. "yellow") unions which is a realistic problem now considering Amazon is involved.

Potentially true, my reflection point is Finland instead of Sweden. Unions over here are however thinly masked extensions of political parties, yes they operate somewhat independently but each political party has a 'favourite' union who they influence through unofficial channels.

Sweden and Finland are pretty alike, but Sweden's system has a bit less political interference compared to how it's here in Finland.

The ruling Social Democratic Party has strong ties with the unions though.

They have traditional strong ties to one subset of the unions, the LO ones. But it's complex: LO is often openly critical of the (ruling) Social Democratic Party. At the same time a large chunk of the actual union members are voting for a different party, often one in opposition to the Social Democrats.

Yeah, my experiences with Swedish unions is definitely a bit dated, but I guess SD's growth is messing things up a bit, especially in LO?

It is. The LO union members are the ones with the most to loose with a workforce surplus that comes with more immigration (really refugee asylum, traditional immigration is on about the same levels as ever). The Alliance (center-right, when it existed) recogniced this and made the traditionally left humanitarian stance their own. This backfired in a spectacular way when the alt-right wave swept the world. SD takes voters from both blocks.

>each political party has a 'favourite' union who they influence through unofficial channels.

its the other way around.

Good correction - although I would say its more or less a two-way influence system.