It's more or less the same. The employer is obligated to giving a truthful and sensible reason for the dismissal in writing, the employee has no such obligation

It's more or less the same. The employer is obligated to giving a truthful and sensible reason for the dismissal in writing, the employee has no such obligation. The union can only object and demand compensation if the employer is lying or the grounds for dismissal are unreasonable. Also, Denmark has public salary insurance backed by the state, so in case the employer goes bankrupt, all back wages will still be paid as if the employees were just dismissed. Overtime, vacation and severance packages will not be lost by the employees, giving them more security and time to relocate to other jobs. But eg. in Sweden the dismissal process can be extremely difficult and complicated. As a consultant in a Swedish corporation I experienced the crazy consequences of extreme union protectionism of employee rights. In one case, a worker was fired because he was caught sleeping on the night shift, while he should have been keeping an eye on a multi-million dollar food processing machinery, making ingredients all night long - ingredients which has to be produced within strict food safety tolerances. The union blocked his firing, so the department boss let him go after a few month, giving lack of work as the reason. When the boss of the department finally had waited long enough, and went looking for another employee with the same qualification in the small towns near the factory, the union representatives at the factory demanded that the boss re-hired the Mr. Sleepy, because he was the last one to be let go, and as such had first priority for being re-hired. Also, I was informed of a factory of domestic appliances being shut down and moved some 300 km away, because the top brass was annoyed by the grey haired middle management at the site, their obstructionism and resistance to change, backed by the manager's union. The C-suites figured that they could easily replace the employees, but the middle management wouldn't tag along, sell their houses, etc. The union was told it was a cost cutting exercise, and all employees would be offered their old jobs back at the new location if they were willing to relocate. The real reason for the exercise was actually the elimination of the useless middle management layer and getting free hands to rebuild the organisation.