3 ms·

If Postnord is unable or unwilling to fulfill its obligations, then their contract should be dropped, and another company should be used instead. Right? Or is

If Postnord is unable or unwilling to fulfill its obligations, then their contract should be dropped, and another company should be used instead. Right? Or is there only one mail delivery service? Or is something else the problem? What am I missing?

s1artibartfast 3y ago
Swedish Law was that plates could only be delivered by government owned Postnord. The courts just ruled that Tesla is temporarily exempted from this law until the case is settled. Postnord also has many plates in their possession, and tesla can not legally sell or ship the cars they are registered to. The court has just ruled that Postnord can hold on to these plates until the case is settled
- paulddraper 3y ago
  So it's privatized with statutory exclusivity? Wow that's... Wow. I take for granted that private parties are equal under the law.
  - s1artibartfast 3y ago
    Postnord is a 100% government owned company
    - paulddraper 3y ago
      > Firstly postnord is a (largely government owned) private company, so employees are not state employees. For state employees, employees with sovereignty duties (e.g. police...) typically there are restrictions around strike action. So the government owns the company, but the employees are not government employees? Everything I said still stands. --- EDIT: Basic common sense says you can either be considered (1) a government organization with statutory exclusivity and legal responsibility (2) a private organization without statutory exclusivity or legal responsibility. Sweden is letting Postnord have its cake and eat it too.
      - s1artibartfast 3y ago
        Yeah, I think it is whacky too.
  - limbero 3y ago
    The person you're talking to is mistaken, the use of Postnord is not defined in law, it's contractual. The Swedish government has a centrally negotiated contract with Postnord to do all of their deliveries, and Transportstyrelsen did not believe they were authorized to break that contract – even with the strike causing Postnord to not live up to their end. It makes sense to me that the court system was needed to decide that the contract in practice is void in situations like this.

s1artibartfast 3y ago

Swedish Law was that plates could only be delivered by government owned Postnord. The courts just ruled that Tesla is temporarily exempted from this law until the case is settled. Postnord also has many plates in their possession, and tesla can not legally sell or ship the cars they are registered to. The court has just ruled that Postnord can hold on to these plates until the case is settled

paulddraper 3y ago
So it's privatized with statutory exclusivity? Wow that's... Wow. I take for granted that private parties are equal under the law.
- s1artibartfast 3y ago
  Postnord is a 100% government owned company
  - paulddraper 3y ago
    > Firstly postnord is a (largely government owned) private company, so employees are not state employees. For state employees, employees with sovereignty duties (e.g. police...) typically there are restrictions around strike action. So the government owns the company, but the employees are not government employees? Everything I said still stands. --- EDIT: Basic common sense says you can either be considered (1) a government organization with statutory exclusivity and legal responsibility (2) a private organization without statutory exclusivity or legal responsibility. Sweden is letting Postnord have its cake and eat it too.
    - s1artibartfast 3y ago
      Yeah, I think it is whacky too.
- limbero 3y ago
  The person you're talking to is mistaken, the use of Postnord is not defined in law, it's contractual. The Swedish government has a centrally negotiated contract with Postnord to do all of their deliveries, and Transportstyrelsen did not believe they were authorized to break that contract – even with the strike causing Postnord to not live up to their end. It makes sense to me that the court system was needed to decide that the contract in practice is void in situations like this.