Finland fixed-term contracts will become easier to use after Parliament approved a controversial labour reform on Wednesday, with 93 votes in favour, 78 against and 28 MPs absent. The change allows employers to offer a fixed-term contract of up to one year without a justified reason when it is the first employment contract between that employer and employee. The government says the reform will lower the threshold for hiring, especially for small and medium-sized companies. Opposition parties, trade unions and women’s organisations warn that it could weaken job security and increase the risk of discrimination linked to pregnancy and parental leave.
A narrow vote on a wider labour market shift
The reform, often referred to in Finland as the fixed-term employment law (määräaikaisuuslaki), was backed by the governing majority in the Finnish Parliament (Eduskunta). The opposition parties — the Social Democratic Party, the Centre Party, the Left Alliance, the Greens and Movement Now — voted against it.
Until now, Finnish employment law has generally required a justified reason for a fixed-term contract initiated by the employer. Such reasons can include seasonal work, a temporary project, substitution for an absent employee or another specific feature of the job. Without such justification, the contract has normally been treated as valid indefinitely.
The new law changes that rule for first contracts. An employer will be able to conclude a fixed-term employment contract without a justified reason for a maximum of one year when hiring a worker for the first time. The same possibility may also apply if a previous employment relationship between the same employer and employee ended at least two years earlier.
For the government, the reform is part of a broader labour market agenda aimed at increasing flexibility and supporting employment. Minister of Employment (työministeri) Matias Marttinen has argued that the package is designed to make hiring easier, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises.
Why unions see the fixed-term contract reform as a risk
The strongest criticism has come from trade unions and worker organisations, which see the reform as a shift of risk from employers to employees. Their concern is not only that more jobs may become temporary, but that workers could find it harder to plan housing, family life, income and career development if the first step into a workplace is more often a time-limited contract.
Millariikka Rytkönen, chair of the Union of Health and Social Care Professionals (Tehy), criticised the government for pushing the law through despite criticism from civil society and experts. In her view, the process sends a message that workers’ rights and expert assessments have little weight in labour policy.
The Trade Union of Education in Finland (OAJ) described the easing of fixed-term employment rules as a serious mistake. It argued that the change is harmful to predictability and equality in working life, particularly in sectors where temporary contracts are already common.
The criticism reflects a wider Nordic debate about how far labour markets can be made more flexible without weakening the security that has traditionally supported high employment, trust and collective bargaining. In Finland, the issue is particularly sensitive because the government has already pursued a series of labour market reforms contested by unions.
Pregnancy and parental leave are at the centre of the dispute
A key point of concern is the possible impact on workers who are pregnant, planning a family or taking parental leave. Trade unions and women’s groups linked to government parties have warned that easier access to fixed-term contracts could make it more difficult to detect or challenge discrimination.
The government says discrimination remains prohibited. According to the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Employment (työ- ja elinkeinoministeriö), an employer will not be allowed to conclude or refuse a fixed-term contract on discriminatory grounds. The ministry also says the reform is not expected, in itself, to weaken protection against discrimination.
However, the ministry has acknowledged that if the number of fixed-term contracts increases, the number of suspected discrimination cases connected to them may also rise. That is the central tension in the reform: the legal prohibition remains in place, but critics argue that proving discrimination can become harder when an employer can simply let a temporary contract expire.
Finland has also been moving separately to strengthen protection against discrimination related to pregnancy, parenthood and family care responsibilities. Under proposed changes to equality law, employers would have to explain the non-renewal or termination of a fixed-term contract when the employee has informed them of pregnancy, childbirth or family care obligations. The interaction between these safeguards and the new fixed-term rules will be closely watched.
Safeguards limit repeated temporary contracts, but doubts remain
The government has included limits intended to prevent abuse. A fixed-term contract concluded without a justified reason cannot exceed one year. It can be renewed at most twice during the year following the first contract, and the combined duration of such contracts cannot exceed one year.
Employers will also have obligations at the end of the contract. They must provide a reasoned explanation of whether the employee could be hired permanently or under a justified fixed-term contract. If the employer is considering hiring more people for the same or similar tasks, they must offer work to the employee whose unjustified fixed-term contract is ending. This obligation can last for a period corresponding to one third of the total duration of the contracts, up to a maximum of four months.
The government argues that these safeguards will protect employees and prevent employers from circumventing employment protections. Critics remain unconvinced. For unions, the central change is still that the first employment relationship may begin without the security of an open-ended contract, even when the employer’s need for labour is permanent.
A Finnish reform with a Nordic and EU relevance
The Finnish vote matters beyond Helsinki because it touches on a wider European question: how to balance labour market flexibility with social protection. The EU’s fixed-term work framework has long aimed to prevent abuse arising from successive temporary contracts, while leaving member states room to define national rules.
In the Nordic context, the debate is also about the social foundations of work. Nordic labour markets are often described through cooperation between employers, unions and the state. When unions argue that reforms are being adopted without sufficient dialogue, they are not only objecting to a single law. They are warning that the method of reform may weaken trust in the labour market model itself.
For Finland, the practical effects will depend on how employers use the new rules, how courts interpret possible disputes and whether equality protections prove strong enough in practice. The immediate political message is clearer: the government sees fixed-term contracts as a tool to encourage hiring, while its critics see the reform as another step towards a less secure working life.
