Since you're a Swede you can read up on it here:

https://www.ifmetall.se/globalassets/avdelningar/bohuslan-dal/resurser/dokument/ny-medlem/medlemsavgifter-2023.pdf

1.5% of salary before tax, minimum 230 SEK and maximum 633 SEK as of 2023.

I was a member of IF Metall about a decade ago, and back then I recall paying some absurd amount like 700kr+ (for reference I didn't make more than like 20kkr at the time). They were also atrocious to deal with, but hopefully that's just true for my local department.

Unionen on the other hand has been great to deal with from personal experience, and like you said, costs borderline nothing to be a member of.

Technically it does have collective agreements just not with the company I work for.

A union, at least in Sweden, isn't tied to a place of work so me working somewhere they don't have a collective agreement isn't that odd. Now it does mean I don't get as much out of my membership but I still do gain some things. Like if my employer screws me over the union is there to help me and fight for me in court if need be. There are also some extra protections like if there is a layoff the company will need to negotiate and justify why I, or anyone else in my union, should be the one to loose their job.

Your workplace can choose to have a collective agreement or not. It doesn't affect whether individual employees are unionised or not.

My first workplace did not have a kollektivavtal. Nothing in our contract said anything about negotiating salaries, meaning you might never see a salary increase (I didn't for the three years I worked there, knew someone who worked there seven years and only saw it once), it basically just complied with Swedish worker laws.

I was in a union, because unions are still useful for e.g. personal development, career advice, legal help, etc. You can be self-employed and be in a union, unions can offer assistance and guidance for self-employed people too.

The argument I see against collective agreements here is that they're "inflexible" and "not easy to apply to small companies" but I've yet to ever read a concrete example of this, so my personal belief is that it's utter bunk. Like I mentioned elsewhere, there are times where not having one can sort of make sense; when you're self-employed, and in a scenario where your contract covers all bases you want it to and you're content not having a kollektivavtal. For example, if you have an incredible salary and you don't ever care to negotiate about it (assuming there's no clause in the contract about it)

If it's a normal workplace, you should have a kollektivavtal. It's common sense.

It's very possible to be in an overarching group. The Netherlands, for example, has two really huge union-federations. You can join them even when they don't have a collective bargaining agreement for your profession. That means you still get legal aid in conflicts with your employer, for example.

Cool, TIL, thanks for the breakdown!

I realised shortly after posting it, that it might be something people abroad aren't familiar with. So I've amended my comment to include a short description of what a kollektivavtal, a collective agreement is. It differs depending on your line of work, a programmer like me wouldn't have the same agreement that say, a mine worker in Kiruna would have.

In short though, a kollektivavtal opens up a breadth of fundamental workers rights, like the right to negotiate your salary. A workplace not having one is a gigantic red flag.

@SturgiesYrFase@lemmy.ml