The one-and-a-half year delay of the Whistleblower Protection Act has resulted in accelerating the implementation of these regulations for companies with 50 to 249 employees. They will have 24 hours to implement the changes after their publication in the Journal of Laws. – Bartosz Tomanek comments for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Article here.
“Employing a majority shareholder is considered not to be an employment relationship when the other shareholders’ equity is so small that it essentially has no impact, i.e. their stake does not exceed a few per cent. Because there is such a disproportionate majority holding leading to the concentration of voting power and the way this is used, employment relationships in a multi-member limited company should be treated on an equal footing with a single-member company. The legal structure of a single-member company has no equivalent in the Labour Code because relationships under such a structure would lack the essential components of an employment relationship prescribed by the labour law.” The Supreme Court judgment of 13 December 2022, I USKP 144/21.
The case in question was based not on labour law but on social insurance law. It considered an insured person employed under an employment contract as the chair of a one-member board in a limited company, while at the same time holding more than 95% of the shares. Because of that, the insured person would be considered self-employed and not an employee for the purposes of social insurance. This, in turn, affects the amount of sickness and maternity benefits. A few things do not add up here, such as the fact that the insured person was not the sole shareholder in the limited company and, therefore, was not even insured as self-employed. Arguably, the Social Insurance Institution acted quite generously by not questioning this insurance title. The issue of shareholder employment in a limited liability company has been the subject of disputes for years – attorney-at-law Łukasz Chruściel comments for Rzeczpospolita.
Article here.
A recent amendment to the Labour Code has somewhat clouded the issue when it comes to requesting parental leave. Previously, Article 179(1) of the Labour Code prescribed the so-called simultaneous application, i.e. parental leave could be applied for immediately within 21 days of the birth. Even though this provision has been repealed, it is still possible to submit a simultaneous application for benefits during these two types of leave under the Sickness Act within 21 days. How to go about this? It is sufficient to make a simultaneous application under the Sickness Act within 21 days of the birth, at the same time treating it as an application for parental leave under the Labour Code. This is because the Labour Code has left in place the requirement to apply at least 21 days before parental leave, which therefore merges with the application that is made within 21 days after the birth. – Łukasz Chruściel comments for the Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Article here.
Although the circumstances in which an employer may refuse to grant such leave are not indicated directly in the provision itself, an employer will be able to reject application for carer’s leave if it contains formal deficiencies. If the application is, for example, for a relative other than a son, daughter, mother, father, or spouse, and the employee fails to show that tis person resides with them in the same household, the carer’s leave may not be granted. – Katarzyna Witkowska-Pertkiewicz comments for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Article: here.
Employers should include an appropriate reason in their response to a privileged employee’s request for remote work. Instead of claiming too high costs of remote work, they should mention the organization or type of work that makes it impossible. The paradox of this situation is that most often expenses i.e. financial matters hold up agreements for remote working, but, according to Article 6719 par. 6 this cannot be the explicit reason for refusal. – Bartosz Tomanek comments for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Article: here.
The draft regulation of the Minister of Health shows that the state of epidemic emergency in Poland will be lifted on 1 July 2023. This will affect employees and employers – the changes will include, among other things, rules for training and occupational health examinations and a renewed increase in the limit on severance payments and compensation. – Paweł Sych comments for Interia Biznes.
Article: here.
Following the entry into force of the amendments to the Labour Code regarding work-life balance and transparent and predictable working conditions, employers are faced with an expanded catalogue of employment information, new rules governing probationary employment contracts, and requests from employees for more predictable working conditions. The changes were introduced at a rapid pace, which may be the reason why there is little practical guidance on how to apply them in day-to-day employee relations. Recent training courses and webinars for employers show that there are many questions in this area. – Piotr Kuźniak and Anna Kencel comment for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Artykuł: tutaj.
Employer’s primary duty in relation to health and safety in remote working is to prepare an occupational risk assessment. As indicated in the memorandum to the bill, the employer themselves or with expert’s help must identify the risks to health and life of employees, taking into account i.e. mechanical, physical, chemical, and biological factors occurring, or likely to occur in connection with the performance of work. – Bartosz Wszeborowski and Michalina Lewandowska-Alama comment for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Article: here.
The topic of work-life balance has been at the forefront of the Polish labour market in recent months, all thanks to the implementation of the EU directive in this area. Making working hours more flexible, increasing digitalisation, and the possibility to work from different parts of the world – all to help employees maintain work-life balance. At the same time, this is the result of listening over the years to the needs of employees who are increasingly struggling with workaholism and work burnout. – Bartosz Wszeborowski and Anna Kencel comment for Contact Online magazine.
Article here.
Amended legislation related to the implementation of the EU directives on work-life balance and transparent working conditions poses a new challenge for employers. The regulation came into force on 26 April this year. When implementing the new rules, employers must keep in mind the transitional provisions. These regulate a number of issues, without them proper implementation and application of the new regulations will not be possible. Those who receive maternity benefits, should also pay attention to the transitional provisions, as they regulate the change to the amount of this benefit in context of the introduced changes. – Paweł Sych and Patryk Kozieł comment for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.
Article: here.