Month: November 2024

The implementation of the EU’s directive on pay transparency will shed light on pay disparity within group companies. By requiring companies to disclose salary information across different subsidiaries, the directive will also heighten the risk of legal action related to equal pay and non-discrimination. – Kinga Polewka-Włoch and Katarzyna Stępień comment for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

Full article in Polish avialible: here.

Many seemingly harmless personal relationships between employees can have a ripple effect, impacting the entire organisation. Conflicts of interest can not only disrupt the work environment and employee relations, but also damage a company’s brand image and market reputation. The key lies in prevention – it is essential to have internal regulations in place. This can be achieved by developing a specific procedure outlining how to identify and address potential conflicts. – Michał Bodziony, Kinga Ciosk and Katarzyna Kuta comment for IT-Leaders.

Full article in Polish avialible here.

Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion are now prominent aspects of many workplaces in Europe and the United States. As a result, there is heightened sensitivity among workers regarding the rights of women, LGBTQ+ communities, minority ethnicities, and other groups. Misunderstanding such sensitive issues can also carry legal consequences. Marcin Sanetra, Renata Neeser, Aki Tanaka, and Lavanga Wijekoon discuss how multinational employers can address inclusion, equity, and diversity issues in their global workforces.

Watch the video here.

Employee volunteering programs fall within the concept of CSR – socially responsible business. Involvement of companies in charity or environmental work is becoming more common in Central and Eastern Europe and can bring many benefits to employers. Can employees refuse to participate in such activities, especially when they are scheduled outside their regular work hours, such as on Sundays? – Bartosz Wszeborowski and Magdalena Pawełczyk comment for prawo.pl.

Full article here.

Employers often turn to their existing staff to fill gaps when facing shortages. However, when additional responsibilities become permanent without a corresponding salary increase, it can lead to a situation known as a “dry promotion”. What employers need and what they are legally allowed to do may not always go hand in hand, which can come as a surprise for employers and employees alike. In this article, we explore the potential risks for employers who engage in such practices. – Karolina Kanclerz and Michalina Lewandowska-Alama comment for kobieta.rp.pl.

Full article in Polish avialible: here.

 The purpose of stating a reason for termination is to allow the employee to defend themselves against an unjustified dismissal. Hence, the assessment of whether the reason was specified correctly should be based on its ability to fulfill this purpose. Only when the reason for termination is imprecise or incomprehensible can the dismissal be deemed invalid due to a procedural flaw and, therefore, considered non-compliant with termination laws. – Mariusz Maksis comments for Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish here.

The proposed rewording of workplace bullying would define it as “persistent or prolonged” actions, rather than requiring both conditions to be met simultaneously. This means that even short-lived but persistent actions could potentially be classified as workplace bullying. It would be sufficient to keep only the “persistence” requirement, as this term inherently implies continuous, repetitive, and extended actions. – Michał Włodarczyk comments for Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

Full article in Polish avialible: here. 

Employers can offer different base salaries depending on several factors, including work conditions, such as location or assigned workspace. Even for the same type of work, pay differences can be justified by considering factors like required qualifications, work conditions, and the quantity and quality of work. This is particularly true when, despite seemingly identical positions and duties, the specific work conditions demand higher professional qualifications and psychological or physical attributes that are not necessary for other employees. In such cases, the employer has both the right and the obligation to differentiate pay based on these objective factors. – Kinga Polewka-Włoch and Katarzyna Stępień comment for ius.focus.

Article available at Legalis.

The one-month period for a summary dismissal should begin from the moment the employer receives verified and certain information about the misconduct justifying termination. This requires determining who, within the organization, must be aware of the employee’s specific conduct to trigger the termination process. – Patryk Koziel comments for Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish avialible: here.