Month: February 2026

For employers and HR departments, the fundamental question is no longer whether to use artificial intelligence, but how to do so legally while safeguarding employee rights. While technology can significantly enhance operational efficiency, it must be applied with caution in HR, where any error has a direct impact on individual rights, legal liability, and the organisation’s reputation. – Kinga Polewka-Włoch and Anna Szulc comment to Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish available: here.

Electronic applications were finally regulated by the Labour Code. There have been some issues to date largely stemming from inconsistent terminology. For instance, there was no requirement for unpaid leave applications to be in the written form to be valid; the focus remained on the evidence provided. Consequently, the specific format was not important, given that an email can be printed and presented as evidence. Therefore, the current amendments should be viewed as a formal alignment with existing practices rather than a radical shift in policy. – Kinga Polewka-Włoch comments to Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

Full article in Polish available: here.

 

A significant change to the Social Insurance Institution’s (ZUS) medical certification process is set to launch later this year, promising faster decisions and more efficient sick leave checks. However, a key change allowing employees to remain on sick leave at one company while working at another will not take effect until 2027. The amendment to the Social Insurance System Act and certain other acts, which introduced these changes, was published in the Journal of Laws on 12 January 2026. – Sławomir Paruch and Jan Kozakoszczak comment to Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish available: here.

We have selected what we consider to be the ten most important 2025 Supreme Court rulings in social security cases for employers and insured individuals. In these decisions, the Supreme Court addressed such issues as social insurance coverage for management board contracts and the right to challenge overestimated bases for benefit calculations. – Sławomir Paruch, Marcin Szlasa-Rokicki, Oskar Kwiatkowski and Julia Rożen comment to Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

Full article in Polish available: here.

Checking trade union membership is an important organisational step that confirms the actual scope of a union’s powers. This process effectively mitigates the risk of overestimated membership figures and ensures that trade union consultation is grounded in reliable data rather than assumptions. The procedure also provides a constructive incentive for trade unions to maintain accurate documentation, ensure strict compliance with statutory requirements, and exercise only the powers to which they are legitimately entitled. This contributes to more predictable and stable workplace relations over the long term. – Kinga Polewka-Włoch and Oliwia Niepsuj comment to Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish available: here.

An employer’s inability to waive liability, even after making every effort to prevent workplace bullying, could lead to them being held responsible for conduct occurring without their knowledge. This shift suggests that even the most robust preventative measures may not shield a company from the financial consequences of a toxic manager’s actions. In essence, this moves the legal framework towards a model of strict liability, where the employer bears the inherent risk. – Kinga Polewka-Włoch comments to Dziennik Gazeta Prawna.

Full article in Polish available: here.

The government has adopted an amendment to the PIP Act alongside significant changes to workplace bullying regulations.

Legislative work has accelerated regarding the PIP’s new powers, including the ability to reclassify B2B and other contracts based on the Civil Code into employment contracts, as well as updated regulations on workplace bullying. Revised drafts of both bills were published in early February and formally adopted by the Council of Ministers on 17 February. Given the current pace, these changes are expected to come into force in the first half of 2026.

We have previously discussed the core proposals of the PIP bill; our full summary is available here.

The key developments in workplace bullying legislation are as follows:

1. Persistence as a core requirement: A key component of the legal definition of workplace bullying is “persistent bullying”. This is defined as repetitive, recurring, or constant behaviour, whether physical, verbal, or non-verbal. Isolated incidents do not constitute workplace bullying, even if they infringe upon an employee’s personal rights.
2. Distinction from justified criticism: The legislation explicitly clarifies that justified professional criticism, provided it is delivered in an appropriate manner, does not constitute bullying. Similarly, the legitimate enforcement of employment duties is not classified as workplace bullying.
3. Minimum compensation threshold: Employees subjected to workplace bullying will be entitled to claim compensation of no less than six times the national minimum monthly salary (currently around PLN 30,000). This does not preclude further claims for damages, and there is no statutory upper limit on either form of compensation.
4. Duty to take active measures: Employers with nine or more employees are required to formally establish rules, procedures, and a schedule of activities aimed at protecting personal rights, ensuring equal treatment and fostering a workplace environment free from discrimination and bullying. Such regulations must be incorporated into collective agreements, work regulations, or formal internal notices.
5. Redefined scope of perpetrators: Workplace bullying may be committed by an individual or a group. It can originate not only from an employer or superior but also from colleagues in equivalent positions, subordinates, or third parties performing work for the employer outside of a standard employment contract.
6. Protection against retaliation: An employee’s exercise of their rights regarding labour law breaches, including the principle of equal treatment, must not result in any adverse consequences. Specifically, such actions cannot constitute grounds for the termination of an employment contract, either with or without a notice period.
7. Broader definition of discrimination: The new legislation introduces two new concepts: (i) discrimination by perception, where an employee is or could be treated less favourably based on a characteristic incorrectly attributed to them (e.g., presumed political views), and (ii) discrimination by association, where less favourable treatment stems from the employee’s connection with another person possessing a specific characteristic (e.g., a family member).
8. Implementation timeline: The new provisions are set to take effect 21 days after the Act is officially announced. However, the legislator has provided a six-month transitional period for employers to adapt their internal regulations.

How should employers prepare for these changes?

In light of these developments, employers should ensure that their workplace regulations together with anti-bullying and anti-discrimination procedures are fully updated. We recommend prioritising regular training to raise awareness among both staff and management regarding the prevention of undesirable behaviour. With the legal burden on employers to maintain a safe and respectful workplace set to increase, it is essential to implement proactive preventive measures immediately.

Please feel free to contact us!

The new regulations introduce expanded inspection powers for the Social Insurance Institution, alongside stricter accountability for the issuance of medical certificates. Furthermore, starting in 2027, employees will be permitted to continue working in one role while on leave from another. What are the practical implications of these amendments? – Bartosz Wszeborowski and Aleksandra Bruchajzer, comment to prawo.pl.

Full article in Polish available: here.

New provisions of the Labour Code concerning pay transparency, which came into force on 24 December 2025, are transforming recruitment practices. One of the most practical and contentious issues arising from these regulations is whether an employer may ask a candidate for their salary expectations before disclosing the remuneration offered for the role. Currently, the law does not explicitly define the sequence in which this information must be shared. This lack of clarity has resulted in conflicting interpretations among legal practitioners, lawyers, and HR professionals regarding best practices for compliance. – Bartosz Tomanek and Michał Włodarczyk comment to Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish available: here.

Some incentive programmes allow employees to benefit directly from the company’s growth, alongside or instead of a standard cash salary. The aim is not only to reward employees, but also to build long-term commitment and loyalty. In this way, employees are aligned with the company goals. Such programmes are becoming increasingly popular because they combine financial motivation with a sense of shared responsibility for the company’s development. – Sandra Szybak-Bizacka and Kajetan Zając comment for Rzeczpospolita.

Full article in Polish available: here.