Employment Law Update: Poland

Estimated reading time 3 minutes

Planned changes to the Temporary Employment Act

The Solidarity Trade Union has proposed changes to the Temporary Employment Act, which would prohibit businesses from using the same temporary employee for a period of more than 18 months within a three year period.  The move, which is aimed at stopping the current practice of hiring the same temporary employee at one workplace for many years by using multiple employment agencies, would enable temporary workers to have greater employment protection.  A draft amendment is being prepared by the Polish Cabinet in consultation with other social partners, including unions and employers.

Supreme Court ruling on social security contributions for executive remuneration

On 12 November 2014, the Polish Supreme Court ruled that the remuneration of a management board member, whose activities were consistent with managing the company, should be treated as consultancy fees for the purposes of social security contributions.  In the case in question, the management board member was registered as an individual entrepreneur, which attracted reduced social security contributions.  However, the Court ruled that the individual’s position on the management board of the company made it impossible for him to be treated as an independent entity, and that he should be treated not as an entrepreneur but as a consultant.  Under Polish law, the company is responsible for the withholding of social security contributions on consultants’ remuneration and social security contributions are considerably higher.

Employees can claim damages for 'inappropriate duties'

In September 2014, the Polish Supreme Court ruled that an employee was entitled to damages for moral injury for work, other than that defined in the employment contract, that did not match the employee’s qualifications.  In another case, which was further confirmed by the Appellate Court, it was judged that requiring a Deputy Head of Department to work as a Junior Assistant was below her qualifications and inflicted moral injury.

Resources

• Supreme Court Ruling I UK 126/14
• Supreme Court Ruling III PK 138/13
• Appellate Court (Bialystok) Ruling III APa 11/14

Further information

For further information or to discuss any of the issues raised, please contact Roch Palubicki at SKS Legal on +48 61 856 04 14.

Disclaimer
Content is for general information purposes only.  The information provided is not intended to be comprehensive and it does not constitute or contain legal or other advice.  If you require assistance in relation to any issue please seek specific advice relevant to your particular circumstances.  In particular, no responsibility shall be accepted by the authors or by Abbiss Cadres LLP for any losses occasioned by reliance on any content appearing on or accessible from this article.  For further legal information see our legal page.

Circular 230 disclosure
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS and other taxing authorities, we inform you that any tax advice contained in this article (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on any taxpayer or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or matter addressed herein.

Copying
If you would like to copy or otherwise reproduce this article then you may do so provided that: (1) any such copy or reproduction is for your own personal use or if it is made available to any third party it is done so on a free of charge basis; and (2) the article is reproduced in full together with the contact details, disclaimer and any logos as they appear on each article.