Easier pursuit of claims for discrimination and mobbing, obligation to retain an employee until the end of court proceedings, minimum wage in 2020, “zero-rate PIT for young people”, varying employees’ remuneration in relation to length of service (Supreme Court judgement), issuance of A1 certificates (Court of Justice judgement and the stance of the Ministry of the Family, Labour and Social Policy)

Labour Code: new rendition of provisions on mobbing, discrimination and work certificates. Personal data under labour law. Status of British citizens in Poland after Brexit. Highest earners’ contributions to Employee Capital Plans. Supreme Court: age and personal connections as discrimination criteria. Court of Justice of the EU: obligation to register time at work for all employees.

Businesses optimising their operations often cease employing some of their staff in favour of outsourcing services. Sometimes, for this purpose, they transfer their employees based on Art. 23¹ of the Labour Code to an outsourcer, most often without transferring any other assets. The main economic motive for such measures is savings on social security and health insurance contributions. However, in the opinion of courts ruling on cases in similar factual circumstances, often at the request of tax or social insurance authorities, this may be only a sham transfer of the workplace, and as a consequence Art. 23¹ of the Labour Code does not apply. What does this mean for the original employer?

Dr Szymon Kubiak, Kamil Jabłoński

An employee in the sales department of a company that sells its own products reported to a management board member a suspicion that the employee’s superior—the head of the sales department—was passing confidential information to a competitor. The employee discovered this when accidentally copied on an email the superior sent to the competitor. The company launched an internal investigation.

Dr Marta Derlacz-Wawrowska, Katarzyna Żukowska