Legislative work is under way on an amendment to the Labour Code introducing significant changes in the area of equal treatment, the protection of personal rights and preventing mobbing. In October 2025, a further, substantially revised version of the bill was published, clearly tightening employers’ liability regime and strengthening the procedural position of employees.

The amendment is systemic in nature – it includes both a redefinition of key concepts and the introduction of minimum thresholds for compensation for non-material harm, an extension of the reversed burden of proof mechanism, and a stronger obligation to formalise preventive measures.

New forms of discrimination

The bill introduces the express regulation of both discrimination by assumption and discrimination by association. The former involves less favourable treatment of an employee due to a characteristic wrongly attributed to them (e.g. an assumed sexual orientation, health condition or views). The latter concerns situations where an employee is treated worse due to an association with a person who has a protected characteristic (e.g. a family member).

In practice, this means that employer liability may arise even where actions were based on stereotypes, assumptions or incorrect information. Protection against discrimination is thus clearly linked to the perpetrator’s motivation rather than the objective existence of a characteristic on the employee’s side.

A new model of claims for unequal treatment

The bill provides for a clear separation of two categories of claims available to an employee in the event of a breach of equal treatment: compensation for material damage and compensation for non-material harm. The minimum level of compensation for non-material harm is set at not less than the minimum wage, and in the case of repeated breaches – at least three times that amount.

This solution significantly limits the court’s discretion in setting the lower threshold and eliminates the possibility of awarding symbolic amounts. As a result, the minimum financial risk for employers increases substantially.

Strengthened protection against retaliation

The amendment extends protection for employees who take action in connection with breaches of labour law provisions, including the equal treatment principle. An employee subjected to any retaliatory actions will be able to pursue not only compensation, but also compensation for non-material harm.  Protection will also cover individuals who provided support to an employee exercising their entitled rights. Protection will be excluded only if the employee knew that the reported violation had not occurred

Reversed burden of proof

A significant change is the extension of the reversed burden of proof mechanism to all cases concerning breaches of the equal treatment principle, including harassment and sexual harassment. The employee will only have to make the breach plausible, while the employer will have to demonstrate that it did not occur. This mechanism will apply both in court proceedings and internal workplace procedures.

In practice, this materially strengthens the employees’ procedural position and increases the importance of documenting actions taken by the employer.

An obligation of active prevention

The bill introduces an explicit obligation to actively and continuously strive to prevent breaches of the equal treatment principle, infringements of dignity and other personal rights of employees. This obligation covers preventive actions, detection and an appropriate response, as well as remedial actions and support for those affected.

In practice, even the absence of preventive measures may itself form a basis for employer liability. The liability model shifts from reactive to preventive – employers are expected to manage risk on an ongoing, real basis, rather than merely respond after incidents occur.

A new definition of mobbing

The bill substantially modifies the definition of mobbing. A key feature is the persistent harassment of an employee, understood as conduct that is repeated, recurring or constant. The requirement of a long duration has been removed, meaning that even an intense series of events over a short period may be classified as mobbing.

The bill explicitly states that mobbing may also include non-purposeful (unintentional) conduct. The perpetrator does not have to be a manager, but could also be a co-worker, a subordinate, a third party, a person working on a basis other than an employment relationship, as well as a group of people. The minimum compensation for non-material harm for mobbing is set at not less than twelve times the minimum wage.

Employer liability will be excluded only where the mobbing did not originate from a person managing the employee or holding a superior position, and where the employer demonstrates that it duly fulfilled the obligation to prevent mobbing. In practice, this shifts the burden of proof to the employer, requiring it not only to prove the existence of procedures but also their actual effectiveness. The bill also confirms the possibility of recourse claims against the perpetrator, introducing an explicit link between mobbing-related claims and the protection of personal rights.

Formalisation of internal procedures

The amendment obliges employers to specify – either in work regulations or in a separate notice – the rules, procedures and frequency of actions related to preventing mobbing, discrimination, breaches of equal treatment and infringements of employees’ personal rights. The absence of such rules will constitute a breach of employer obligations.

Practical consequences

The amendment represents a qualitative shift in the model of employer liability in the area of employment relations. It is no longer sufficient merely to respond to reports, but active prevention becomes necessary. This requires implementing genuinely functioning legal risk management mechanisms in HR, including training, procedures, documenting responses and monitoring managerial practices.

The expansion of definitions, the introduction of hard minimum amounts, the reversed burden of proof and the obligation of active prevention mean that the previous approach based on minimal compliance is no longer sufficient.

The bill provides for entry into force 21 days after promulgation, with a six-month period in which internal regulations are to be adjusted. The new rules will also apply to conduct that began before the amendment entered into force, where it continues after that date.

Read more about Polish HR law – PRO HR Year Book 2025