Over the past several months, debate regarding the reform of the National Labour Inspectorate (PIP) has continually resurfaced, gaining and losing momentum in equal measure. Some time ago, however, media headlines have described it as \u201con hold\u201d or \u201cfrozen\u201d.<\/p>\n
After several months of work, the Prime Minister stated on social media that, in his view, allowing an official to change the form of employment without asking the employer or the worker, and without a court judgment, is a bad idea. At the same time, he announced that the government would find better ways to protect employees. And it seems that they did manage to find such ways, as recent press reports indicate that the government resumed work on the reform a few days ago.<\/p>\n
Where did PIP reform come from?<\/strong><\/p>\n The answer helps us \u2013 at least approximately \u2013 predict its future.<\/p>\n The amendment to the PIP Act did not appear \u201cout of nowhere\u201d. It forms part of Poland\u2019s broader commitments under the National Recovery Plan (KPO). In other words, it is a milestone that must be achieved if Poland is to meet specific obligations towards the European Union. From this perspective, the question is not \u201cwhether it will enter into force at all,\u201d but \u201cwhen and in what final shape.\u201d<\/p>\n The aim of the reform is stated as being a more effective fight against abuses on the labour market and its segmentation, in particular situations in which civil law contracts are used solely to reduce employment costs, even though in practice the cooperation differs little from a classic employment relationship.<\/p>\n Reclassifying a civil law contract as an employment contract<\/strong><\/p>\n The most groundbreaking element of the draft was granting PIP the power to administratively determine the existence of an employment relationship \u2013 i.e. to issue decisions that are currently exclusively within the courts\u2019 remit. In practice, this meant that, after conducting an inspection, an inspector would be entitled to issue a decision reclassifying a civil law contract as an employment contract.<\/p>\n Importantly, the explanatory memorandum assumed a clear shift in emphasis: decisive significance was to be given to the content of Article 22 of the Labour Code, not the parties\u2019 intent or the name of the contract. If, in practice, the features of an employment relationship were present \u2013 subordination, work performed under management, at a specified time and place \u2013 the parties\u2019 intentions would become secondary.<\/p>\n Changes in inspections<\/strong><\/p>\n Alongside the legislative changes, PIP also announced a qualitative change in its approach to inspections of employers. There was to be less formal analysis of documents and more examination of how cooperation looks in practice. According to the media, inspectors would be interested, among other things, in:<\/p>\n The draft also provided for data exchange between PIP, ZUS and the tax authorities, aimed at making the selection of entities for inspection far more precise and inspections far more effective. This goal was also to be achieved by introducing remote inspections.<\/p>\n A temporary pause <\/strong>is not a withdrawal<\/strong><\/p>\n Although some time ago work on the reform project was temporarily suspended – when it was already at the final stage – it has now resumed after being halted by the Prime Minister. As anticipated, the government decided that it could not afford to lose the funds available under the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (NRRP).<\/strong><\/p>\n While we do not yet know what final form the reform project will ultimately take, everything indicates that its assumptions will be softened compared to the previously agreed version. It should also be expected that the work will accelerate, as Poland must account for the NRRP funds by August.<\/strong><\/p>\n Approaching civil law contracts<\/strong><\/p>\n Contrary to alarmist slogans, the PIP reform never meant the end of civil law contracts (mandate contracts, contracts for specific work) or self-employment. It certainly did, however, mean the end of comfortable \u201cpaper\u201d operations, without reflecting on how cooperation looks in reality.<\/p>\n In this respect, nothing has changed \u2013 the problem has always been where a contractor is, in practice, an \u201cemployee without a contract\u201d, and the differences between them and employees hired under employment contracts are purely declaratory.<\/p>\n We must remember that, although there has been no increase in the powers of PIP so far, other risks remain in place:<\/p>\n The most sensible strategy today, therefore, seems to be a calm, methodical audit \u2013 not only of contracts, but above all of practices in: management methods, communication, settlements, benefits, internal procedures.<\/p>\n It is worth creating a risk map, estimating the potential financial exposure and deciding where changes are truly necessary \u2013 and how much time is needed to implement them.<\/p>\n The shift in approach to civil law contracts \u2013 regardless of when and in what shape the reform ultimately enters into force \u2013 is a fact, meaning that a lack of response is no longer neutral. That is precisely why this is not a topic that can be safely postponed.<\/p>\n\n
\n