Tolerating racist and homophobic behaviour in the workplace (and, in a broader context, tolerating heckling) is a breach of the employers’ duty to respect the dignity of their employees. It is also a breach of the duty to create an ethical working environment. Employers face a loss of reputation and good name for this, and in exceptional cases may even face criminal liability.

Workplace haterade

In 2019, according to a survey conducted by CBOS, 12% of people experienced heckling at work. Surveys from 2024 and 2025 indicate that 34% of adult Poles have encountered “hejt” (Polishisation of “hate”) at work. It is obvious to everyone that the problem is growing. There have been recent attempts to amend the Criminal Code by extending the hate speech offence to insulting a person on the basis of their gender identity or sexual orientation. These attempts failed, but this does not mean that the problem of hate crime does not exist, or that employers do not have a duty to counter it.

Obligations of the employer

Every employer has an obligation to actively counteract bullying and discrimination in the workplace. Discriminatory criteria are defined much more broadly in labour law than in the Criminal Code, as they include sexual orientation, among other things. A breach of the duty to actively counteract “hejt” exposes the employer to claims from aggrieved employees and also to a loss of reputation and goodwill.

As part of the duty to actively counteract hate speech, the employer should promote appropriate attitudes in the workplace, provide training and guidance. It is also the employer’s responsibility to respond to any suspicion of inappropriate behaviour, including heckling.

Criminal liability

Individuals who use hate speech in the workplace may be committing a criminal offence. The Criminal Code sets out penalties for hate speech and incitement to hatred on the grounds of national, ethnic, racial, religious differences, or on the grounds of irreligiousness (Article 256). For years, there have been calls to expand the catalogue of these grounds to include sexual orientation and other forms of discrimination. Today, insulting another person on these grounds is an offence handled by private prosecution (Article 216 of the Criminal Code).

Creating an atmosphere of acquiescence to hegemony at work can be interpreted as facilitating the commission of an offence. The facilitator can be punished for the offence in the same way as the perpetrator (Article 18 § 3 of the Criminal Code).

Find more articles in PRO HR April 2025.