A new version of the draft bill on the National Labour Inspectorate has been approved by the Standing Committee of the Council of Ministers. Although the legislator has abandoned the most controversial solutions from the previous draft, the direction of the changes remains clear: the Inspectorate will be given tools to intervene more effectively in the employment model, especially where B2B and civil law contracts are used. The draft does not so much soften the previous proposals as rebuild them into a more formalised form that is resistant to accusations of official discretion. Employers should therefore read it not as a "soft reversal" but rather as a new, more refined stage of the same reform.

Have a question or need support?

Contact us

The biggest change concerns the sequence of actions taken by the National Labour Inspectorate (PIP). The previous version provided for the rapid issuance of decisions on the existence of an employment relationship, which raised concerns about excessive automatism. Currently, the decision is to be preceded by a mandatory order to remedy the violations. Only failure to comply with this order opens the way for an administrative decision. From the employers' point of view, this is still a mechanism that allows for far-reaching interference in the employment structure, although it is only applied after an ineffective "call for improvement".

Compared to the original proposal, the issue of the enforceability of the decision has also changed. The automatic rigour of immediate enforceability has disappeared – the decision takes effect on the date of issue, but becomes enforceable only after the deadline for appeal has expired or after a final court judgment has been issued. However, this does not mean that the risk of immediate consequences ceases to exist. It is still possible to impose enforcement on an individual basis under the Code of Administrative Procedure. In practice, employers must take into account that the Inspectorate will resort to this instrument in situations it considers "obvious" or "urgent", and the legislator's aversion to automatic enforcement will not limit the small degree of freedom of action of the authorities.

One of the most important and new features of the draft is the protection of the person performing the work from the moment the inspection begins. If, during the inspection, the principal terminates their cooperation with the contractor, the person subject to the proceedings will benefit from protection against dismissal similar to that known from the Labour Code. In practice, this leads to a situation where the inspection itself becomes an event triggering a legal regime similar to the protection of a full-time employee.

Another fundamental change is the elimination of the appeal stage before the Chief Labour Inspectorate. It will be possible to appeal against the decision of the Regional Labour Inspectorate directly to the labour court, but under completely new rules. The draft provides for preclusion of evidence – all claims and evidence must be presented in the appeal, and only in exceptional cases will it be possible to supplement them later. This means a significant raising of the bar for employers: failure to prepare documents at the inspection stage may translate into a real inability to defend themselves effectively in court.

In addition, there are systemic solutions: central guidelines from the Chief Labour Inspectorate are to introduce uniform criteria for assessing employment relationships, and individual interpretations issued by the National Labour Inspectorate – a novelty on the Polish market – will be binding on the Inspectorate. On the other hand, the amnesty, which gives six months to "come clean", may seem attractive , but at the same time it will probably be a prelude to more intensive and targeted inspections after its end. However, the regulations concerning the exchange of information between the PIP, the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and tax offices have not changed significantly. This will allow the Inspectorate to conduct more targeted inspections.

What does all this mean in practice? Firstly, employers basing their employment models on B2B or contract work must assume that PIP inspections will become more methodical and more difficult to challenge. Secondly, the risk of unknowingly entering into an employee protection regime is significantly increasing. Until now, attempts have often been made to "terminate cooperation" even before the Inspectorate has formulated its position – in the new model, such actions may have the opposite effect to that intended. Thirdly, the introduction of evidentiary preclusion means that employers should implement procedures for the immediate securing of documentation – from the first day of the inspection, and not only at the appeal stage.

For many entities, a strategic approach to amnesty may also prove crucial. This is a good time to review cooperation models, especially where B2B relationships in practice fulfil the conditions of an employment relationship. It is also worth considering applying for an individual interpretation from the National Labour Inspectorate, which may become a real element of risk mitigation.

The new draft law on the PIP therefore does not appear to be a "milder version" of previous proposals, but rather a more structured construct leading to the same goal: increasing the effectiveness of the Inspectorate in counteracting abuses of forms of employment. Employers should treat it as a signal to act before the new inspection system becomes fully operational.