Texts of pending comments

The Committee notes the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” received on 30 August 2021 and the response of the Government.

Articles 1 to 4 of the Convention. Gender pay gap and promotion of equal remuneration. The Committee notes the Government’s indications that: (1) according to the data of the European Institute for Gender Equality and Eurostat, the wage gap in Poland is 8.5 per cent (compared to an average of 14.1 per cent for the European Union); (2) according to the Ministry of Family and Social Policy (MFSP), the wage gap in the public sector is 2.5 per cent (the lowest in the European Union); (3) the National Action Programme for Equal Treatment 2021-2030 develops solutions to close the gender pay gap; (4) in particular, the MFSP developed a free application to measure wage inequality that will be promoted in the coming years, intended to increase knowledge about the wage gap as well as to help employers to set wage more fairly; (5) the MFSP also participates in the implementation of the Project “A good climate for good quality workplaces”, which aims at, inter alia, raising entrepreneurs’ awareness through actions directed at transparent remuneration and monitoring remuneration policies in enterprises; and (6) a package of relevant policy recommendations will be developed and a series of 10 workshops for employers and social partners will be held. The Committee also notes the observations by the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” that: (1) the positive trend in equalizing opportunities for women on the labour market has been interrupted by the Covid-19 epidemic; and (2) the data provided by Eurostat differ from those provided by the Central Statistical Office according to which the wage gap is approximately 19 per cent. In its response to the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc”, the Government emphasizes again that: (1) in terms of the amount of the salary gap, Poland compares well with other EU countries; and (2) that the situation is very different between the public and the private sectors, which is typical of all European countries and one of the reasons why European countries have decided to work on the elaboration of directive in this regard. The Government also stresses that there is no hard data at this stage to estimate the impact of Covid-19 on the salary gap. The situation needs to be monitored before conclusions can be drawn and remedial actions undertaken. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on the steps taken regarding: (i) the implementation of the National Action Programme for Equal Treatment 2021-2030 and its impact on closing the gender pay gap; (ii) the dissemination and promotion of the use of the application developed to measure wage equality; (iii) the implementation of the Project “A good climate for good quality workplaces”, in particular with respect to pay transparency; and (iv) the policy recommendations developed by the Government. The Committee also asks the Government to continue to provide information on the evolution of the gender wage gap, in particular information on the impact of the Covid-19 epidemic in this regard and the measures taken to remedy any negative impact noted. Lastly, emphasizing the importance of collecting appropriate data in determining the nature, extent and causes of unequal remuneration, to set priorities and design appropriate measures, to monitor and evaluate the impact of such measures, and to make the necessary adjustments, the Committee requests the Government to monitor the impact of programs in place and make adjustments towards the reduction of the gender pay gap.

Articles 1(b) and 2. Equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value and scope of comparison. Legislation. In its previous comments, the Committee had noted the indications by the Government that courts appeared to limit the scope of comparison provided for under section 183c of the Labour Code – that provides for equal pay for equal work or work of equal value - to the same enterprise. The Committee notes the indications by the Government that: (1) the draft of the new Labour Code developed by the Labour Law Codification Commission in 2018 did not receive recognition from the social partners and that there is no decision to resume this process; (2) the recommendations developed by the Codification Commission in the area of collective labour law will be used to develop further directions of the Government’s policy; and (3) work is currently in progress within the forum of the European Union to adopt a Directive on strengthening the application of the principle of equal pay for women and men for equal work or work of equal value, the possible adoption of which may have an impact on the equal pay solutions contained in the Labour Code. With regard to the ongoing legislative developments, the Committee further notes the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” that: (1) two parliamentary bills were submitted to the Sejm covering the issue of equality in remuneration for women and men, one amending the Labour Code and another one amending the Act on the National Labour Inspectorate; (2) a parliamentary draft of the Act on limiting the gender pay gap was also developed but not approved by the parliament – as the project presented a number of disadvantages, including that the role of trade unions was disregarded, and that it did not specify the consequences for the employers who failed to fulfil the obligations included in the draft act; and (3) the current legislative instruments do not equip workers and their representatives with effective tools to enforce the principle of the Convention. The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide information on any legislative development in relation to ensuring a broad scope of comparison between jobs to determine whether they are of equal value, such as ensuring that the application of the principle is not limited to the “same enterprise”. More generally, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on any legislative development on the application of the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value.

Article 3. Objective job evaluation. Further to the Committee’s request in this respect, the Government indicates that the survey that had been envisaged to be undertaken in all the ministries has been delayed and will be implemented before the end of the third quarter of 2022. It also notes that the free application developed by the MSFP to measure wage inequality will help employers in the setting of fair wages. The Committee asks the Government to provide information on any job evaluation exercise conducted in the public sector, including on the advancement of the survey planned to be conducted in the ministries in 2022, with detailed information on the method and criteria used to compare different jobs to determine whether they are of equal value. It also asks the Government to provide further information on the objective job evaluation methods used in the private sector, including detailed information on the application developed by the MSFP with specifics on the criteria and the measures used to compare jobs in the context of this application.

Awareness-raising. Further to the Committee’s request, the Government indicates that between 2017 and 2021, the topic was addressed in several continuing training courses for judges, court assessors, registrars, assistant judges in labour and social security divisions as well as civil divisions, and prosecutors and assistant prosecutors dealing with civil law cases. The Government also indicates that within the framework of its cooperation with the Academy of European Law ERA, Polish judges and prosecutors took part in several international trainings devoted to equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value and wage discrimination. Taking note of this information, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on training and awareness-raising activities on the principle of equal remuneration for men and women for work of equal value among workers, employers and their respective organizations.

Enforcement. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the National Labour Inspectorate undertakes activities of a preventive and informative nature to raise awareness on the principle of the Convention. More specifically, labour inspectors organize and participate in conferences, seminars, and training sessions on the issue, addressed to workers, employers, trade unions and employers’ organizations. The National Labour Inspectorate also publishes and distributes publications on the issue. The Committee further notes the detailed information provided by the Government on cases of pay inequality addressed by the National Labour Inspectorate, indicating that in 2018, 31 complaints were filed, and that in 17 of these cases, the inequality was found unjustified. In 2019, 24 complaints were filed and in 13 of these cases, the inequality was found unjustified. In 2020, 21 complaints were filed and for five of them, the inequality was found unjustified. Between 1 January and 30 June 2021, 14 complaints were filed and for five of them, the inequality was found unjustified. The Committee also takes note of the records of labour law cases provided by the Government on the number of complaints filed and addressed by the courts on employment pay, compensation for infringement of the principle of equal treatment in employment and for discrimination in employment, disaggregated by sex. It notes however that the data provided is not specific to cases related to the pay inequality between men and women. Taking note of this information, the Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the awareness-raising activities conducted by the labour inspectors among employers and workers and the number of cases of pay inequality between men and women addressed by the labour inspectorates, the courts or any other competent authorities, and the outcomes of these cases, including: (i) the reasons given for finding pay inequality between men and women to be unjustified, or justified, in particular cases; and (ii) the nature of relief granted in cases where the inequality was unjustified (amount of back pay to individuals; any punitive damages awarded; any prospective injunctive relief for the affected positions etc.).

The Committee notes the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” received on 30 August 2021, and the Government’s response.

Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. Prohibited grounds of discrimination. Legislation. In its previous comment, the Committee noted that section 113 of the Labour Code and section 3(1) of the Equal Treatment Act, 2010, do not prohibit discrimination on all the grounds enumerated in Article 1(1)(a) and requested the Government to provide information on any progress made in this regard, for instance in the context of the envisaged elaboration of a new draft Labour Code. The Committee notes the indication by the Government that the draft of the new Labour Code developed by the Labour Law Codification Commission in 2018 did not receive the recognition of the social partners and that as a result its enactment did not appear to be feasible. The Committee also notes the Government’s explanation that section 113 of the Labour Code prohibits any discrimination for any reason and that, similarly, section 183a(1) of the Labour Code: (1) provides for the obligation to treat employees equally in terms of establishing and terminating an employment relationship, conditions of employment, promotion and access to training to improve professional qualifications; and also (2) uses the same open list of grounds for discrimination, explicitly mentioning sex, age, disability, race, religion, nationality, political opinion, union membership, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, employment for a definite or indefinite period of time, and full-time or part-time employment. The Committee therefore notes that the Labour Code does not explicitly refer to colour, national extraction (which differs from ethnic origin and nationality) or social origin, but contains an open list of prohibited discrimination grounds. With respect to the Equal Treatment Act, the Committee notes that the definition of direct (section 3(1)) and indirect discrimination (section 3(2)) and the prohibition of unequal treatment in employment and occupation (section 3(1) and (2)) cover explicitly only the following grounds: sex, race, ethnic origin, nationality, religion, denomination, beliefs, disability, age and sexual orientation. It therefore notes that the Equal Treatment Act omits the grounds of colour, political opinion, national extraction and social origin that are enumerated in Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention. It also notes the indication by the Government that, during the reporting period, the courts did not issue any rulings relating to discrimination on the basis of skin colour or social origin. The Committee therefore asks the Government to: (i) ensure that the Equal Treatment Act explicitly prohibits discrimination in employment and occupation based on at least all the grounds set out in Article 1(1)(a) of the Convention, by adding political opinion, colour, national extraction and social origin to the list of explicitly prohibited grounds; (ii) consider aligning the Equal Treatment Act with the provisions of the Labour Code in this regard, while also ensuring that the additional grounds already enumerated in the Labour Code and the Equal Treatment Act are maintained; (iii) consider the possibility, when revising the Labour Code in future, to explicitly cover the grounds of colour, national extraction and social origin, in order to avoid any legal uncertainty; and (iv) ensure that the prohibition of discrimination on the basis of colour, national extraction and social origin is implemented in practice, including with respect to Roma people (see paragraph below).

Discrimination based on sex. Sexual harassment. The Committee previously requested detailed information on the measures adopted to prevent and address all forms of sexual harassment, and the implementation in practice of the relevant provisions of the Labour Code. It notes that the Government refers to section 183a(6) and (7) of the Labour Code defining sexual harassment and protecting employees against retaliation. The Committee also notes the information provided by the Government on the number of complaints of sexual harassment filed with the National Labour Inspectorate, according to which: in both 2018 and 2019, 24 complaints were filed; in 2020, 15 were filed; and between January and June 2021, eight complaints were filed. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the absence of, or a low number, of complaints regarding sexual harassment does not necessarily indicate that this form of sex discrimination does not exist; rather, it is likely to reflect the lack of an appropriate legal framework, the lack of awareness, understanding and recognition of this form of sex discrimination among government officials, and workers and employers and their organizations, as well as the lack of access to or the inadequacy of complaints mechanisms and means of redress, or fear of reprisals (General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraph 790). The Committee therefore asks the Government to: (i) provide information on any activities planned or effectively conducted to raise awareness on and prevent sexual harassment among employers and workers and their respective organizations, such as training activities or media campaigns; and (ii) continue providing information on the number of cases of sexual harassment handled by the National Labour Inspectorate and the courts and their outcome, including the compensation granted and penalties imposed.

Discrimination based on sexual orientation. The Committee notes the “Memorandum on the stigmatisation of LGBTI people in Poland” (CommDH (2020)27) issued by the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe on 3 December 2020. Recalling that the Labour Code prohibits discrimination based on sexual orientation, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on: (i) the measures taken to combat discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans and intersex (LGBTI) persons at all stages of employment, and to address prejudice and promote tolerance; and (ii) any cases of discrimination based on sexual orientation handled by the National Labour Inspectorate and the courts, indicating the compensation granted and the penalties imposed.

Articles 2 and 3. Equality of opportunity and treatment of men and women. The Committee previously requested the Government to provide information on the measures taken to address both horizontal and vertical segregation between men and women in the labour market, and gender stereotypes. The Committee takes note of the adoption of the National Action Programme for Equal Treatment for 2021–30 (NAPET 2021–30). It observes that one of the priorities enumerated in the NAPET 2021–30 is to support equal opportunities for women and men in the labour market. In particular, the NAPET 2021–30 stresses the importance of reducing occupational segregation and identifies the promotion of the participation of women in decision-making processes in enterprises, institutions, universities and non-governmental organizations as one of its objectives. The Committee also takes note of the statistical information provided by the Government on occupational groups, showing that in 2018 men remained over-represented in certain categories such as chief executives, senior officials and legislators, and science and engineering professionals. The Committee therefore asks the Government to provide detailed information, including statistical data, on the implementation and impact of the NAPET 2021–30, and of any other relevant measure adopted, on the horizontal and vertical segregation of men and women in the labour market, and more generally, on its impact on the promotion of equality of opportunity and treatment of men and women in employment and occupation.

Equality of opportunity and treatment irrespective of race, colour and national extraction. Roma people. The Committee previously asked the Government to ensure equality of opportunity and treatment of the Roma people in employment and occupation in practice, and in this context requested information on: (1) any measures adopted in the context of the Programme for the Integration of the Roma Community for 2014–2020 (PIRC 2014–20); and (2) statistical data on the participation of the Roma people and persons belonging to other minorities in education and the labour market, disaggregated by sex. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that an independent evaluation was conducted on the effectiveness of the activities of the PIRC 2014–20. It welcomes the Government’s indication that it adopted the new Programme of social civic integration of Roma in Poland for 2021–2030 (PSCIRP 2021–30) and that, despite the prospect of a post-pandemic crisis, the PSCIRP’s budget has been maintained. Education remains a priority of the PSCIRP, with a focus on secondary education and particular emphasis on vocational education. In this regard, the Government further reports on a number of activities undertaken to reduce the over-representation of Roma students in special schools from the level of about 17 per cent (2010 data) to about 10 per cent. Reducing this over-representation to a level comparable to that of the general population (approximately 3.5 per cent) remains one of the important objectives of the current strategy. With regard to access to employment, the Government reports that in the period 2017–20, under the above-mentioned programme, more than 1000 persons from the Roma community were employed, with 80 per cent of them under a permanent contract. Access to the labour market is also being addressed in the context of European Union structural funds with larger budgets than the ones allocated to the PIRC. The Committee also notes that, in its concluding observations, the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) expresses concern at: (1) the persistence of structural discrimination against Roma; (2) the low attendance rates of Roma children in primary school, their high rates of high school dropout, their persistent over-representation in special schools and their under-representation in secondary and post-secondary education; (3) the extreme poverty and substandard living conditions faced by Roma in segregated neighbourhoods with no proper infrastructure and basic services, as well as threats of eviction; and (4) the high rates of unemployment among Roma and the large wage gap between Roma and the rest of society (CERD/C/POL/CO/22-24, 24 September 2019, paragraph 21). Noting this information, the Committee asks the Government to continue taking steps to implement the Programme of social civic integration of Roma in Poland 2021–2030 (PSCIRP) and adopt measures to effectively address discrimination against Roma people, including stereotypes and prejudice against them. It also asks the Government to provide detailed information on the implementation of the Programme in practice and its impact on the participation of the Roma people in education, vocational training and the labour market, and particularly on the reduction of the over-representation of Roma students in special schools.

The Committee notes that under the priority “work and social security” of the NAPET 2021–30, one of the objectives is to support groups exposed to discrimination in the labour market due to age, disability, race, nationality, ethnic origin, religion, belief, sexual orientation and family status (II.3). In this regard, the Committee welcomes the detailed statistics provided by the Government on the number of complaints reported to the National Labour Inspectorate of instances of discrimination based on race, ethnic origin and nationality. According to the data: (1) 15 cases were reported between 2018 and 2020 and 1 between 1 January 2021 and 30 June 2021 of non-compliance with the prohibition of discrimination by employment agencies and other related entities; (2) 31 cases were reported between 2018 and 2020, and 8 between 1 January 2021 and 30 June 2021 of discrimination in the creation or termination of employment; (3) 34 cases were reported between 2018 and 2020, and 5 between 1 January 2021 and 30 June 2021 of discrimination in the determination of pay or other terms or conditions of employment; and (4) 5 cases were reported between 2018 and 2021 of discrimination in promotion or other work-related benefits. Recalling that it is necessary to adopt a comprehensive and coordinated approach to tackling the obstacles and barriers faced by persons in employment and occupation because of their race, colour or national extraction, and to promote equality of opportunity and treatment for all, the Committee asks the Government to provide information on any policies envisaged or adopted to address specifically such discrimination, and the results achieved.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee notes the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” received on 30 August 2021 and the response of the Government.

Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention. Categories of workers excluded from the scope of the Labour Code. Workers in uniformed services. The Committee notes that in its observations, the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” stresses that the provisions of the legislation are not sufficient to effectively protect workers in uniformed services (i.e. officers from the armed forces, from the internal security agency, the foreign intelligence agency, the state fire service, the police, etc.) against discrimination in employment and occupation, as these groups of workers are not covered by the Labour Code. The organization also alleges that the provisions of the Equal Treatment Act, 2010 are insufficient to ensure the application of the Convention in practice and that complaints filed by officers often result in retaliatory actions.

In its response to the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc”, the Government provides detailed information on the legal framework adopted to prevent undesirable behaviour in the uniformed services. The Government refers in particular to the amendments in 2021 of section 132(3)(11) of the Act on the police of 6 April 1990, section 135(2)(11) of the Act on the Border Guard of 12 October 1990, and section 209(1)(6a) of the Act of 8 December 2017 on the State Protection Service. In addition, pursuant to section 1(18)(a), section 2(3) and section 7(12(b)) of the Act of 14 August 2020 on special solutions concerning support of uniformed services supervised by the minister in charge of the interior, amending the Act on the Prison Services and certain other Acts, the list of cases of infringing official discipline has been extended to include an act consisting in a deliberate infringement of the personal rights of another officer, applicable even in the case of one-off actions with no requirement of persistence and endurance. The Committee also notes that other legislative measures in the area of preventing discrimination and “mobbing” (defined in article 943 of the Labour Code as “actions or behaviour concerning an employee or directed against an employee, consisting of persistent and long-term harassment or intimidation of an employee, causing the employee to be undervalued in terms of professional usefulness, causing or intended to cause humiliation or ridicule of the employee, isolating the employee or eliminating the employee from his/her team of co-workers”) include the provisions of the rules of professional ethics of police officers (Ordinance No. 805 of the Commander in Chief of the Police of 31 December 2003), border guards (Ordinance No. 11 of the Commander-in-Chief of the Border Guard of 20 March 2003) and state protection officers (Ordinance No. 9 of the Commander of the State Protection Service of 26 February 2018), according to which the officers referred in each Ordinance must act pursuant to and within the limits of the law and respect human rights, and are liable to disciplinary sanctions. Furthermore, in January 2021, the Police adopted the “Plan of educational and information activities in the field of protection of human rights and freedoms, implementation of the principle of equal treatment and compliance with the rules of professional ethics in the Police for the years 2021–2023”. The plan provides for, among other things, a continuation of educational and information activities aimed at making police officers and employees sensitive to the issue of equal treatment and professional ethics. In March 2021, the “Standards for the functioning in the Police of preventive and intervention procedures in the area of conflict resolution, preventing mobbing behaviour, discrimination and other undesirable behaviour in the place of service and work” were approved and form the basis for the procedures implemented in the Police units. Decision No. 178 of the Commander-in-Chief of the Police of 15 July 2021 also introduced, in the National Police Headquarters, an internal procedure for in the event of a conflict situation, mobbing behaviour, discrimination or other undesirable behaviour, which includes protection against retaliation.

As for soldiers, they are protected by both generally and specific applicable regulations, such as for example the Act of 11 September 2003 on military service of professional soldiers, the Act of 9 October 2009 on military discipline, and the General Regulations of the Armed Forces of the Republic of Poland, which prohibits mobbing and provides for sanctions in cases of unethical, immoral, or rude behaviours, and for violating the norms of social coexistence. In addition, the armed forces have a Coordinator for Equal Treatment and female soldiers are appointed at the Women’s Affairs Council. The Coordinator for Equal Treatment and the Women’s Affairs Council have developed a project aiming at strengthening the protection against mobbing and discrimination within the armed forces and that further legislative developments are currently under consideration. The Committee recalls that the protection afforded by the Convention applies to all categories of workers, including workers in uniformed services. The Committee asks the Government to indicate whether the legislation applicable to workers in uniformed services explicitly defines the concepts of discrimination and sexual harassment and enumerates specific protected grounds of discrimination. It also asks the Government to provide detailed information on the number of cases of discrimination detected or dealt with by the competent authorities within the different services, as well as the grounds of discrimination invoked, the outcome of the cases (sanction imposed and remedies granted) and the measures taken to ensure that complaints filed by officers do not result in retaliation.

Article 1. Indirect discrimination. The Committee had requested the Government to provide information on the manner in which the prohibition of indirect discrimination in employment and occupation provided for under section 3(2) of the Equal Treatment Act of 2010 and section 18 3a of the Labour Code is applied in practice, specifying how the Courts had interpreted the differences between the two legal definitions of such discrimination in order to ensure comprehensive protection against indirect discrimination in employment and occupation. In its report, the Government refers to two judgments of the Supreme Court on indirect discrimination under the relevant sections of the Labour Code. The first one of 28 February 2019 (I PK 50/18) concluded that the protection against discrimination under section 18 3a (4) of the Labour Code is extended to cases in which the employer introduces a certain criterion for differentiating between employees which, on the face of it is objective, but as a result of its application, all or a significant number of employees belonging to a particular group are in a particularly unfavourable situation or there are particularly unfavourable proportions in relation to other employees. In the second decision of 7 May 2019 (II PK 31/18), the Supreme Court concluded that the failure to take any action to equalize the level of remuneration may be evidence of discrimination. While taking note of this information, the Committee asks the Government to consider aligning the definitions of “indirect discrimination” in the Equal Treatment Act and the Labour Code to cover the effects of “indirect discrimination” on both a “person” and a group of persons, and to continue to provide information on the application in practice of the prohibition of indirect discrimination, including information on the court decisions issued on the application of section 3(2) of the Equal Treatment Act.

Article 1(1)(b). Additional ground of discrimination. Disability. In follow up to its request for information in this regard, the Committee takes note with interest of the adoption of the Strategy for Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030, by Resolution No. 27 of 16 February 2021, providing for a comprehensive and cross-sectoral approach to public policy to support persons with disabilities. It notes in particular that “work” is one of the priorities of the strategy that provides for actions aimed at increasing the possibility of employment in an open, inclusive and accessible working environment. The Committee further takes note of the launch of two projects in the context of the previous Operational Programme Knowledge Education Development for 2014-20 (OPKED 2014-2020): (1) “Active disabled – tools to support the independence of persons with disabilities”; and (2) “Inclusion of the excluded – active instruments to support people with disabilities on the labour market”. The Government further reports on several measures adopted to support the employers of workers with disabilities, such as aid programmes for training costs, and subsidies to supplement employees’ wages. The Government further provides detailed data showing notably that: (1) the labour force participation rate of the population with disabilities increased by 0.2 percentage points – from 17.3 per cent in 2018 to 17.5 per cent in 2020; (2) the employment rate increased by 0.5 percentage points – from 16.2 per cent in 2018 to 16.7 per cent in 2020; (3) the unemployment rate decreased by 1.8 percentage points – from 6.5 per cent in 2018 to 4.7 per cent in 2020. The Committee also takes note of the data disaggregated by degrees of disabilities, showing that: (1) the 2020 employment rate for people with significant degrees of disabilities was 9.6 per cent, compared to 33.9 per cent for workers with moderate degrees of disabilities and 44.3 per cent for workers with mild disabilities; and (2) the employment rates for workers with moderate and mild degrees of disabilities had increased since 2018 while the employment rate of workers with significant degrees of disabilities had decreased in the same period. Lastly, the Committee welcomes the detailed data provided on the number of complaints for discrimination based on disability filed with the national labour inspectorate, showing: (1) six cases reported between 2018 and 2020 for non-compliance with the prohibition of discrimination by employment agencies and other related entities; (2) three cases reported between 2018 and 2020 for discriminatory refusals to employ a candidate in a vacant place or a place of professional training; (3) 33 cases reported between 2018 and 2020 for discrimination in the recreation or termination of employment; (4) 38 cases reported between 2018 and 2020 for discrimination in determining pay or other terms or conditions of employment; (5) five cases reported between 2018 and 2020 for discrimination in promotion or other work-related benefits; and (6) two cases between 2018 and 2020 for discrimination in the participation in trainings to improve professional qualifications. Welcoming the comprehensive action undertaken by the Government, the Committee asks it to continue to provide information on: (i) any steps taken to promote the employment and vocational training of persons with disabilities, in particular information, including statistics disaggregated by sex, on the implementation of the Strategy for Persons with Disabilities 2021-2030 and the above projects, their results and impact on the recruitment of persons with disabilities on the open market and on the number of complaints for discrimination based on disability as well as on any obstacles encountered; and (ii) cases of discrimination based on disability in employment and occupation that have been addressed by the national labour inspectorate and the courts.

Enforcement. In follow up to its previous comment in this regard, the Committee takes note of the detailed information provided by the Government on the number of complaints addressed to the national labour inspectorate disaggregated by grounds of discrimination. It notes however that the data provided does not include information on the sanctions imposed nor the remedies granted. The Committee asks the Government to continue to provide information on the violations of the prohibition of discrimination in employment and occupation detected by the labour inspectors and other competent authorities and on the sanction imposed and the remedies granted.

The Committee notes the supplementary information provided by the Government on matters raised in its previous direct request, and otherwise repeats the content of its observation adopted in 2019 which read as follows.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Vulnerable situation of migrant workers with regard to the exaction of forced labour. The Committee previously noted the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union (“Solidarnosc”) that there had been exploitation of citizens of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) for forced labour in Poland. In 2012, there were 509 DPRK workers brought legally to Poland. Reportedly they had to send back to the regime a large part of their legitimate earnings. The Committee also noted that, according to the report of the Special Rapporteur of the United Nations on the situation of human rights in the DPRK, nationals of the DPRK were being sent abroad by their Government to work under conditions that reportedly amount to forced labour, mainly in the mining, logging, textile and construction industries. The workers were forced to work sometimes up to 20 hours per day with only one or two rest days per month and given insufficient daily food rations. They were under constant surveillance by security personnel and their freedom of movement was unduly restricted. Workers’ passports were also confiscated by the same security agents.

The Committee noted the Government’s statement that, in response to the signals revealed in 2016, the National Labour Inspectorate and the Border Guards carried out monitoring activities covering all entities employing the citizens of the DPRK, and no infringements seemed to relate to forced labour. The Government further indicated that, in 2016 and 2017, no new visas had been issued to DPRK citizens. As of 1 January 2017, there were 400 citizens from DPRK in Poland with valid residence permits. The Committee also noted the Government’s information that a number of violations of provisions of the Act on the Promotion of Employment, as well as regulations in the scope of Labour Law were identified, such as the indirect payment of wages and confiscation of identification papers. The Committee requested the Government to strengthen its efforts to ensure that migrant workers, especially those from the DPRK, are fully protected from abusive practices and conditions that amount to the exaction of forced labour.

The Government indicates in its report that it has ceased to issue new temporary residence permits for paid activities to the DPRK nationals. Consequently, section 100, paragraph 1, point 4 of the Act on Foreigners of 2013 and section 88(j), paragraph 2 of the Act on the Promotion of Employment and on Labour Market Institutions have been amended by the Act of 20 July 2017, and have accordingly been supplemented with the provisions providing for an additional reason for refusing temporary residence. The Government further indicates that it is currently implementing the United Nations Security Council Resolution 2397 of 22 December 2017, which allows for the return of the DPRK employees to their own country to be accelerated. The Government has already withdrawn the majority of the temporary residence permits for paid activities issued to the DPRK nationals in Poland. The Government states that, in March 2019, no more than 19 DPRK nationals resided in Poland, so that the number of the DPRK employees in Poland has dropped by approximately 95 per cent.

Furthermore, in recent years, as a result of the alleged infringements of the rights of the DPRK nationals who work in Poland and of the increasing number of foreigners employed in the territory, the frequency of inspections has been increased. The Border Guard Service has applied special monitoring to businesses employing DPRK citizens. The Government indicates that the inspections carried out did not show any indications that the DPRK nationals experienced forced labour. The Government communicates statistical data collected by the Border Guard Service, indicating that in 2018, 12,108 foreigners were found to be working illegally and 155 DPRK nationals were identified during inspections, among which 11 have been illegally employed, namely without valid residence permits or work permits, or without employment contracts or civil law contracts. From 1 January to 31 May 2019, 4,255 foreigners were found to be working illegally and 88 DPRK nationals were identified during inspections, among which 58 have been illegally employed. Additionally, the Committee notes the Government’s information that labour inspectors detected a number of irregularities as a result of the inspections carried out in entities hiring foreigners, such as the failure to provide a foreigner with a contract translated into a language comprehensible to the foreigner before signature, or the failure to provide a foreigner with a copy of the work permit. The Border Guard Service also identified cases of non-payment of wages, or only partial payment thereof.

With regard to prevention measures, the Committee notes the Government’s indication that the National Labour Inspectorate launched education and information campaigns, intended to raise awareness both among employers hiring foreigners regarding their obligations, and among foreigners working in Poland, regarding their rights. A hotline was made available to foreigners at the National Labour Inspectorate Consultancy Centre in February 2018, in order to increase understanding of the legislation on the employment of foreigners in Poland, in the Ukrainian and Russian languages. Over 3,400 foreigners have so far contacted the experts for advice, including Ukrainians, Belarusians, Georgians, Moldovans and Russians.

The Committee notes that, in its concluding observations of August 2019, the United Nations Committee against Torture reported that, despite the fact that a recent case was opened in Poland, involving 107 nationals of the DPRK, investigations appear to be ineffective and to lack impartiality, particularly with regard to interpreting services and formal proceedings for those investigated. While taking note of the measures taken by the Government, the Committee urges the Government to strengthen its efforts to prevent foreign migrants from falling victim to abusive practices and conditions that amount to the exaction of forced labour and to ensure their access to justice and remedies. The Committee also requests the Government to continue to supply information on the number of identified victims of abusive practices among migrant workers, and on the number of investigations, prosecutions and penalties imposed on the perpetrators.

The Committee is raising other points in a request addressed directly to the Government.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year (see articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 below, on trafficking in persons), as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee notes that the first report of the Government on the Protocol of 2014 to the Forced Labour Convention, 1930, has not been received. The Committee requests the Government to provide the first report on the Protocol of 2014 along with its next report on Convention No. 29 due in 2022.

Articles 1(1), 2(1) and 25 of the Convention. Trafficking in persons. 1. Law enforcement and penalties. The Committee previously noted that trafficking in persons is criminalized by section 189(a) of the Penal Code. The Committee also noted that the cooperation between the labour inspectorate and other authorities, including border guards, had been reinforced. Moreover, teams for combating human trafficking were established to initiate close regional cooperation. The Committee further noted that in 2016, 50 cases of human trafficking had been recorded, of which 13 were for forced labour, 15 were for prostitution and other forms of sexual abuse and one was for begging. Moreover, preliminary proceedings of 59 cases were concluded, leading to 13 indictments, and 30 persons were accused. The Committee requested the Government to pursue its efforts to strengthen the capacity of the law enforcement authorities, including the labour inspectorate, in combating trafficking in persons and to provide information on the application in practice of section 189(a) of the Penal Code.

The Government indicates in its report that, in 2017, the National Public Prosecutor’s Office recorded 135 cases of trafficking in persons, under section 189(a) of the Penal Code, of which 34 were for forced labour, 46 were for prostitution and other forms of sexual exploitation, six were for begging and 43, were for other types of exploitation. Moreover, 17 cases led to indictments and 47 persons were prosecuted. In 2018, 79 cases of trafficking in persons were recorded. In addition, 23 cases led to indictments, 47 persons were prosecuted and 13 persons were sentenced to imprisonment. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication in its supplementary report that, in 2019, 67 proceedings were initiated for cases of trafficking in persons, including 18 for forced labour, 30 for prostitution, and 19 for other types of exploitation. In addition, out of 55 closed proceedings, 17 cases resulted in indictments.

The Government also states, in its report of 2019, that a new cooperation agreement between the National Labour Inspectorate and the Police is being negotiated, in order, inter alia, to regulate cooperation in combating criminal offences, including trafficking in persons offences. The Government indicates that inspections can be carried out by the National Labour Inspectorate in cooperation with the police or the Border Guard Service. The Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of investigations, prosecutions and convictions applied for trafficking in persons cases, and to further specify the penalties imposed on perpetrators.

2. Victim protection. The Committee previously noted the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union (“Solidarnosc”) stating that although victims can bring a civil action against the perpetrators of crimes related to trafficking in persons, very few victims of this practice ever receive compensation from the perpetrators. The Committee noted that the National Consulting and Intervention Centre for Victims of Trafficking (KCIK) provides two shelters dedicated to female victims of trafficking and medical assistance to the victims who are beneficiaries of the KCIK. The Committee also noted the Government’s information that the Expert Group for Supporting Victims of Human Trafficking, which is operating within the Inter-Ministerial Team for Combating and Preventing Human Trafficking, undertakes activities to improve the work efficiency of state authorities for the identification and protection of potential victims of trafficking. The Government indicated that, in 2016, 78 victims were identified, of which 34 were women and 44 were men. Moreover, the Act of 12 December 2013 on foreigners, implemented important changes in terms of granting residence permits for foreign victims of trafficking. The Committee also noted that, in April 2015, a law which reinforces and consolidates the framework of protection and assistance for victims of crime and witnesses including trafficking victims, came into force. The Committee requested the Government to continue providing detailed information on the measures undertaken and results achieved regarding the identification and protection of victims of trafficking in persons.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 302 of the Act on foreigners exempts from the obligation to return due to irregularities in the performance of work, the foreigner who was made to perform work illegally by being misled or taken advantage of, or when this results from the hierarchical dependence or the inability to comprehend properly the actions taken. The Government also indicates that 453 victims of trafficking were identified in 2017 and 197 were identified in 2018. According to the Government’s supplementary information, in 2019, 208 victims were identified (including 104 foreign victims), of which 101 were exploited for the purpose of forced labour, 62 for prostitution, and 45 for other types of exploitation.

The National Labour Inspectorate is responsible for informing any potential victims of human trafficking about any available forms of support provided by, among many, the KCIK. In this regard, the Government indicates that the KCIK provided support to 187 victims or alleged victims of trafficking in persons in 2017, and to 181 persons in 2018, including 102 women and 79 men. In 2019, 13 victims of trafficking were referred to the KCIK. The Government further indicates that the Border Guard Service observed that victims of trafficking in persons mainly come from Poland, Ukraine, Viet Nam, Belarus and the Philippines.

The Committee further notes the Government’s information in its supplementary report that one of the priority tasks for the years 2020–2021 is to improve the National Referral Mechanism by, inter alia, systematizing its operating principles, strengthening the capacities of law enforcement authorities in identifying victims of trafficking, as well as extending the institutional infrastructure to support victims of trafficking. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of section 302 of the Act on foreigners. It also requests the Government to continue to provide information on the impact of the measures taken by the Government in identifying and assisting victims of trafficking, including through the National Referral Mechanism, and to indicate the manner in which they have been provided with support and assistance. Lastly, the Committee requests the Government to continue to provide information on the number of victims of trafficking who have been identified and who have benefited from protection and assistance.

3. Plan of action to prevent and combat trafficking in persons. The Committee previously noted the Government’s information that the Council of Ministers adopted the National Action Plan against Human Trafficking for 2016–2018, and requested the Government to provide information on the implementation of this Plan.

The Committee notes the Government’s information that it has developed activities to raise awareness of the issue of trafficking in persons, such as the distribution of information materials for young people, the development of a website and the organization of conferences. The Government also organized training courses for employees of the public services that provide help to persons who are particularly exposed to risks, such as labour office employees and social workers. Such courses were also organized for labour inspectors and for prosecutors, as well as for consular officials delegated to diplomatic posts, and for provincial coordinators and heads of provincial offices, whose official duties are related, in particular, to combating trafficking in persons.

The Committee further notes the Government’s supplementary report, according to which a new National Action Plan to combat human trafficking for 2020–2021 was adopted on 10 April 2020. Its specific objectives are to: (i) raise awareness of trafficking in persons; (ii) improve support provided to victims; (iii) improve prosecutions of cases of trafficking; (iv) improve the qualifications of personnel involved in the prevention of trafficking and support for victims; (v) deepen knowledge on trafficking and on the effectiveness of the activities undertaken; and (vi) strengthen international cooperation. The National Action Plan provides for the establishment of, inter alia, a team for combating and preventing human trafficking, led by the Ministry of Interior and Administration, and comprised of representatives of ministries, institutions, non-governmental organizations and the International Organisation for Migration (IOM); and of a working group for monitoring the implementation of the National Action Plan. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the desired outcomes of the National Action Plan to combat human trafficking 2020–2021 have been achieved, indicating in particular the activities undertaken, including by the team for combating and preventing human trafficking, and the results achieved in this regard.

Article 2(2)(c). Work of prisoners for private individuals, companies and associations. The Committee previously noted that, according to the Executive Penal Code and its implementing regulations, prisoners are allowed to work for private employers. It noted the Government’s reiterated statement that convicts work for private entities on a voluntary basis in practice, under conditions comparable to a voluntary employment relationship and that there is a lack of work opportunities. The Government stated that a person who is deprived of liberty and works outside of the prison remains under the supervision of a penal institution. The Committee also noted that, according to section 123(a) of the Executive Penal Code, as amended in 2016, the director of a prison may allow the convict to work for a public institution or an entity of public benefit for free up to 90 hours per month, with the written consent of the convict or upon the written request of the convict. The Committee accordingly encouraged the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that the protection of the rights of the convicts who work for private entities, on a voluntary basis in practice, are also afforded by law.

The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the Minister of Justice issued the regulation amending the regulation on the detailed rules for employing prisoners, which entered into force on 2 September 2017. The Government also indicates that the Ministry of Justice is currently working on the draft Act amending the Act on the Executive Penal Code. The Committee further notes the Government’s statement that it is implementing a programme entitled “Jobs for Prisoners”, in order to enhance the employment of prisoners. The Government indicates that at the end of 2018, 57 per cent (37,078 prisoners) were employed, compared with 36.07 per cent of the prisoners (24,048 prisoners) in 2015. The employment rate among prisoners capable of working was 84.78 per cent at the end of 2018. The most desired effect of the implementation of the programme is the increased potential for paid employment, which is a priority for the Prison Guard Service. The Government states that prisoners in paid employment rose from 9,843 people in December 2015 to 17,714 at the end of 2018. The Government adds that 11 additional production facilities are being built, which will secure job positions for at least 1,000 prisoners.

The Committee recalls that, to be compatible with the Convention, prisoners’ work for private parties must be performed on a voluntary basis, implying the full and informed written consent of the prisoners and conditions which approximate a free labour relationship, including wages and occupational safety and health (see General Survey on the fundamental Conventions, 2012, paragraphs 279 and 291). The Committee accordingly requests the Government to take the necessary measures to ensure that any work or service performed by prisoners for private entities is carried out voluntarily, which implies the payment of wages. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the measures taken to ensure that the voluntary nature of prison work for private entities is unequivocally reflected in the legislation. The Committee hopes that the Government will take into consideration the Committee’s comments when drafting the Act amending the Executive Penal Code, to bring its legislation into conformity with Article 2(2)(c) of the Convention.

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Conventions on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, including the summary of the annual labour inspection report of 2019 (see Article 3(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) and (3) of Convention No. 129 below), as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee takes note of the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc” received on 19 August 2019, and the Government’s reply to these observations received on 26 September 2019.

Articles 2(1), 5(a), 6, 12(1) and 16 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 4, 6, 12, 16(1) and 21 of Convention No. 129. Coverage of workplaces by labour inspection. Restrictions on collaboration between labour inspection officials and other public institutions and on inspectors entering workplaces freely. The Committee previously noted the limitations on the work of the labour inspectorate in the Act on Freedom of Economic Activity (AFEA) related to prior authorization by the inspection authority, as well as practical difficulties it posed in inspecting workplaces with multiple employers and the conduct of joint inspections. The Committee notes that the Entrepreneurs’ Law, adopted in 2018, replaced the AFEA. It notes that pursuant to sections 48(1) and 54(1) of the Entrepreneurs’ Law, prior notice to the entrepreneur is required and the undertaking of simultaneous controls of an entrepreneur’s activities are not permitted, but that sections 48(11)-(1) and 54(1)-(8) state that these restrictions do not apply if the inspection is carried out on the basis of a ratified international agreement. With respect to authorization, the Committee takes note of the Government’s indication that prior authorization by the inspection authority seeks to ensure transparency, reliability, validity, and legitimacy of public administrative bodies. It notes that pursuant to section 49(1) and (2) of the Entrepreneurs’ Law, labour inspectors are empowered to conduct controls without prior presentation of the authorization from the inspection authority only in cases where control activities are necessary to prevent a crime or offence or securing evidence that such an offence has been committed, or when inspections are justified by a direct threat to life and health or environment, so long as such authorization is presented later to the entrepreneur within three days from the date of initiation of a control. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Entrepreneurs’ Law empowers inspectors to carry out control activities only during working hours (section 51(1)).

The Committee recalls that according to Article 12 of Convention No. 81 and Article 16 of Convention No. 129, labour inspectors provided with proper credentials shall be empowered to enter freely and without previous notice at any hour of the day or night any workplace liable to inspection. The Committee requests the Government to ensure that the Entrepreneurs’ Law is amended to provide without qualification that labour inspectors with proper credentials are empowered to enter freely any workplace liable to inspection, in accordance with Article 12(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 16(1) of Convention No. 129. Noting the absence of the information, the Committee once again requests the Government to indicate whether the conduct of joint inspections with other public authorities, including the State Sanitary Inspection and the Road Transport Inspectorate, is possible under the Entrepreneurs’ Law.

Article 3(1) and (2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) and (3) of Convention No. 129. Additional functions entrusted to labour inspectors, and labour inspection activities for the protection of migrant workers in an irregular situation. The Committee takes note of the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request, that the National Labour Inspectorate (NLI) supervises and controls compliance with legal provisions related to OSH and the legality of employment of both Polish citizens and migrant workers. The NLI’s controls cover visas and other residence permits or work permits, the conclusion of written employment contracts or civil law contracts, and compliance with labour legislation. The NLI predominantly targets entities where migrant workers from outside the EU/EEA and Switzerland are engaged in work due to the high risk of irregularities. Controls are initiated based on the results of past controls, or referrals and complaints lodged by other institutions, including the Border Guard. The Government indicates that the NLI’s controls can also be initiated based on complaints made by migrant workers, predominantly concerning non-payment of wages or the lack of written employment contracts. Moreover, the NLI’s controls focus on temporary employment agencies, as well as employers sending workers to Poland and employers in Poland posting workers to other countries.

The Committee notes the statistics provided by the Government indicating that in 2018, a total of 7,817 controls were undertaken on the legality of employment of migrant workers which detected labour law violations related to the payment of wages and other benefits (related to 1,555 migrant workers), medical examinations (780 migrant workers), OSH trainings (1,370 migrant workers), records of working hours (662 migrant workers), and other working time regulations including rest periods (569 migrant workers). These inspections also detected a lack of work permits (related to 3,101 migrant workers), employers’ non-adherence to the terms and conditions under work permits or residence permits (related to 1,087 migrant workers), and violations related to employers’ obligation to conclude written contracts (916 migrant workers). The Government indicates that labour inspectors issued decisions or oral orders to correct these violations. It further indicates that infringements of labour law provisions result in notifications by the NLI to the social insurance institution, the head of the customs and revenue office, and the police or the Border Guard. The Committee also notes with concern that, according to the 2018 annual labour inspection report, available on the website of the NLI, the NLI performed 176 joint inspections with the Border Guard, and that the NLI sent 711 notifications to the Border Guard of cases regarding the illegal performance of work by migrant workers. The same report also indicates that the Chief Labour Inspector signed a new cooperation agreement with the Chief Border Guard to cope with a dramatic increase in the number of migrant workers from outside the EU. The Committee further notes the Government’s indication in its supplementary report that in 2019, labour inspectors conducted 8,348 controls of the legality of employment and performance of work by migrant workers, which represented a 7 per cent increase from 2018. In addition, according to the summary of the 2019 labour inspection report, the NLI controlled the legality of work performed by 43,400 migrant workers in 2019, among which, 5,947 persons were found engaged in “illegal” work (related to the lack of the required work permit in the majority of cases).

The Committee notes that the observations of Solidarnosc refer to, among the new tasks undertaken by the inspectors, the increased control activity on the legality of employment of migrant workers. The Committee urges the Government to take measures to ensure that the additional functions assigned to labour inspectors do not interfere with the main objective of labour inspectors, which is to provide for the protection of workers in accordance with Article 3(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) of Convention No. 129. In this respect, it requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which it ensures that cooperation with other authorities such as the Border Guard does not prejudice in any way the authority and impartiality which are necessary to inspectors in their relations with employers and workers, in accordance with Article 3(2) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(3) of Convention No. 129. The Committee also requests the Government to indicate the manner in which the NLI ensures the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the statutory rights of migrant workers, including those in an irregular situation. It also requests the Government to provide information on the orders issued by labour inspectors related to labour law violations (such as orders for establishing an employment contract, payment of overdue wages or other benefits resulting from their work) concerning migrant workers in an irregular situation, and the results obtained from such orders.

The Committee is raising other matters in a request addressed directly to the Government.

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of ratified Conventions on labour inspection, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Conventions Nos 81 (labour inspection) and 129 (labour inspection in agriculture) together.

The Committee takes note of the supplementary information provided by the Government in light of the decision adopted by the Governing Body at its 338th Session (June 2020). The Committee proceeded with the examination of the application of the Convention on the basis of the supplementary information received from the Government this year, including the summary of the annual labour inspection report of 2019 (Articles 3, 6, 10 and 11 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 8, 14, 15 and 17 of Convention No. 129 below), as well as on the basis of the information at its disposal in 2019.

The Committee takes note of the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarność” received on 19 August 2019, and the Government’s reply to these observations received on 26 September 2019.

Articles 3, 6, 10 and 11 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6, 8, 14 and 15 of Convention No. 129. Additional duties entrusted to labour inspectors. Conditions of service. Resources of the labour inspectorate. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in its report that a number of tasks have been newly entrusted to the National Labour Inspectorate (NLI), under the Act on Compliance Assessment and Market Supervision (2016), the Energy Law (2017), the Act on the National Revenue Administration, the Entrepreneurs’ Law (2018), replacing the Act on Freedom of Economic Activity, as well as the amendments in 2019 to the Act on the NLI adding new control tasks for the NLI under the Act on the Employee Capital Plans (2018), the Act on Minimum Wages (2002), and the Act on Trade Restrictions on Sundays and Holidays (2018). The Committee further notes that, according to the supplementary information provided by the Government in 2020, the NLI is also entrusted to supervise the enforcement of certain maintenance benefits, following the 2018 amendment to the Labour Code. The Committee notes the observations of Solidarność that there is a need to increase financial, human and organizational resources for the operation of the NLI, in response to the NLI’s increased tasks, which, according to the union, are too broad and go beyond the functions of the labour inspection system. The Committee notes the Government’s response that many of the newly introduced tasks exceed the framework of Conventions Nos 81 and 129, and that it is necessary to increase expenditures to prepare staff, including through the introduction of training, new organizational and IT solutions. The Government indicates that the Chief Labour Inspector has, over the years, drawn attention to the NLI’s increased workload without an adequate increase in its budget at various occasions including at the proceedings of Sejim Committees and the Labour Protection Board.

Solidarność also indicates the need for ensuring attractive employment conditions for inspectors, as some inspectors seek additional sources of income through training activities. Referring to the NLI’s performance in terms of improved workers’ rights and increased occupational safety demonstrated in the 2017 annual labour inspection report, Solidarność states that it strongly opposed a reduction of the NLI’s budgetary resources that had been proposed as amendments to the draft Budget Act for 2019 by the Public Finance Committee. Solidarność states that this was proposed while foreseeing at the same time an increase in expenses for prison officers, police officers and customs officers. In this respect, the Committee notes that the reduction in the NLI’s budget was not approved in the course of further legislative proceedings and that the 2019 Budget Act endorsed an increase of the NLI’s budget by more than 14 million PLN. The Committee requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to align the conditions of service for labour inspectors with other public servants exercising similar functions (e.g. tax inspectors or the police). It also asks the Government to provide information on which of the newly introduced tasks goes beyond the functions of labour inspection as outlined in Article 3(1) of Convention No. 81 and Article 6(1) of Convention No. 129, and to provide information on the proportion of time spent by labour inspectors on such additional tasks in relation to the primary functions of labour inspection. The Committee further asks the Government to provide its comments with respect to the observations that inspectors are seeking additional sources of income, including, if applicable, whether they engage in such income-generating activities within or outside the scope of their official duties.

Article 3(1)(a) and (b) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 6(1)(a) and (b) and 17 of Convention No. 129. 1. Preventive control of new establishments and installations. The Committee notes the Government’s indication, in reply to its previous request regarding cooperation between the NLI and other specialized authorities, that tasks are jointly performed within the compliance assessment system, in order to eliminate goods which pose potentially serious threats to health and life, and to monitor compliance with European Union (EU) requirements. Joint control activities are carried out proportionately to the level of risk and threats to health and safety of employees. The NLI conducts controls based on complaints and referrals from other specialized authorities regarding the existence of goods that may pose a threat to employees and it cooperates with customs authorities to prevent imports from non-EU countries of hazardous goods or goods violating requirements. The Committee notes this information.

2. Control of illegal job placement and matching by employment agencies. The Committee notes the observations by Solidarność that there is a need to strengthen supervision of unauthorized employment agencies, and that measures should be taken to ensure better protection for the rights of temporary workers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in response that pursuant to section 10(1)–3(d) and (e) of the Act on the NLI, the NLI is empowered to carry out inspections related to compliance with the registration of employment agencies and their operations in accordance with the terms provided under the Act on Employment Promotion and Labour Market Institutions (AEPLMI). The Government states that there is no need to take further measures, since extensive modifications were already made to the AEPLMI with a view to improving the employment conditions of temporary workers and strengthening the effectiveness of inspection measures including through increased penalties. In this regard, the Committee notes that according to the 2018 labour inspection report, 65 employment agencies out of a total of 602 entities inspected were found to be operating illegally, and that irregularities were found in the entities inspected related to principles of cooperation and conditions of temporary work between the agency and user employer (25.3 per cent); payment of wages and other benefits (8.1 per cent); and conclusion of civil law contracts (7.9 per cent). The Committee also notes that, according to the summary of the 2019 labour inspection report, in 2019, 63 employment agencies were found to be operating illegally, of which the majority (49 entities) provide temporary work services, including outsourcing services in particular. With reference to its comments on the Private Employment Agencies Convention, 1997 (No. 181), the Committee requests the Government to provide further information on the role of the NLI with respect to the enforcement of the legal provisions relating to conditions of work and the protection of workers engaged through employment agencies.

Articles 6 and 7(1) of Convention No. 81 and Articles 8 and 9(1) of Convention No. 129. Recruitment and qualifications of labour inspectors. The Committee notes the observations of Solidarność that the practice of filling many positions of the NLI based on appointment raises a serious concern with respect to ensuring the stability of the NLI. According to the Act on the NLI, the Chief Labour Inspector shall appoint and remove managerial positions at the NLI, the district labour inspectorates and the training centre (section 40). District labour inspectors shall be appointed and dismissed by the Chief Labour Inspector (section 5(3)). Pursuant to section 70 of the Labour Code, an employee employed based on an appointment may be dismissed from his post by the body that appointed him at any time, immediately or at a specific time. Solidarność alleges that these regulations destabilize employment relations of persons in managerial or advisory positions at the NLI, contributing to the politicization of the NLI. In addition, Solidarność states that there is a lack of stability in the employment of labour inspectors because they are recruited based on an appointment by the Chief Labour Inspector, following the completion of a fixed-term employment contract (which can be a maximum term of three years), in accordance with section 41(1) and (2) of the Act on the NLI. The Government indicates in response that further employment to an equivalent position shall be guaranteed for the employees of the NLI dismissed under section 5(3), and that in practice the maximum duration of open-ended contracts for employees appointed for performing inspection activities is two years and early termination of contracts is exceptional.

The Committee recalls that, under the terms of Article 6 of Convention No. 81 and Article 8 of Convention No. 129, labour inspection staff shall be composed of public officials whose status and conditions of service are such that they are assured of stability of employment and are independent of improper external influences. Article 7 of Convention No. 81 and Article 9 of Convention No. 129 further require that labour inspectors shall be recruited with sole regard to their qualifications for the performance of their duties, and that the means of ascertaining such qualifications shall be determined by the competent authority. The Committee therefore requests the Government to provide detailed information on the appointment-based recruitment of labour inspectors, and for advisory and managerial positions at NLI, and its impact on the effectiveness of the functioning of the NLI and district labour inspectorates, as well as the measures taken or envisaged to ensure the stability and independence of labour inspectors, as required under Conventions Nos 81 and 129.

Articles 5(a), 17 and 18 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 12, 22 and 23 of Convention No. 129. Sanctions and effective enforcement. Cooperation between the inspection services and the judiciary. The Committee previously noted that most cases transmitted to the prosecutor’s office concerning suspected criminal offences by labour inspectors do not result in proceedings. The Committee notes with interest the Government’s indication in response that a cooperation agreement between the NLI and the prosecutor’s office was concluded in 2017, which resulted in the appointment of persons responsible for contacting the prosecutor’s office and executing a specialist supervision over notifications made by labour inspectors concerning suspected criminal offences. Within this cooperation, the NLI took measures to ensure that notifications to the prosecutor’s office contain all data available to the NLI confirming the validity of the notifications as well as the immediate transmission, upon request of the prosecutor’s office, of further detailed documentation of the inspection. The public prosecutor’s office also took measures to familiarize labour inspectors with the evidence collected during preparatory proceedings before a decision is issued to discontinue proceedings, in order to enable inspectors the possibility of filing an additional motion. In addition, the public prosecutor’s office now provides justification immediately in the event that labour inspectors make requests for justification pursuant to section 325(e) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The most common reasons for discontinuing proceedings concern a lack of statutory grounds, insufficient evidence and a lack of intention to commit a crime. The Committee notes that as a result of meetings and training to improve cooperation, inspectors have been trained to properly draw up notifications transmitted to the prosecutor’s office. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the impact of the measures taken to enhance cooperation between the labour inspection services and the judicial system, including the number of notifications made to the public prosecutor’s office, the number of such notifications which resulted in proceedings, and the results of such proceedings.

Articles 20 and 21 of Convention No. 81 and Articles 26 and 27 of Convention No. 129. Annual labour inspection reports. The Committee notes that detailed annual labour inspection reports are available on the website of the NLI, as well as the summary of the report submitted, in English, to the ILO.

Specific matters relating to labour inspection in agriculture

Articles 5(1)(a) and (c), 6(1)(a) and (b), 12 and 13 of Convention No. 129. Preventive activities by the labour inspectorate in agriculture. The Committee notes the detailed information provided by the Government concerning the NLI’s information and prevention activities related to farming using training, lectures, publications and promotional action via various communication methods. For the years 2016–18, the NLI performed 10,000 inspections focusing on farms, 707 OSH trainings for farmers, and delivered 1,531 lectures for students. The Committee notes that in this area of work, the NLI cooperates with the Agricultural Social Insurance Fund, the Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development, and the social partners.

The Committee notes the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarnosc”, received on 29 August 2016, indicating the rising number of illegally employed foreign workers who do not have access to social security rights. The “Solidarnosc” further points out an upward trend in a number of cases in which employers failed to report foreign workers to the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS). In addition, the “Solidarnosc” indicates that the fines imposed for violating the employment rights of foreign workers are set too low and do not deter many employers from infringing them. The Government, in its reply to the observations of the “Solidarnosc”, indicates that to eliminate practice of illegal employment of foreign workers, it put into place a number of measures, which includes, in particular, the imposition of a stricter requirement to conclude a written contract with employees as well as penalties for employers in case of non-compliance. The Government further provides information on contribution payers controls, undertaken by the ZUS, with respect to establishing correct basis of insurance and calculation basis for contributions. The Committee recalls its observation on the application of the Labour Inspection Convention, 1947 (No. 81), and Labour Inspection (Agriculture) Convention, 1969 (No. 129), requesting the Government to provide information on the manner in which the labour inspection services ensure the enforcement of employers’ obligations with regard to the statutory rights of foreign workers, including those in an irregular situation, resulting from their existing and past work (such as wages and social security benefits). In light of the above-mentioned information, the Committee requests the Government to continue providing information on measures taken to ensure the provision of compensation to foreign workers injured in industrial accidents and their dependants. It further requests the Government to provide data on the number of sanctions imposed on employers, particularly for not reporting foreign workers to the ZUS and not concluding a written contract, and cases in which foreign workers’ rights to the payment of compensation for industrial accidents have been restored as a result of inspections undertaken.

Article 1(2) of the Convention. Payment of benefits abroad. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request concerning procedures and record-keeping relating to the payment of compensation for industrial accidents in case of residence outside the European Union.

In order to provide a comprehensive view of the issues relating to the application of the ratified Conventions on wages, the Committee considers it appropriate to examine Convention No. 99 (minimum wage) and Convention No. 95 (protection of wages) together. It notes the observations of the Independent and Self-Governing Trade Union “Solidarność” received in 2017 on the application of Convention No. 95.

Minimum wage

Article 3(2) and (3) of Convention No. 99. Consultations with social partners. In its previous comments, the Committee requested the Government to provide information on how the views of the social partners are taken into consideration when, in the absence of a tripartite agreement, the minimum wage is determined by the Council of Ministers. The Committee notes the Government’s indication in its report that the amount of the minimum wage determined by the Council of Ministers in such cases may not be lower than the amount presented for negotiations within the Social Dialogue Council (the tripartite body established pursuant to the Act of 24 July 2015).

Article 3(4). Prohibition of abatement. The Committee previously noted that section 6(2) of the Minimum Wage Act allowed the remuneration of first-time employees to be up to 20 per cent lower than the statutory minimum wage. It also noted that a parliamentary initiative proposed to amend this provision and requested the Government to provide information on its outcomes. In this regard, the Committee notes that section 6(2) has been abrogated by the Act of 22 July 2016 amending the Minimum Wage Act.

Protection of wages

Article 2 of Convention No. 95. Scope of application. In its previous comments, the Committee noted that the Labour Code, which is the main piece of legislation giving effect to the Convention, only applies to employment relationships under an employment contract. It requested the Government to clarify how it was ensured in law and practice that workers engaged under civil law contracts enjoyed, with respect to their wages, the level of protection prescribed by the Convention. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that the provisions of the Labour Code concerning protection of wages would be enforced in relation to civil law contracts where the circumstances showed that there was an employment relationship.

Article 8(1). Deductions from wages. The Committee notes that Solidarność reports that there have been cases with respect to civil law contracts where, in order to reduce workers’ remuneration, considerable deductions have been applied, for example, deductions of fees paid to rent the necessary equipment to perform work. The Committee requests the Government to provide its comments in this regard.

The Committee also notes that section 82 of the Labour Code allows for possible reductions to remuneration to be made where there is defective performance in work attributed to the fault of the worker. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application of section 82 in practice, and on the procedure in place for the determination of workers’ liability in this context.

Article 12(1). Regular payment of wages. In its previous comments, the Committee noted the serious difficulties in several sectors regarding the timely payment of wages. It notes that, according to the statistical information provided by the Government, some difficulties persist. The Committee therefore requests the Government to pay special attention to the specific sectors at risk in its efforts to ensure that wages are paid to workers in full and on time, and to prevent the recurrence of wage arrears and similar practices in the future. It also requests the Government to continue to provide information in this regard.

Part VII (Family benefit). Article 44 of the Convention. Total value of family benefits. The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request concerning calculations of the total value of family benefits.

Part XI (Standards to be complied with by periodical payments). The Committee notes the information provided by the Government in reply to its previous request concerning calculations of the replacement rate of benefits.

Part XIII (Common provisions). Article 71(3). General responsibility of a Member for the due provision of medical care benefits. The Committee takes note of the information provided by the Government on various measures taken to improve the standard and quality of healthcare services. The Committee however notes that in 2017, the European Committee of Social Rights concluded that the situation in Poland is not in conformity with Article 11(1) of the European Social Charter on the ground that access to healthcare is not ensured because of long waiting times for different medical treatments. Recalling that the Member shall accept general responsibility for the due provision of the benefits provided in compliance with the Convention, and shall take all measures required for this purpose, the Committee requests the Government to provide information on the manner in which effect is given to this Article of the Convention in practice.

Article 1(a) of the Convention. Sanctions involving compulsory labour as a punishment for holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee notes that the Penal Code of 1997, as amended, provides for the penalty of restriction of liberty, which can involve an obligation to perform unpaid and controlled work for social purposes. The Committee notes that, under the following provisions of the Criminal Code, the penalty of restriction of liberty may be imposed:

-section 136(4), on publicly insulting a person belonging to the diplomatic personnel of a mission of a foreign country to Poland;
-section 137, on publicly insulting, destroying, or removing a symbol of the State, or insulting the symbols of foreign countries;
-section 196, on offending the religious feelings of other persons;
-sections 212 and 226(1), concerning defamation, including of public officials;
-section 216, on insult;
-section 226(3), on publicly insulting or humiliating a constitutional authority of the Republic of Poland.

The Committee recalls that according to Article 1(a) of the Convention, no sanction involving compulsory labour (such as restriction of liberty) should be imposed on persons holding or expressing political views or views ideologically opposed to the established political, social or economic system. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on the application in practice of the above-mentioned sections of the Penal Code, so that it can assess their scope of application and ascertain that they are not applied under circumstances falling within Article 1(a) of the Convention. Please, provide information on the number and nature of the penalties applied under these provisions, including information on the application of the penalty of restriction of liberty, and the grounds for prosecution.

The Committee notes the Government’s second report on the application of the Maritime Labour Convention, 2006, as amended (MLC, 2006). It further notes that the amendments to the Code approved by the International Labour Conference in 2014 and 2016 entered into force for Poland on 18 January 2017 and 8 January 2019 respectively. The Committee notes with interest the adoption of the Maritime Labour Act (MLA) of 5 August 2015 which regulates many of the aspects covered by the Convention. Based on its second review of the information and documents available, the Committee draws the Government’s attention to the following issues.

Article II, paragraphs 1(i), 2 and 7. Scope of application. Definition of “ship”. The Committee notes that section 2(7) of the MLA provides that a non-convention ship – shall be understood as a ship to which the MLC, 2006 does not apply, including, among others, ships engaged solely in navigation in maritime areas of the Republic of Poland with the exception of an exclusive economic zone and a seagoing yacht. In this regard, the Committee recalls that the Convention applies to all ships as defined in Article II, paragraph 1(i), other than those expressly excluded under paragraph 4. The Committee also recalls that Article II, paragraph 6, provides additional flexibility, under certain conditions, with respect to the application of “certain details of the Code” to ships of less than 200 gross tonnage not engaged in international voyages. The Committee requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that the Convention is applied to commercial yachts. It further requests the Government to provide information on the definition of the notion of “maritime areas of Poland”, referred to in section 2(7) of the MLA.

Regulation 1.1 and Standard A1.1, paragraph 4. Minimum age. Hazardous work. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that pursuant to the Labour Code, young persons must not be employed in the types of work specified in the Regulation of the Council of Ministers of 24 August 2004 on the jobs forbidden to young people. The Committee however observes that the list contained in the said Regulation is of general nature and does not seem to take into account the specificities of the maritime sector. The Committee recalls that the Convention, under Standard A1.1, paragraph 4, requires the absolute prohibition for young seafarers of the types of work considered hazardous but allows, under Guideline B4.3.10, the determination of types of work which young seafarers cannot undertake without adequate supervision and instruction. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to adopt a new list of types of hazardous work or adapt the existing one to take into account the specific conditions of work on board ships for young seafarers under 18 years of age, after consultation with the seafarers’ and shipowners’ organizations concerned, as required under Standard A1.1, paragraph 4.

Regulation 1.4, paragraph 3. Standard A1.4, paragraphs 5(c)(vi) and 9. Recruitment and placement. Concerning the system of protection that recruitment and placement services are required to establish, the Committee notes that section 23(1) of the MLA provides that the employment agency shall have insurance or other financial guaranties with respect to liability for damages incurred by seafarers as a result of inefficiency of job agency services or the shipowner’s failure to meet obligations arising from the seafarers’ employment agreement. The same section of the MLA seems to limit the responsibility of the agency to three months’ wages specified in the seafarer employment agreement. Recalling that such limitation is not foreseen in Standard A1.4, paragraph 5(c)(vi), the Committee requests the Government to provide clarifications concerning the limitations to the liability of recruitment and placement services. Furthermore, the Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on how it ensures that shipowners of ships that fly its flag, who use seafarer recruitment and placement services based in countries or territories in which this Convention does not apply, respect, as far as practicable, that those services meet the requirements of this Standard, as required by Standard A1.4, paragraph 9. The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this regard.

Regulation 2.1 and Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1(e) and 3. Seafarers’ employment agreements. Record of employment. The Committee notes that the MLA does not refer to the record of the employment of the seafarer (Standard A2.1, paragraph 1(e)). The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate the measures adopted or envisaged to ensure that the seafarers receive a document containing a record of employment on board the ship, in accordance with Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1(e) and 3.

Regulation 2.5 and Standard A2.5.2. Financial security in the event of abandonment. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that section 62(1) of the MLA provides that the State Treasury has to bear the cost of repatriation if the shipowner does not take action to cover such cost. Under paragraph 2 of the same section, the State Treasury shall claim repatriation costs by action of subrogation against the shipowner. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that, pursuant to Standard A2.5.2, the Government shall ensure the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in case of their abandonment. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) does national legislation require the provision of an expeditious and effective financial security system to assist seafarers in the event of their abandonment? (if yes, specify if the financial security system was determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned); (b) has your country received requests to facilitate repatriation of a seafarer and, if yes, how did your country respond?; (c) what are the circumstances under which a seafarer is considered abandoned according to national legislation?; (d) does national legislation provide that ships that need to be certified according to Regulation 5.1.3 must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence must contain the information required by Appendix A2-I and has to be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (e) does national legislation require that the financial security system is sufficient to cover outstanding wages and other entitlements, all expenses incurred by the seafarer (including the cost of repatriation), and the essential needs of the seafarers, as defined in Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 9?; and (f) does national legislation provide for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the above-mentioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A2-I of the Convention (Standard A2.5.2, paragraph 7).

Regulation 3.1 and the Code. Decent accommodation and recreational facilities. Noting that certain provisions of the Accommodation of Crews Convention (Revised), 1949 (No. 92), and the Accommodation of Crews (Supplementary Provisions) Convention, 1970 (No. 133), require the enactment of national legislation for their application, the Committee requested the Government to take the necessary measures in that regard. The Committee notes that, under section 63 of the MLA, the shipowner is obliged to ensure that work, living and recreational spaces, showers, toilets and messes on board a ship comply with the requirements set out in the MLC, 2006 in terms of surface area, lighting, air cleanliness, noise and vibration level. Moreover he/she shall provide the seafarer on the ship accommodation free of charge as well as recreation conditions, and, if possible, other amenities whose aim is to satisfy the needs of seafarers. However, there is no reference to the legislation providing that all ships, including those constructed prior to the Convention’s entry into force, maintain decent accommodation and recreational facilities for seafarers on board nor reference to ships built before that date will continue to fall under national legislation implementing Conventions Nos 92 and 133. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that the provisions of Conventions Nos 92 and 133 are implemented for ships that continue to fall under the application of these Conventions.

Regulation 3.1 and the Code. Accommodation and recreational facilities. The Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 63, paragraphs 1 and 2, of the MLA, which refers to the requirements set out by the MLC, 2006 in terms of surface area, lighting, air cleanliness, noise and vibration. The Committee observes, however, that this section gives only partial effect to the requirements set out in the Convention. Noting the absence of information on several provisions of this Standard A3.1, the Committee requests the Government to indicate how it implements the following requirements: (i) accommodation (Standard A3.1, paragraph 6(a)–(f)); (ii) the availability of individual sleeping rooms for each seafarer (Standard A3.1, paragraph 9(a)); (iii) the minimum floor area in single berth seafarers’ sleeping rooms (Standard A3.1, paragraph9(f)); (iv) the minimum floor area on passenger ships and special purpose ships (Standard A3.1, paragraph 9(i)); (v) the minimum floor area on ships other than passenger ships and special purpose ships (Standard A3.1, paragraph 9(k)); (vi) the floor area for seafarers performing the duties of ship’s officers on passenger ships and special purpose ships (Standard A3.1, paragraph 9(l)); (vii) adjoining sitting rooms (Standard A3.1, paragraph 9(m)); (viii) the fact that the clothes locker should be a minimum of 475 litres (Standard A3.1, paragraph 9(n)); and (ix) hospital accommodation (Standard A3.1, paragraph 12).

As regards the implementation of Standard A3.1, paragraphs 10, 11, 12 and 13, the Committee notes the Government’s reference to section 63 of the MLA, which does not appear to be relevant in this context. The Committee requests the Government to provide detailed information on the measures taken to implement these requirements of the Convention. The Committee notes that, with regard to the implementation of Standard A3.1, paragraphs 14, 15 and 17, the Government refers only to section 63(2) of the MLA, which does not appear to be relevant in this context. The Committee recalls that Standard A3.1, paragraphs 14 (space on open deck) and 17 (recreational facilities), apply to all ships to which the Convention is applicable, whereas Standard A3.1, paragraph 15 (ship’s offices), only allow for the exclusion of ships of less than 3,000 gross tonnage after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned. The Committee requests the Government to provide information on how these provisions of the Convention are implemented with regard to the other ships covered by the Convention. It further requests the Government to provide information on the implementation of Standard A3.1, paragraph 19 (variations of accommodation standards for differing religious and social practices), as well as to indicate whether any exemptions for ships of less than 200 gross tonnage have been granted pursuant to Standard A3.1, paragraphs 20 and 21, of the Convention.

Regulation 3.2 and Standard A3.2, paragraph 2(b). Organization and equipment of the catering department. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that this issue is addressed by instructions given by Flag State Control inspectors. The Committee recalls that Standard A3.2, paragraph 2(b), requires that Members adopt laws and regulations or other measures to provide to the seafarers of adequate, varied and nutritious meals prepared and served in hygienic conditions. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate the measures taken or envisaged to comply with this requirement of the Convention.

Regulation 4.1, Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(a). Inspection and maintenance of medicine chests, medical equipment and medical guides at regular intervals. The Committee notes that under sections 71(5) and 72, paragraphs 1 and 2 of the MLA deal with medical chests on board ship. However, it contains no reference to its inspection at a regular intervals. The Committee requests the Government to explain how it gives effect to Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(a), indicating, in particular, how it has given due consideration to Guideline B4.1.1, paragraph 4, which provides that inspections should take place at regular intervals not exceeding 12 months.

Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(d). Availability of medical advice through radio stations. The Committee notes that in order to perform the tasks of the States relating to the provision of medical advice by radio at sea, the Maritime Telemedical Assistance Service has been established. The tasks of this Service shall be performed by the University Centre for Maritime and Tropical Medicine in Gdynia. To this end, the minister in charge of maritime economy, in consultation with the minister in charge of health, shall determine, by way of a regulation, the operational rules as well as the detailed scope of tasks of this Service. The Committee requests the Government to indicate if these services are already operational and to clarify if they are available 24 hours a day and provided free of charge, as requested under Standard A4.1, paragraph 4(d).

Regulation 4.2 and Standards A4.2.1, paragraphs 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14, and A4.2.2, paragraph 3. Shipowners’ liability. In relation to the 2014 amendments to the Code of the Convention, the Committee recalls that pursuant to Standards A4.2.1 and A4.2.2, national laws and regulations shall provide that the financial security system to assure compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard meet certain minimum requirements. The Committee notes the Government’s indication that insurance is provided by an insurance policy issued by a private insurer. The Committee brings the Government’s attention to the following questions included in the revised report form for the Convention: (a) what is the form taken by the system of financial security and was it determined after consultation with the shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations concerned?; (b) how national laws and regulations ensure that the system of financial security meets the following minimum requirements: (i) payment of compensation in full and without delay, (ii) no pressure to accept payment less than the contractual amount, (iii) interim payments (while situation is being assessed) to avoid undue hardship, (iv) offsetting payment against any damages resulting from any other claim made by the seafarer against the shipowner and arising from the same incident, and (v) persons who can bring the claim for contractual compensation (seafarer, her/his next of kin, representative or designated beneficiary)?; (c) does national legislation provide that ships must carry on board a certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security issued by the financial security provider? (if yes, specify if the certificate or other documentary evidence has to contain the information required in Appendix A4-I, be in English or accompanied by an English translation, and if a copy must be posted in a conspicuous place on board); (d) does national legislation provide: (i) for at least 30 days of notice by the financial security provider to the competent authority of the flag State before the financial security can cease, (ii) that the competent authority is notified by the financial security provider if a shipowner’s financial security is cancelled or terminated; and (iii) that seafarers receive prior notification if a shipowner’s financial security is to be cancelled or terminated?; and (e) how does national legislation ensure that effective arrangements are in place to receive, deal with and impartially settle contractual claims relating to compensation in the event of the death or long-term disability of seafarers due to an occupational injury, illness or hazard, through expeditious and fair procedures? The Committee requests the Government to reply to the above-mentioned questions, indicating in each case the applicable national provisions. The Committee also requests the Government to provide a copy of a model certificate or other documentary evidence of financial security containing the information required in Appendix A4-I of the Convention (Standard A4.2.1, paragraph 14).

Regulation 4.3, paragraph 4, Standard A4.3, paragraph 3. National guidelines. The Committee notes that the Government has not provided information on the development, after consultation with representative shipowners’ and seafarers’ organizations, of national guidelines for the management of occupational safety and health, to protect seafarers that live, work and train on board ships flying its flag (Regulation 4.3, paragraph 2). The Committee requests the Government to provide information in this regard.

Regulation 4.5 and the Code. Social security. The Committee requested the Government to clarify whether seafarers ordinarily resident in Poland who work on ships flying the flag of another country are also protected under Poland’s social security law. The Committee notes the Government’s reply that the social insurance system in Poland is regulated by the Act of 13 October 1998 on the Social Insurance System. Pursuant to sections 6(1), 11(1) and 12(1) of the Act, all persons who are employees in Poland, shall be subject to mandatory pension, disability pension, sick leave and accident insurance. The Government further indicates that, pursuant to the Act of 13 October 1998 on Social Insurance System – seafarers are entitled to benefits from the social security system on equal rights with the insured employed on shore, if they are subject to compulsory social insurance or are voluntarily covered (retirement and disability pension insurance). In order to be covered by the said Act, seafarers must be in an employment relationship with a Polish entity and perform work in the territory of Poland. Consequently, seafarers subject to Polish legislation have access to benefits in case of old age, disability, employment injury as well as sickness or maternity on identical principles as other insured persons, irrespective of whether the place of their permanent residence shall be Poland or any other country.

The Committee further notes the Government’s indication that Polish seafarers employed by foreign shipowners and working on ships flying flags other than Polish, shall not be subject to mandatory social insurance but may be covered by old age and disability insurance at their own request, pursuant to section 7 of the Act of 13 October 1998 on Social Insurance System. However, they shall not be subject to sickness, accident and health insurance. Seafarers permanently residing in Poland and working on ships flying a flag of a country not member of the EU, may take out voluntary health insurance in Poland. Coverage by voluntary health insurance depends on payment of a fee to the National Health Fund (NFZ), the amount of which depends on the period in which the seafarer has not been covered by health insurance in Poland. In 2015, a new provision was introduced to the Act on health care services financed from public funds (section 68(8)(a), pursuant to which this period (insurance interruption) shall not include the period in which the seafarer has been employed on a seagoing ship with foreign registration. Therefore, the fee in question may be substantially lower or not required at all. The Committee observes that, contrary to shoreworkers, seafarers residing in Poland and employed on board foreign ships (other than EU) would only be entitled to voluntary affiliation and would need to bear alone the financial burden of both employer’s and employee’s contributions, in breach of the principle established by Regulation 4.5, paragraph 3, according to which seafarers who are subject to the national social security legislation are entitled to benefit from social security protection no less favourable than that enjoyed by shoreworkers. The Committee therefore requests the Government to indicate measures taken or envisaged to comply with the principle of equality of treatment between seafarers and shoreworkers as regards social security protection in the case of seafarers serving on board foreign ships (other than EU), in particular by way of actively seeking to conclude bilateral or multilateral social security agreements, for example, with the most important flag States with a view to giving effect to the above principle.

Regulation 5.1.4 and Standard A5.1.4. Inspection and enforcement. The Committee notes that the Government does not specify the national provisions that set the requirement ensuring that the inspectors shall have the status and the independence necessary to enable them to carry out the verification of the application of the Convention. The Committee accordingly requests the Government to specify the legislative or regulatory provisions giving effect to Standard A5.1.4, paragraphs 3, 6, 11(a) and 17. It further requests the Government to indicate how it ensures that the inspector is empowered to require that any deficiency is remedied and, where relevant, to prohibit a ship from leaving port until necessary actions are taken as required under Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 7(c).

Additional documents requested. The Committee requests the Government to provide the following documents and information: an example of the approved document for a seafarer’s record of employment (Standard A2.1, paragraphs 1 and 3); an example of a seafarer’s employment agreement (Standard A2.1, paragraph 2(a)); the relevant portion of any applicable collective bargaining agreements that are subject to a port State inspection under Regulation 5.2 (Standard A2.1, paragraph 2(b)); a copy of any authorized or registered collective agreement provisions that establish seafarers’ normal working hours or permit exceptions to the established limits (Standard A2.3, paragraphs 3 and 13); for each type of ship (passenger, cargo, etc.), a typical example of a safe manning document or equivalent issued by the competent authority (Standard A2.7, paragraph 1); a copy of the annual reports on inspection activities that have been issued in accordance with Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 13; a standard document issued to or signed by inspectors setting out their functions and powers (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 7); a copy of any documentation that is available informing seafarers and interested others about the procedures for making a complaint (in confidence) regarding a breach of the requirements of the Convention (including seafarers’ rights) (Standard A5.1.4, paragraph 5).

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Poland

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C100 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C111 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C111 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C029 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C029 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C081 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C129 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Specific matters relating to labour inspection in agriculture

Adopted by the CEACR in 2019

C019 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C099 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Minimum wage

Protection of wages

C102 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C105 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Comments adopted by the CEACR: Poland

Display the list by:

Adopted by the CEACR in 2021

C100 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C111 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

C111 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2021, published 110th ILC session (2022)

Adopted by the CEACR in 2020

C029 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C029 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C081 - Observation (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C129 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2020, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Specific matters relating to labour inspection in agriculture

Adopted by the CEACR in 2019

C019 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C099 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

Minimum wage

Protection of wages

C102 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

C105 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)

MLC, 2006 - Direct Request (CEACR) - adopted 2019, published 109th ILC session (2021)