Labour and Social Security Journal 09/2025

The article analyses the issue of transgender and gender non-binary in the context of Polish social insurance law. The authors point out that the traditional, binary under­standing of gender (male/female) is insufficient in the face of contemporary medical, psychological and social knowl­edge, and that Polish legal regulations do not take into account the complexity of gender identity, leading to nu­merous practical problems and potential violations of the rights of non-cisnormative persons. The article highlights the urgent need to bring Polish social insurance law in line with current human rights standards to ensure equal treatment and protection of transgender and non-binary persons. The lack of adequate regulations leads to legal uncertainty, risk of discrimination and violation of consti­tutional rights to dignity and equality.

The considerations presented in this article focus on the definition of a digital labour platform provided in Di­rective (EU) 2024/2831 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2024 on improving working conditions in platform work. The interpretation of the term ‘digital labour platform’ is of key importance for the effec­tiveness of the presumption of an employment relationship, which constitutes the cornerstone of the Directive. The au­thor explores potential directions for interpreting the defi­nitional criteria, taking into account the specific nature of platform-based employment and highlighting interpretative uncertainties within the context of the Polish legal system. In the author’s view, the requirement that all definitional criteria be cumulatively met by a single entity in order for it to be classified as a digital labour platform does not cor­respond to the realities of platform work, which is typically characterised by multi-actor arrangements. This, in turn, may undermine the effectiveness of the presumption.

Relatively low retirement age is among key public finance problems in developed countries. Attempts to increase it are usually ineffective. Contrary to that automatically adjusting universal public pension schemes (e.g. Poland, Sweden) opens new possibilities to solve the problem. Being based on individual accounts stimulates individual rationality of participants. This enables giving up the re­tirement age as a fiscal policy tool and to exchange it by the minimum retirement age. Chronological age ceases to institutionally matter in the labour market. The minimum retirement is needed as a social policy tool.

The purpose of this article is to answer the question of whether the occupational health and safety measures re­ferred to in ILO Convention No. 190 concerning the elim­ination of violence and harassment in the world of work are appropriate for determining such phenomena and preventing them. The examination of the content of this Convention and of ILO Conventions No. 155 and No. 187, fundamental in the field of occupational health and safety, justifies their application subject to certain modifications due to the specific type of risk, namely the risk arising from improper interpersonal relations in the working environ­ment. The study indicates in particular the employer’s ob­ligation to assess the risk of such hazards occurring, the employee’s right to refrain from work due to fear of their occurrence, and the powers of inspection authorities in this respect. It also formulates a general reflection on the universality of occupational health and safety measures serving to protect the health and life of workers not only in connection with work processes but also in connection with improper interpersonal relations.

The subject of this article is the analysis of the subjective scope of Article 755⁵ § 1 of the Civil Procedure Code using the example of an employee in the period of pre-retire­ment protection. A dispute has arisen in the doctrine as to whether the protection provided for in Article 755⁵ § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure may be enjoyed by an employ­ee in relation to whom the legislator has provided for the prohibition of termination of the employment relationship, but has not established the prohibition of termination of the employment relationship without notice. The article presents the positions expressed in the doctrine and analy­ses the concept of an employee subject to special protection against termination of the employment relationship with or without notice. The paper carries out a linguistic, purposive and logical analysis of Article 755⁵ § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure in order to demonstrate that an employee who is in a period of pre-retirement protection falls within the scope of the subject matter of 755⁵ § 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure regardless of whether the employment relation­ship was terminated with or without notice.

The article attempts to answer the question, which is a fragment of the limitation period issue, of how to un­derstand the phrase contained in Article 295 § 2 of the Labor Code „until the proceedings initiated to pursue or establish or satisfy or secure the claim are concluded”. The point is whether it should be understood as the day on which the court decision becomes final or the day of issuing the decision by the court that last ruled in the case. The direct reason for writing it was the legal issue present­ed to the Supreme Court for resolution under Article 390 of the Code of Civil Procedure by the District Court in Bielsko-Biała, which by the resolution of January 22, 2025, III PZP 2/24 was referred by the ordinary bench for reso­lution to the enlarged bench of the Supreme Court of the Labor and Social Insurance Chamber.

The author presents the Supreme Court’s stance on the common practice of occupational physicians issuing cer­tificates of partial health contraindications for the current position. These certificates allow employees to work on the condition that tasks they should no longer perform for health reasons are eliminated. However, they are not expressly provided for in the implementing regulation to Article 229 of the Labour Code.

The CJEU interpreted Article 3(1) and Article 5(1) of Directive 2008/104/EC on temporary agency work in its judgment of 24 October 2024 in Case C-441/23. This judg­ment continues the CJEU’s previous jurisprudence and, at the same time, inspires a discussion on the construction of the legal relationship of temporary agency work adopted in Polish law.