Labour and Social Security Journal 12/2019

The author discusses the interpretation of the worker’s participation principle in managament of establishements according to art. 18(2) labour code. He also discribes legal status being used in this place. As main subject of regulation of this principle the author considers the Act of informing and consultation of workers being rhe ground of creating worker’s councils. However the scope of their functioning is every year decreasing. The proposals which could serve to stimulate this institution have been presented. This would also be in complince with EU-labour law.

In the event of the regulation of the right to social security at the constitutional level, one of the most interesting theoretical and practical issues is the question about the possibility of claims on the grounds of the provision of the Constitution that lays down the right to benefits at a determined level. Thus, in the above-cited constitutions, there is either the constitutional right to social security or only reference is made to provisions regulating this right precisely. In the latter case, there is no doubt that the specific contents of the given right are to be developed in the future secondary regulations. On the other hand, in the situation when the right to social security is laid down in a constitution directly, a question is raised about its material (definite) substratum. It usually results in many controversies in literature as well as in judicial decisions. The issue also concerns the right to social security regulated by the Polish Constitution of 1997. The aim of the article is to present the controversies over the above-mentioned issue in the Polish constitutional system.

Due to the high demand for qualified employees on the labor market, their expectations for providing fair pay, but also other benefits affecting the safety and functioning of the employee, both in private life and in the professional environment, are growing. The way to ensure safety will depend on the employer's approach to the issue of employee benefits in general and the role they play in increasing the postulated work efficiency. Entering additional parental rights into the system of company sources of labor law seems to be justified, and entering them there – especially justified in the face of diverse financial possibilities of employers.

This article is an analysis of the legal position of the only representative company trade union organization, especially as a participant in collective bargaining. The reason for addressing this issue is, in particular, the introduction of art. 30 paragraph 7 to the Trade Union Act. A closer look at the position of the only representative trade union organization shows that it differs depending on the type of negotiations in which the trade union organization participates. These differences cannot always be rationally explained. The issues discussed in this article also have considerable practical significance - the situation in which there is only one representative company trade union organization is quite common in practice, and the diversity of the legal position of such organization according to not entirely clear criteria causes quite serious practical problems.

The protection of salary is an important issue when personal bankruptcy is declared with respect to a natural person who does not conduct business activity. Pursuant to the provisions of the bankruptcy law and the provisions of the Labour Code, the salary is divided into two parts: the one that forms a part of the bankrupt person’s assets (masa upadłości) managed by an insolvency administrator (syndyk) and the one that is excluded from the bankrupt person's assets and remains available to the bankrupt person’s disposal. During insolvency proceedings (i.e. from the date when bankruptcy is declared to the date when the repayment plan order becomes final and binding or debts are written off without any repayment plan, or when the court decision to discontinue the proceedings becomes final and binding) claims are set-off against the bankrupt person’s salary. The part of the salary against which claims may be set-off forms a part of the bankrupt person's assets and serves to satisfy claims to be made by creditors and listed on the list of debts. This part is also used to cover the cost of insolvency proceedings and other liabilities payable from the bankrupt person's assets. The money excluded from the bankrupt person's assets, including the part of the salary that cannot be seized, constitute their sole means of subsistence. The right of the bankrupt person to their salary may be violated in particular when excessive amounts are deducted from the salary or such amounts are deducted for an excessively long period of time.

The issues discussed in the article consider whether the provision of art. 130 § 2 of the Labour Code applies to educators at educational establishments working in no-summer, no-winter holidays system (Monday through Sunday 40 hours per week) for whom a territorial self-government unit is the governing body, and if under art.42c (4) of the Teacher’s Charter, such an educator is given a day off for working on a holiday, art. 130 § 3 of the Labour Code also applies.

According to the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 19 November 2019, C-585/18, C-624/18 and C-625/18, in joined cases A.K. vs. Krajowa Rada Sądownictwa (C‑585/18) and CP (C‑624/18), DO (C‑625/18) vs. Sąd Najwyższy, if cases concerning the application of EU law falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of a court which is not an independent and impartial tribunal, within the meaning of Article 47 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, the principle of the primacy of EU law must be interpreted as requiring the referring court to disapply the provision of national law which reserves jurisdiction to hear and rule on the cases in the main proceedings to the abovementioned chamber.