Labour and Social Security Journal 07/2025

Technological development has caused profound changes in economic and social life. It is also changing the world of work. A consequence of technological development is the weakening of the protection of employees, visible especially in the platform economy. This leads to the question whether labour law (employment law) serving to protect the worker as the weaker party has become an inadequate form of regulating social relations? The answer to this question requires confronting the goals of the legal regulation of human labour with the actual situation of employees and employers within the framework of social relations using modern technologies. The author refers general conclusions on the role of labour law and its evolution to the state of Polish regulation of social relations related to the performance of work.

The objective of this article is to assess whether the 2024 draft amendment to the Trade Unions Act, which grants trade unions the right to obtain information about AI systems and algorithms used by employers, ensures effective oversight of these technologies. The author argues that the right to information alone is insufficient without mechanisms for consultation, co-decision, and supervision. The article discusses EU regulations and solutions adopted in Spain, Germany, Italy, and Norway, proposing that the draft provision be expanded to include consultation obligations, protection of trade secrets, and the possibility of involving independent experts. In conclusion, it emphasis es the need to involve employees and trade unions in digital transformation processes.

The text covers issues related to determining the amount of the general pension in relation to persons who received an early pension before obtaining this pension. The basis for the considerations is the judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal issued in case SK 140/20, in which it was found unconstitutional Article 25 section 1b of the Act on Pensions and Annuities from the Social Insurance Fund, in the scope in which it provided a basis for reducing the basis of the general pension by the amounts previously paid to the pensioner from early pensions. The argumentation contained in the justification of the Constitutional Tribunal was assessed, indicating its limited scope of impact, imposed by the boundaries of the case, which was derived as a result of the constitutional complaint, limiting the possibility of its application to persons who applied for their early pensions before 6 June 2012 and were then surprised - while receiving an early pension - by the content of the introduced Article 25 section 1b of the Act on Pensions and Annuities from the Social Insurance Fund. The article assesses the legal consequences of the aforementioned judgment of the Constitutional Tribunal, both in terms of the legal basis for initiating administrative proceedings before pension authorities in matters of re determining the amount of an incorrectly calculated pension, and in the phase of review of a pension decision by a common court.

This article presents a constitutional perspective of collective labour agreements within the system of sources of law. The author particularly focuses on highlighting the constitutional-law nature of collective labour agreements. Additionally, the article points out doctrinal differences in the perception of the legal character of collective labor agreements. The author argues that collective labor agreements should be regarded as normative acts sui generis, which are not issued within the framework of legislative competence, but remain one of the fundamental institutions of collective labor law. According to the author, collective labour agreements do not constitute sources of law as defined in Chapter II of the Constitution, a position that is also sup ported by a substantial part of legal doctrine and the case law of the Supreme Court. Moreover, they do not have the character of being universally or internally binding, nor do they take the so-called “mixed” form. The publication also emphasizes that the compliance of collective labour agreements with the law should be determined by the competent common court, rather than the Constitutional Tribunal of Poland or the Supreme Administrative Court.

The author conducts a legal analysis and assesses the admissibility of taking into account the amounts of foreign pensions on reducing the amount of benefits being in concurrence within the institution of so called widows’ pension resulting from Polish regulations. The analysis concerns the legal principles of taking into account the amounts of foreign benefits paid from the social insurance system of another EU/EFTA member state or a state with which Poland has concluded an international agreement on social security. The author notes the differentiation of the legal situation of persons receiving pensions under bilateral social security agreements concluded by the Re public of Poland in relation to persons receiving pensions from EU/EFTA member states. The author proves that benefits from EU/EFTA member states do not cause a re duction of Polish benefits within the framework of widows’ pension, unlike benefits from countries with which Poland has concluded international agreements on social security. The author proposes a change in national law in order to extend to persons covered by bilateral agreements the principle resulting from European Union law, due to the analogy of the situation of beneficiaries.

Abstract The commented judgment of the Supreme Court of 12 March 2024, II PSKP 29/23 (OSNP 2024/12/116), deals with the call for a settlement attempt as the reason for the interruption of the limitation period (Article 295 § 1 point 1 of the Labor Code). It correctly found, among other things, that in the event of dismissal of a claim arising from an employment relationship due to the validity of the ob jection of the limitation of the claim, limiting the basis for cassation only to the violation of Article 123 § 1 point 1 of the Civil Code is insufficient to conduct a cassation review, due to the autonomy of labor law from civil law and the complete regulation of the interruption of the limitation period in Article 295 of the Labor Code. However, the Supreme Court’s view of the full autonomy of labor law from civil law in the scope of the issue of the limitation of claims goes too far. It also rightly noted that an application for a call for a settlement attempt does not always consti tute an action directly aimed at pursuing a claim within the meaning of Article 295 § 1 item 1 of the Labor Code.

The study discusses the Supreme Court’s case law in re sponse to a practical problem regarding the rules for calculating the time limit within which the management board of a trade union organisation must give or refuse consent to the termination or amendment of the employ ment (work) contract of a trade union activist (Article 32(1)(1) of the Trade Unions Act).

The protection of personal data of natural persons in the employment is regulated by Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation, hereinafter referred to as “GDPR”). In accordance with Article 88 of the GDPR Member States may provide for more specific rules to ensure the protection of employees’ rights and freedoms in respect of the processing of employees’ personal data in the employment context. The Court of Justice of the EU interpreted the concept of “more specific rules” in the judgment of 30 March 2023 in case C-34/21, Hauptpersonal rat der Lehrerinnen und Lehrer beim Hessischen Kultusmin isterium vs. Minister des Hessischen Kultusministeriums. In the judgment of 19 December 2024 in case C-65/23, MK v K GmbH, the Court again ruled on this issue, defining the relationship between Article 88 of the GDPR and other provisions of that regulation.