When analysing the amendments, we must remember that their key objective is to prevent avoiding regulations applicable to indefinite employment contracts through concluding a series of consecutive fixed-term contracts instead. Pursuant to the new version of Article 25(1) of the Labour Code, the maximum allowed fixed term employment period is 33 months, and the contract itself can be repeated thrice over this period. After the end of the 33rd month a fixed-term contract shall automatically be converted into an indefinite employment one. The same rule applies to the fourth fixed-term employment contract. 

 

There is an exemption from the above rule: fixed-term employment may exceed 33 months if supported by objective reasons on the employer’s side. In such cases, two conditions must be met, though: the reasons must be determined in the contract, and the competent Labour Inspection Office must be informed that such a contract has been concluded. Should an employer fail to provide such information, it may be fined with an amount up to PLN 30,000. 

 

Please note that since 22 February 2016 each fixed-term employment contract may be terminated even if a termination clause has not been included therein. Notice periods are the same as for indefinite employment contracts, i.e. two weeks, a month and three months, depending on the years in service.  

 

The amendment has maintained the existing assumptions regarding the trial period contracts, which can be concluded for the period up to three months, and a consecutive trial contract concluded with the same employee is allowed only once if an employer decides to move the employee to another position or if three years have passed since the last employment period. 

 

The amendments restrict the list of labour law contracts to three types: a trial period contract, a fixed-term contract and an indefinite employment contract. The existing contracts regarding employee replacement, seasonal and casual work and employment for a specified term of office employment are classified as fixed-term contracts. 

Another positive change involves regulating the issue of releasing an employee from the service obligation during the notice period. Before, when an employer wanted to release an employee from this obligation, the employee’s consent was necessary.

 

The practice was not directly regulated by law, but resulted from the doctrine and court decisions. The issue has been clarified: an employer may make such decision at its own discretion, and due payment of employee’s remuneration for the period in question is the only condition.

 

Tomasz Podleśny, Attorney at law, Manager, Deloitte Legal