New powers of the State Labour Inspection (PIP) in Poland from 8 July 2026 – consequences for employers

From 8 July 2026, the State Labour Inspection (PIP) in Poland will operate under new rules that materially strengthen enforcement in the area of employment structures. For employers, investors and managers responsible for HR and payroll in Poland, the most important change is that PIP will be able to confirm the existence of an employment relationship by way of an administrative decision, rather than only by referring the case to a labour court. In practice, this means a higher risk of challenge not only for mandate contracts and other civil law contracts, but also for B2B cooperation models, where the actual way the work is performed reflects the conditions typical of regular employment.

The amendment was published in the Polish Journal of Laws as Journal of Laws of 2026, item 473, and the core provisions take effect on 8 July 2026, i.e. three months after publication.

The new law goes beyond contract reclassification alone. It also covers remote inspections, new cooperation rules between PIP, the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) and the National Revenue Administration (KAS), individual interpretations, and higher fines for offences against employee rights.

---

The key change: a PIP decision confirming the existence of an employment relationship

Until now, even if a labour inspector concluded that a civil law contract was being performed in the same way as an employment contract, the case generally had to be referred to the labour court. From 8 July 2026, a district labour inspector will be able to issue a decision confirming the existence of an employment relationship if, in the authority’s view, the cooperation is carried out under the conditions set out in Article 22 of the Polish Labour Code. This concerns, in particular, work performed for the employer and under the employer’s direction, at a place and time designated by the employer, in return for remuneration. The label used in the contract will not be decisive. This matters equally for companies using B2B arrangements. The new rules do not eliminate that form of cooperation, but they clearly strengthen enforcement tools wherever B2B functions only on paper. The more a cooperation model resembles standard employee employment, the greater the risk of intervention by the State Labour Inspection (PIP) in Poland.

---

First an order, then a decision

An important point is that the law makes the administrative decision conditional on prior non-compliance with an order.

Before issuing a decision, the competent PIP authority must first allow the parties to present their position and then issue an order requiring the irregularities to be remedied. This may concern either the way a civil law contract functions in practice or the failure to conclude an employment contract where one should have been concluded. The order is meant to be framed in a way that allows compliance to be assessed during the inspection itself.

Only if the order is not followed may the authority proceed to issue an administrative decision.

From the employer’s perspective, this means that not only the inspection findings themselves matter, but also how the company responds to them. In many cases, a business may have some time to regularise the legal relationship, documentation and practical organisation of the cooperation before a formal decision is issued. That should not, however, create a false sense of security. A short deadline, incomplete records, or inconsistency between the contract wording and the real organisation of work may still determine the outcome.

---

The parties’ intention still matters, but only within the limits of Polish law

A common question in the debate around these changes is whether the parties’ mutual intention will still be taken into account. The answer is yes, but only to a limited extent.

The law provides that, in the administrative proceedings, the intention of the parties should be considered as long as it is not contrary to the law, the principles of social coexistence, or aimed at circumventing the law. In other words, simply stating in the contract that both parties want a B2B relationship will not protect the company if the actual working conditions correspond to employment.

The new rules also introduce default solutions. If the evidence does not allow all elements of the employment relationship to be established, the decision will indicate an indefinite-term employment contract, full-time work, the employer’s registered office as the place of work, and the statutory minimum wage as the remuneration level.

This shows clearly that poorly organised evidence does not necessarily work in the employer’s favour.

---

The effects of the State Labour Inspection (PIP) in Poland decision do not end with labour law

One of the most important elements of the amendment is that, from the date it is issued, a PIP decision will produce effects not only under labour law, but also in the areas of taxation, social insurance, health insurance and mandatory payments to public funds.

This means that reclassification of a relationship may quickly translate into settlement, reporting and organisational obligations on the employer’s side.

At the same time, it is important to distinguish current effects from effects for earlier periods. As a rule, the date of concluding the employment contract is the date of the decision itself. If, however, the district labour inspector considers that the existence or terms of the employment relationship for an earlier period must be established, the authority may bring a claim before the court instead of issuing a decision for that earlier period. This is a crucial distinction. Not every irregularity will automatically trigger full retroactive consequences solely on the basis of an administrative decision.

There is also a specific protective mechanism worth noting. If, between the start of the inspection and the expiry of the deadline for appeal or the final resolution of the case, the civil law relationship is terminated, expires, is cancelled, or the actual performance of work stops at the employer’s initiative, then the date of concluding the employment contract becomes the date on which the inspection started. That is a provision employers should not underestimate when taking “corrective” action after the inspection has already begun.

---

Appeal and a fast-track court path

An appeal against the decision of a district labour inspector may be filed within one month of service. What is particularly important is that the appellant must present all allegations and evidence already in the appeal, and the other parties must do so in their response. New evidence at a later stage will be admissible only exceptionally.

For employers, this means that the evidence file has to be prepared already during the PIP inspection, not only after the decision is received.

The amendment also aims to speed up court proceedings. The court is expected to take steps so that the hearing date falls no later than one month from the filing of the claim or from the removal of formal defects. The law also introduces specific rules for hearing appeals against PIP decisions and complaints concerning immediate enforceability.

---

Immediate enforceability only in exceptional cases

During the legislative process, one of the most controversial issues was whether decisions would be immediately enforceable. In the end, the legislator kept this mechanism, but limited it. Immediate enforceability may apply only to persons covered by special protection against termination of employment. This softens the original concerns of employers, but it does not eliminate the risk of disputes in individual cases.

The law also expressly states that issuing a decision confirming the existence of an employment relationship cannot be used as grounds for unfavourable treatment of the worker and, in particular, cannot justify notice of termination or termination of employment. This creates an additional area of risk for companies that might seek to react in a retaliatory way.

---

Remote inspections and data analysis will increase the detection of irregularities

The amendment allows inspections, or certain inspection activities, to be carried out remotely, either through postal operators or by means of electronic communication.

At the same time, the law strengthens cooperation between PIP, ZUS and KAS and provides for the creation of an inter-institutional risk assessment team, as well as the exchange of data and information by electronic transmission through ICT systems.

This marks a clear move towards more targeted, data-based inspections and faster information-sharing between public authorities in Poland. In practice, that makes data consistency far more important for employers. If the method of settling cooperation, HR documentation, insurance filings and the practical organisation of work are not aligned, the risk of detection will rise.

This is especially relevant for businesses using large numbers of contractors and relying on fixed, repeatable working arrangements that closely resemble employee employment.

---

Higher fines from 8 July 2026

From 8 July 2026, sanctions for offences against employee rights will also increase.

In many cases, fines will rise to between PLN 2,000 and PLN 60,000, and for certain infringements to between PLN 3,000 and PLN 90,000.

For management boards and those responsible for HR, payroll and workforce organisation, this means that incorrect classification of an employment model may create not only a dispute over the individual’s status, but also real financial exposure.

---

Individual interpretations as a tool for reducing risk

A new feature of the amended rules is the possibility of obtaining an individual interpretation from the Chief Labour Inspector. The fee is PLN 40, and the authority should, as a rule, issue the interpretation within 30 days of receiving a complete application. The interpretation is not binding on the entrepreneur, but compliance with it protects the applicant against administrative, financial or criminal sanctions within the scope covered by that interpretation. Importantly, it is binding on PIP authorities and is also to be forwarded to ZUS and KAS.

This is not, however, an absolute safeguard. The protection works only where the actual cooperation model corresponds to the facts described in the application. If an inspection shows that the real situation differs from what was described, the protective effect may be limited. For that reason, an individual interpretation should be seen as one part of broader risk management, not as a substitute for a properly designed employment model.

---

Does this mean the end of B2B contracts in Poland?

The changes do not mean the automatic end of B2B cooperation in Poland. What they do mean is that employers must pay much closer attention to ensuring that the contract wording, the practical model of cooperation and internal processes are genuinely consistent.

The greater the subordination, fixed hours, lack of real independence, lack of business risk on the contractor’s side, and full integration into the company’s work organisation, the greater the risk that PIP will treat the relationship as employment.

For many businesses, the key task will therefore not be to replace all B2B contracts with employment contracts, but to distinguish genuinely business-to-business relationships from those that, in practice, function as standard employment. That is where the main risk area lies after 8 July 2026.

---

What employers should do now – checklist

Before the new rules take effect, it is worth carrying out a structured review of current cooperation models. In practice, the following areas are particularly important:

• reviewing B2B contracts, mandate contracts and other civil law arrangements for features of an employment relationship,
• comparing contract wording with the actual way the work is performed,
• reviewing HR documentation, reporting processes and payroll in Poland,
• preparing internal procedures for dealing with inspections, including the way evidence should be collected,
• assessing whether, in selected cases, it may be justified to apply for an individual interpretation from the Chief Labour Inspector,
• considering whether to use the transitional period if the company already sees that some relationships require adjustment.

The amendment also provides for a specific transitional solution. An entity that, before the law enters into force, used a civil law contract even though the relationship met all the features of employment and, within 12 months from the effective date of the law, voluntarily brings that relationship into compliance by concluding an employment contract, will not be liable under Article 281 § 1 point 1 of the Polish Labour Code. This does not remove all legal consequences, but it may reduce exposure to petty offence liability.

In companies that use multiple employment models, preparing for these changes usually requires a combination of legal, organisational and settlement perspectives. In that context, it may be helpful to bring order to HR and payroll services in Poland so that documentation, day-to-day cooperation and settlements remain fully aligned.

---

The new powers of the State Labour Inspection (PIP) in Poland do not mean that every civil law contract will become a problem. They do mean, however, that from 8 July 2026 the margin for error will be smaller, and the value of a well-designed cooperation model will increase significantly. For employers in Poland, this is the last moment to move from general concern to concrete corrective action.

---

Legal basis:
Act of 11 March 2026 amending the Act on the State Labour Inspection and certain other acts (Journal of Laws of 2026, item 473)

---

If you have any further questions or require additional information, please contact your business relationship person or use the enquiry form on the HLB Poland website.

Contact us »

***