The July amendment to the regulations governing the State Labor Inspectorate was expected to be one of the most significant changes in the labor market in 2026. The new regulations are intended to limit situations in which civil law contracts replace employment contracts, even though the actual manner in which duties are performed corresponds to that of an employee.
However, the President of Poland has referred some of the new regulations to the Constitutional Tribunal. Among other things, provisions expanding the Polish Labor Inspectorate’s (PIP) authority to intervene in relations between employers and employees have been called into question.
For companies that use outsourcing, temporary staffing, and other external employment models, this issue is of particular importance. This is because it concerns not only what is stated in the signed contracts, but above all, what the collaboration actually looks like—in the warehouse, on the production floor, or at the workplace.
What changes did the July PIP reform bring about?
One of the most important elements of the amendment is the expansion of the State Labor Inspectorate’s authority regarding the assessment of the nature of employment.
The new regulations are intended to allow inspectors to issue decisions confirming the existence of an employment relationship if the actual manner in which duties are performed meets the criteria characteristic of an employment contract, even if the parties have relied on a different legal basis.
This is a significant change.
Until now, disputes over whether a given relationship actually constitutes an employment relationship have largely been the purview of labor courts. The expansion of the PIP’s jurisdiction thus strengthens the role of this administrative body in evaluating the employment models used by companies.
Why were the new powers granted to the National Labor Inspectorate (PIP) referred to the Constitutional Tribunal?
The amendment raised concerns regarding, among other things, the extent of a government agency’s interference with the freedom to enter into contracts and conduct business.
It was precisely this part of the new measures that was referred to the Constitutional Tribunal.
The Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling will be significant for the entire market, but companies that rely extensively on civil law contracts and external process organization models should pay particularly close attention to it.
However, this does not mean that companies should wait to take any action until a ruling is issued.
On the contrary.
Process Outsourcing Under Scrutiny?
The mere use of process outsourcing does not constitute a violation. It is a legitimate business model in which a company contracts an external provider to carry out a specific process or part of a process.
The key issue, however, is how such outsourcing works in practice.
In a properly structured model, the focus of the collaboration is on carrying out a process or achieving a specific result, and the outsourcing company retains actual responsibility for organizing its own team and carrying out the assigned tasks.
A risk arises when a contract specifies that a process is to be outsourced, but day-to-day practice begins to resemble a simple arrangement for the provision of personnel.
A contract isn't everything. What matters is what happens on the court.
This is precisely the aspect that should be of particular interest to business owners today.
You may have a very well-drafted outsourcing agreement, but if the way it is implemented deviates significantly from the terms of the document, the agreement itself may not be sufficient during an audit.
In practice, it’s a good idea to ask yourself a few questions:
- Who actually organizes the team's work?
- Who gives day-to-day instructions to the people carrying out the tasks?
- Who sets the schedule and assigns responsibilities?
- Who oversees the implementation of the process?
- Who is responsible for finding substitutes and ensuring adequate staffing?
- Does the contractor have its own management structure?
- Is the client purchasing a specific process or outcome, or does the client, in practice, receive a group of people that they manage on their own?
The greater the discrepancy between the contract's terms and the actual model of cooperation, the greater the potential risk.
Why is this issue particularly important when hiring foreign nationals?
In sectors that rely on outsourced labor, a significant portion of the workforce consists of foreign nationals.
This applies in particular to:
- logistics,
- storage,
- production,
- industry,
- aspects of construction and technical processes.
Therefore, the consequences of changes regarding the classification of legal relationships may be felt particularly acutely in companies that employ a large number of foreign workers.
This introduces an additional level of responsibility— the legality of a foreign national’s employment and residence.
The form and conditions of employment must be consistent with the documents serving as the basis for legal employment. Changes to the actual model of cooperation may therefore require analysis not only from the perspective of labor law but also in light of regulations governing the employment of foreign nationals.
What should companies that use outsourcing do?
The most important course of action today should not be to wait for the Court's ruling.
Now is a good time to conduct an audit of how outsourcing is actually being implemented.
1. Compare the contract with reality
The first step should be to verify whether the rules outlined in the contract are actually being followed at the facility.
It's not enough to review documents in the office. You have to see how the collaboration works in day-to-day operations.
2. Review the team's management approach
The issue of issuing instructions, setting schedules, and supervising employees requires special attention.
In process outsourcing, the contractor should maintain a meaningful organizational role.
3. Review the role of coordinators
The coordinator should not exist solely on paper.
If an outsourcing company has its own management team, its representatives should actually organize and oversee the implementation of the entrusted processes.
4. Check the documentation of foreign nationals
If foreign employees are involved in the process, the audit should also include documents related to the legality of their stay and employment, as well as their compliance with the actual terms of employment.
5. Train operational managers
Risks often do not arise at the level of management or the legal department.
It's being built in the warehouse.
A shift supervisor, foreman, or client manager may—even without realizing the consequences—begin to directly manage an external team in a manner inconsistent with the established outsourcing model.
Therefore, the procedures should also be known to those responsible for day-to-day cooperation with the contractor.
What impact might the Constitutional Tribunal’s decision have?
The Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling may primarily affect the range of tools the National Labor Inspectorate (PIP) can use when determining that a specific legal relationship is, in fact, an employment relationship.
However, it will not change the fundamental principle that business owners should keep in mind even today:
The nature of the cooperation is not determined solely by the name of the signed agreement.
If actual practice deviates from the established model, legal risks may exist regardless of the final decision regarding the new powers of the PIP.
Therefore, the Court’s decision should not be viewed as a reason to suspend internal audits or streamline processes.
Safe outsourcing starts with proper process organization
The changes surrounding the National Labor Inspectorate reflect a broader trend: not only is the formal correctness of documentation becoming increasingly important, but so is the actual way in which employment and collaboration are organized.
For companies that outsource, this means they must consider the entire model—from the structure of the contract, through the division of responsibilities, to the day-to-day management of the process.
At the NJOB Group, this is exactly how we view process outsourcing—as taking responsibility for a specific process, organizing it, and providing the appropriate teams, rather than simply supplying employees.
Given the increasing activity of regulatory authorities, well-organized outsourcing should provide a company not only with operational flexibility but also with a clear division of responsibilities between the parties.
To sum up… it’s not worth waiting for the Constitutional Tribunal’s ruling!
The Constitutional Tribunal’s decision will be significant for the future scope of the State Labor Inspectorate’s authority. For business owners, however, it should not mean a period of uncertainty.
The most important question can be asked today:
Does the model of cooperation described in our agreements actually play out the same way in our day-to-day work?
If the answer isn't clear-cut, now is a good time to re-examine the processes.
Because regardless of how the dispute over the PIP’s new powers is resolved, ensuring that documentation reflects the actual organization of work will remain one of the cornerstones of safe outsourcing.