The two largest Polish unions, NSZZ Solidarność and the All-Poland Alliance of Trade Unions, have filed a complaint with the International Labour Organization against Poland’s civil courts. They believe their right to strike has been violated because, in a closed session and without taking evidence from all parties, the civil court declared a strike by LOT Aircraft Maintenance Services illegal. The OPZZ has also complained to the Ombudsman about Poland’s labour courts.
Members of Poland’s two biggest trade unions at LOT Aircraft Maintenance Services (LOT AMS), NSZZ Solidarność and the Trade Union of Airport Ground Staff (ZZNPL), part of the All-Poland Alliance of Trade Unions (OPZZ), went on strike on 18 March 2012.
They had demanded a pay rise of €500 for all employees, explaining that it would restore the salary levels that were in place before LOT Polish Airlines was restructured, resulting in the creation of LOT AMS as a separate maintenance operation. Although trade unions claimed 95% of employees went on strike, the company’s major client LOT Polish Airlines was not affected and planes managed to leave on time. According to trade unions the strike was legal, but the board of the company insisted that it was illegal without giving any reasons to justify this assertion.
On 26 March 2012, the trade unions received a warrant issued by the Court of Justice ordering them to call off the strike because the company had incurred losses as a result of the action. A few days later, 10 trade union members received notice of disciplinary dismissals effective immediately. The dismissals were issued in line with clause 52 of the Polish Labour Code (in Polish), which states that an employer may dismiss an employee without a notice period when the employee considerably violates their elementary obligations.
As a consequence of these events, in June 2012, NSZZ Solidarność and OPPZ filed a complaint against the Polish courts to the International Labour Organization (ILO). The grounds for their complaint were that the civil court had prohibited the strike at LOT AMS:
Trade unions believe that the civil court’s actions violated ILO Convention 87 (94.2Kb PDF), Freedom of association and protection of the right to organize’, which has been ratified by Poland. The unions have expressed the view that Poland should pay more attention to the practice of civil courts in terms of respecting the ILO convention, and said that it should be clearly stated in Polish law that no warrant to stop a strike should be issued in a closed session without the participation of all sides of a collective dispute.
It might take a few months for the ILO to hear the case. If it finds in the unions’ favour, the ILO might call on the Polish government to take steps to put the Convention into practice.
Meanwhile, trade unions continue to operate outside of the company and still want to fight to improve the situation of employees in the company.
Neither the court nor the Polish Ministry of Justice have so far commented on the subject.
The OPZZ has also raised concerns over another aspect of the Polish justice system. In contrast to the case of LOT AMS, the union’s complaint was not triggered by a single incident, but rather by an analysis of a number of cases. In the OPZZ’s assessment, a number of aspects of the way in which the Polish labour courts function is faulty. It also believes that the number of employee-unfriendly regulations is too high.
The OPZZ appealed to the Ombudsman to look into the functioning of Poland’s labour courts and to consider specific changes to the labour law. Specifically it raised the following issues:
In Poland it can take years for a court of first instance to reach a decision, and employers often deliberately extend the length of proceedings. As for costs, current labour law states that the costs of the winning party should be reimbursed, but only at a flat rate of PLN 60 (about €15) per hour for representation at all stages of the lawsuit, from the very beginning to the very end.
In theory the court could grant a higher reimbursement but the practice is to leave it at the flat rate of PLN 60. In practice employees have to pay for their representation almost entirely themselves since the true legal costs are ten times, if not hundreds of times, higher.
OPZZ is now waiting for the Ombudsman to respond.
Monitoring the functioning of the Polish justice system remains an important aspect of trade unions’ work. In their opinion, the mode of law execution is questionable. The verdict of the ILO and the opinion of the Ombudsman will be important signals as to whether the unions’ criticism of the courts is justified. The responses will also suggest the direction which potential changes in law execution should take.
Ewelina Kuźmicz, Institute of Public Affairs