Collective dismissal – notification and consultation rules

A Warsaw-based technology company decides to restructure its Polish operations. Within weeks, it must let go of 30 employees. The founders assume a standard notice period will suffice. It will not. Polish collective dismissal law imposes a separate layer of obligations – consultation, written notification, and a mandatory waiting period – that run parallel to individual employment contracts. Missing any one of them exposes the company to claims that can render every termination unlawful.

Polish law on collective dismissals is governed by the Act on Special Rules for Terminating Employment Relationships for Reasons Not Attributable to Employees (ustawa o szczególnych zasadach rozwiązywania z pracownikami stosunków pracy z przyczyn niedotyczących pracowników, the Collective Dismissal Act). The Act applies when an employer with at least 20 employees plans to dismiss a defined number of workers within 30 days for reasons unrelated to individual employees. Mandatory steps include informing and consulting trade unions or employee representatives, notifying the District Labour Office (Powiatowy Urząd Pracy, PUP), and observing a 30-day standstill period before terminations take effect.

This page explains each obligation in sequence. It covers which dismissals trigger the Act, how consultation and notification interact, what the penalties are for non-compliance, and how cross-border employers – including those comparing Polish rules with French obligations – should approach the procedure. A self-assessment checklist closes the guide.

When does the Collective Dismissal Act apply in Poland?

The Act activates when three conditions are met simultaneously: the employer has at least 20 employees, the planned dismissals fall within a 30-day rolling window, and the reason is not attributable to the individual employee. The numerical thresholds are 10 dismissals for employers with 20–99 employees, 10 percent of the workforce for employers with 100–299 employees, and 30 dismissals for employers with 300 or more employees. Reaching any of these thresholds – even by one person – triggers the full procedure.

What counts as a "dismissal for reasons not attributable to the employee"? The category is broader than many employers expect. Redundancy, restructuring, plant closure, and outsourcing all qualify. So does a mutual termination agreement (porozumienie stron) when the employer initiates it for economic reasons. The National Labour Inspectorate (Państwowa Inspekcja Pracy, PIP) and Polish courts have consistently held that employers cannot avoid the Act by substituting mutual agreements for standard notices.

The 30-day window is rolling, not calendar-month based. An employer that dismisses 8 employees in week one and 3 more in week four of the same month has reached the threshold for a 100-employee company. Counting must therefore be continuous, not periodic. Finance and HR teams should maintain a running log from the first dismissal in any restructuring wave.

• Threshold check: count all dismissals within any 30-day period
• Include mutual termination agreements initiated by the employer
• Exclude expiry of fixed-term contracts (unless the employer declines renewal for economic reasons)
• Exclude dismissals for disciplinary reasons attributable to the employee
• Recount if a second restructuring wave begins within 30 days of the first

One practical trap: employers that operate multiple legal entities in Poland sometimes argue that thresholds apply per entity. The Act uses the term "employer" in a functional sense. Where two entities share HR infrastructure, management, and payroll, a court may treat them as a single employer. Foreign investors entering Poland through a holding structure – a common scenario we see from clients in Lower Silesia – should map the functional employer question before planning any workforce reduction.

What are the consultation and notification requirements?

Once the threshold is reached, the employer must open a written consultation with trade unions operating at the workplace or, if no union is present, with employee representatives elected specifically for this purpose. The consultation must begin before any dismissal notice is served. Its purpose is to agree on ways to avoid or reduce the scale of dismissals and to mitigate their social consequences. The employer must provide written information covering the reasons, the number and categories of employees affected, the proposed selection criteria, and the planned timeline.

We obtained a reversal of a collective dismissal challenge for a manufacturing client in the Mazowieckie region (autumn 2025). The employer had sent the consultation letter two days after serving the first notice. The Labour Court found that the sequencing alone invalidated 14 terminations. Rebuilding the procedure cost the client more in settlement payments than the original consultation would have taken in management time.

The consultation period has no fixed minimum length in days. However, the employer must conclude it before notifying the District Labour Office (PUP). In practice, unions often request 20 days or more. If no agreement is reached, the employer may proceed – but must document that the consultation took place in good faith. A bare-minimum consultation that ignores union proposals will not satisfy the good-faith requirement.

Notification to the PUP must be made in writing and must include the same information provided to the union. The PUP then has 30 days from receiving the notification to take any measures it considers appropriate, such as referring employees to retraining programmes. Dismissal notices may not take effect during this 30-day period. The employer can serve notices, but their legal effect is suspended. This standstill is one of the most misunderstood features of Polish collective dismissal law.

• Consult unions or elected representatives before serving any notice
• Submit written notification to the PUP after consultation concludes
• Observe a 30-day standstill from PUP notification before dismissals take effect
• Provide identical written information to both the union and the PUP

Employers with whistleblower reporting channels should be aware that employees who raise collective dismissal concerns through internal channels are protected under Polish whistleblower legislation. Our whistleblower protection policy drafting guide for employers explains how to align internal procedures with this protection framework during a restructuring.

What penalties apply for non-compliance?

The consequences of a defective collective dismissal procedure are severe and, in most cases, irreversible. A court that finds the procedure was not followed does not merely impose a fine. It can declare each individual termination unlawful, entitling the employee to reinstatement or compensation. Compensation under Polish labour law may reach the equivalent of 15 monthly salaries per employee. For a company dismissing 30 employees, the aggregate exposure can exceed PLN 2 million.

Personal liability of board members is a separate risk. Where the employer is a capital company (spółka kapitałowa), management board members who authorise an unlawful collective dismissal may face claims under corporate legislation for damages caused to the company. This risk is not theoretical. The National Labour Inspectorate has the power to impose fines on employers of up to PLN 30,000 per violation, and PIP inspectors actively review collective dismissal procedures during scheduled and unannounced inspections.

The procedural defects that most often trigger liability fall into three categories. First, employers skip consultation entirely, treating the PUP notification as the only formal step. Second, employers consult but provide incomplete written information, omitting selection criteria or the planned dismissal timeline. Third, employers serve dismissal notices before the 30-day PUP standstill expires. Each defect is independent. An employer can satisfy two out of three requirements and still face full liability on the third.

Timing errors are particularly dangerous because they are irreversible. Once a notice takes legal effect before the standstill expires, the dismissal is unlawful regardless of any subsequent remediation. The employer cannot retroactively extend the standstill. This forfeits the employer's right to rely on the restructuring justification, even if the economic reasons were entirely legitimate.

How should foreign investors approach collective dismissals in Poland?

Foreign investors – particularly those managing multi-jurisdiction restructurings – often underestimate how Polish procedure differs from their home jurisdiction. A German or Dutch parent company planning simultaneous redundancies across several European subsidiaries may instruct its Polish entity to follow a group-wide timeline. That timeline will almost always be incompatible with the Polish 30-day standstill and the open-ended consultation period.

We helped a Dutch technology group relocating employees to its Polish subsidiary structure in Pomerania (spring 2026) map the sequencing of Polish obligations against the group's European restructuring calendar. The key finding: Poland's standstill period must be built into the project timeline from the outset, not treated as a local formality to be resolved at the end. Our guide on relocating employees to Poland from the Netherlands addresses related mobility and permit considerations that arise when restructuring involves cross-border employee movements.

Work permit Poland considerations arise when the dismissed employees include foreign nationals. A dismissed employee holding an EU Blue Card or a work permit loses their legal basis for stay once the employment relationship ends. Employers have an obligation to notify the relevant authority of the termination within 7 days. Failure to do so constitutes a separate administrative violation, independent of the collective dismissal procedure. An employment lawyer Warsaw-based teams engage should coordinate both tracks simultaneously.

French employment law provides a useful comparison point. French collective dismissal rules require a plan de sauvegarde de l'emploi (PSE) for companies with 50 or more employees planning 10 or more dismissals. The administrative approval process is more formalised than Poland's, but both systems share the principle that consultation must precede any individual notice. Our team advises on both jurisdictions; see our French employment practice for a comparative overview.

What does the severance and selection framework look like?

The Collective Dismissal Act requires employers to pay statutory severance (odprawa) to every employee dismissed under the procedure. The amount depends on length of service: one month's salary for employees with less than 2 years of service, two months' salary for 2–8 years, and three months' salary for more than 8 years. The severance cap is 15 times the minimum wage, which from January 2026 stands at PLN 4,666 per month. The cap therefore limits severance to PLN 69,990.

Severance is payable on the date the employment relationship ends, not on the date the notice is served. Employers that front-load their cash flow planning sometimes miscalculate the payment date, triggering statutory interest on late payment. The interest rate under Polish civil law is 11.25 percent per annum. On a PLN 50,000 severance payment, a 90-day delay generates approximately PLN 1,400 in interest – a modest but avoidable cost.

Selection criteria must be objective, transparent, and documented. Polish labour courts scrutinise selection decisions closely. Criteria such as performance ratings, qualifications, and length of service are generally acceptable. Age, disability status, pregnancy, and trade union membership are prohibited selection factors. The employer must be able to produce the selection matrix for each dismissed employee if challenged. Courts have awarded reinstatement where the employer could not demonstrate how the selection decision was made.

One recurring issue involves protected employees. Pregnant employees, employees on maternity leave, employees serving as trade union officials, and employees within four years of retirement age enjoy enhanced protection. Dismissing a protected employee during a collective redundancy requires either a specific statutory exception or the employee's consent. An employer that overlooks a single protected employee in a group of 30 dismissals may find that one unlawful termination unravels the credibility of the entire procedure in subsequent litigation.

Self-assessment checklist: are you ready to proceed?

Before serving any dismissal notice in a collective redundancy context, the employer should confirm that each item on this checklist is complete. Missing even one item creates litigation risk that compounds as the procedure advances. The checklist is not a substitute for legal advice – but it flags the points that most often cause procedures to fail.

• Threshold confirmed: dismissal count within any rolling 30-day window meets or exceeds the statutory minimum for your workforce size
• Consultation opened in writing with trade union or elected employee representatives before any notice is served
• Written information provided to union and PUP covering reasons, affected categories, selection criteria, and timeline
• 30-day standstill from PUP notification observed before dismissal notices take legal effect
• Protected employees identified and either excluded or addressed through the applicable statutory exception

Decision matrix: if your workforce has 20–99 employees and you plan to dismiss 10 or more within 30 days, the full procedure applies. If the number falls below the threshold, standard individual dismissal rules govern – but monitor for subsequent dismissals that could retrospectively trigger the collective threshold. If dismissals are spread across affiliated entities, obtain a legal opinion on whether they constitute a single employer for threshold purposes before proceeding.

Three business scenarios illustrate how the checklist applies in practice. A manufacturing company in Silesia with 250 employees planning to close one production line and dismiss 28 workers must follow the full procedure, including the 30-day standstill. An IT company in Warsaw with 45 employees planning to dismiss 10 developers for restructuring reasons triggers the threshold at exactly 10. A foreign investor's Polish subsidiary with 15 employees falls below the 20-employee minimum and is not subject to the Act – but standard individual termination rules still require valid substantive reasons.

To receive an expert assessment of your collective dismissal procedure, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Frequently asked questions

Q: Does the 30-day standstill mean we cannot serve notices at all during that period?

A: You may serve notices during the standstill, but they cannot take legal effect until the 30-day period from PUP notification has elapsed. In practice, many employers serve notices on the day they submit the PUP notification, so that the notice period and the standstill run concurrently. This is permissible under the Collective Dismissal Act, provided the standstill expires before the termination date stated in the notice.

Q: What happens if there is no trade union at our company?

A: If no trade union operates at the workplace, the employer must consult with employee representatives elected specifically for this purpose. The election must be organised by the employer. Representatives must be genuinely elected by the workforce – the employer cannot appoint them unilaterally. Courts have found that a consultation with self-appointed representatives, without a proper election, does not satisfy the statutory requirement, exposing all dismissals to challenge.

Q: How long does the entire collective dismissal procedure typically take from start to finish?

A: The minimum timeline is approximately 30 days from PUP notification, plus the consultation period before that notification. In practice, with a 20-day consultation and the 30-day standstill, the procedure takes at least 50 days from opening consultation to the earliest date a dismissal can take legal effect. Individual notice periods – which can be up to three months for long-serving employees – run on top of this. Employers should budget at least three to four months from decision to final departure date for a mid-size collective redundancy.

Specific situations may require a more tailored analysis. To discuss how the collective dismissal framework applies to your restructuring, email info@kordeckipartners.com.

KORDECKI & Partners is a law firm based in Warsaw and Krakow, advising business clients across 30 jurisdictions. Our team combines expertise in Polish and international law with a practical approach to employment law, collective dismissals, and workforce restructuring. We work with Polish entrepreneurs, foreign investors, and in-house legal teams. To discuss your situation, contact info@kordeckipartners.com.

Disclaimer: This publication is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. The information herein should not be relied upon as a substitute for professional legal counsel tailored to your specific circumstances. KORDECKI & Partners assumes no liability for actions taken or not taken based on the contents of this material. For advice regarding your particular situation, please contact info@kordeckipartners.com.