Employee's refusal to work due to equipment safety concerns dismissed; unpaid wages allowed for period of refusal.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court partially overturned the lower court's dismissal of the employee's claim for unpaid wages from April to June 2002. While the court upheld the employer's right to terminate the contract for the employee's refusal to work, it found the lower court failed to determine if the employee was ready to work but hindered by the employer's lack of equipment. Consequently, the court remanded the specific wage claim for that period to the appellate court for reconsideration.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 210 § 1 k.p.; Art. 52 § 1 k.p.; Art. 80 k.p.; Art. 81 § 1 k.p.; Art. 80 k.p. - An employee's refusal to work based on safety concerns does not justify termination unless both statutory conditions are met, but if the employee knowingly disregards expert opinions proving no danger, such refusal constitutes a serious breach of duties justifying dismissal; however, if the employee was ready to work but the employer failed to provide necessary tools, the employee is entitled to wages for that period.