II PK 256/07
AI generated
Supreme Court dismissed equal treatment claim where job duties differed despite same title.
Poland (PL)
Legislator summary
AI generatedThe Supreme Court partially overturned the lower court's judgment regarding a labor dispute between an employee and the Patent Office. The employee argued that his fixed-term contract was invalid and that he was discriminated against regarding equal pay for equal work. The court found that while the employee's title was the same as a former manager, the actual duties and required effort were different, justifying the wage disparity.
Legislator headnote
AI generatedArt. 183a § 1 k.p.; Art. 183c § 1 k.p.: Equal treatment in employment requires that differentiation be based on lawful criteria; differences in actual job duties and required effort justify wage disparities even with identical titles.
Keywords
AI generated
equal treatment in employment
equal pay for equal work
fixed-term contract validity
discrimination in hiring
labor law principles
Cited Legislation
AI generatedArt. 48 ust. 3 ustawy z dnia 18 grudnia 1998 r. o służbie cywilnej
Art. 58 § 1 i 2 k.c.
Art. 183a § 1 k.p.
Art. 183b § 1 pkt 2 k.p.
Art. 183c § 1 k.p.
Art. 39813 § 2 k.p.c.
Art. 39814 k.p.c.
Art. 39815 § 1 k.p.c.
Art. 39821 w związku z art. 108 § 2 k.p.c.
art. 58 § 2 k.c