{"id":3578,"date":"2026-10-09T11:38:09","date_gmt":"2026-10-09T11:38:09","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/?p=3578"},"modified":"2026-10-09T11:38:09","modified_gmt":"2026-10-09T11:38:09","slug":"employee-notice-summary-dismissal-poland","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/publikacje\/employee-notice-summary-dismissal-poland\/","title":{"rendered":"An employee has given notice, but you are planning summary dismissal. Which takes precedence, and how much time do you have left?"},"content":{"rendered":"

For entrepreneurs<\/a> Employment law<\/a><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

An employee has given notice, but you are planning summary dismissal. Which takes precedence, and how much time do you have left?<\/h1>\n

8 minutes<\/p>\n

Table of contents<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \n

    Key concepts to understand before taking action<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  2. \n

    An employee\u2019s notice does not terminate the employment relationship immediately<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  3. \n

    The one-month time limit under Article 52 \u00a7 2 of the Labour Code \u2014 how to calculate it and what not to do<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  4. \n

    How to effectively serve a summary dismissal notice when the employee does not come to work<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  5. \n

    Four decisions you need to make before serving the notice<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  6. \n

    Checklist before serving a summary dismissal notice<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  7. \n

    We can help you with this<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  8. \n

    Summary<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

  9. \n

    Frequently asked questions<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    \n

    The employee\u2019s representative calls and says: \u201cMy client has already sent in their notice.\u201d Most employers put the summary dismissal notice they have prepared back in the drawer at this point. This is one of the costliest instincts in employment law<\/a> \u2014 because giving notice does not terminate the employment relationship<\/strong>. It merely starts the clock.<\/p>\n

    If you run a technology, SaaS, e-commerce or B2B services company and your staff have individual access credentials for transaction systems, company cards or payment dashboards, this article is for you. You will learn which takes precedence (the employee\u2019s notice or the employer\u2019s summary dismissal), how much time you really have left, and which procedural errors can cause you to lose a case even when the grounds were genuine and serious.<\/p>\n

    Summary dismissal cases are not lost on the facts. They are lost because of timing, form and service.<\/p>\n

    Key concepts to understand before taking action<\/h2>\n

    Before moving on to specific steps, make sure you understand how the rules governing the entire process work.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    \n

    Concept<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

    		\n

    What it means<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

    		\n

    Legal basis<\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Termination without notice due to employee misconduct (summary dismissal)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Immediate termination of the employment relationship by the employer due to a serious breach of duties<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Article 52 \u00a7 1 point 1 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    One-month time limit<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The employer has one month from learning of the breach to serve the employee with notice \u2014 this time limit cannot be reinstated<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Article 52 \u00a7 2 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Authorised person (Article 31 of the Labour Code)<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The person or governing body that performs employment-law actions on behalf of the employer \u2014 the time limit starts when that person or body learns of the breach<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Article 31 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Receipt of a declaration<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    A declaration of intent is deemed made when it reaches the recipient in such a way that they could become acquainted with its contents \u2014 sending it is not enough<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Article 61 of the Civil Code in conjunction with Article 300 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Trade union consultation<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The employer must notify the workplace trade union organisation and allow 3 days for objections before serving the summary dismissal notice<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Article 52 \u00a7 3 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Notice period<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The period between notice being given and the contract being terminated \u2014 the employment relationship continues until it expires<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Articles 34 and 36 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    An employee\u2019s notice does not terminate the employment relationship immediately<\/h2>\n

    This is the fundamental point at which employers make their costliest mistake. Notice given by an employee (Article 32 in conjunction with Article 36 of the Labour Code) starts the notice period<\/strong>, but the employment relationship continues until that period ends. Until then, you remain fully entitled to serve a summary dismissal notice.<\/p>\n

    The outcome depends on the order in which the declarations reach their recipients \u2014 this was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Resolution III ZP 31\/98<\/a> and Judgment II PK 372\/15<\/a>.<\/p>\n

    Here is how it works in practice:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n
    \n

    Event<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

    		\n

    Date<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

    		\n

    Effect<\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    The employee gives notice (two-week notice period)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    23.09.2026 (Wednesday)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The notice period ends on 10.10.2026 (Saturday)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    The employer serves a summary dismissal notice<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    25.09.2026<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The employment relationship ends on 25.09.2026 \u2014 the employee\u2019s notice ceases to have legal effect<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    The employer serves a summary dismissal notice<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    11.10.2026<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Too late \u2014 the contract terminated on 10.10.2026 when the notice period expired<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    Conclusion: if the summary dismissal notice reaches the employee before the notice period expires<\/strong>, the contract is terminated by summary dismissal. The employment certificate should cite Article 52 \u00a7 1 point 1 of the Labour Code, not the employee\u2019s notice.<\/p>\n

    If you are even one day late, your declaration has no legal object. You cannot terminate a contract that no longer exists.<\/p>\n

    Important:<\/strong> information given verbally (for example, by the employee\u2019s representative stating that \u201cnotice has been sent\u201d) does not constitute a declaration of intent. Until the letter reaches the employer in a manner allowing the employer to become acquainted with its contents (Article 61 of the Civil Code in conjunction with Article 300 of the Labour Code), it is merely an announcement and must not be used as a basis for suspending the summary dismissal process.<\/p>\n

    Contact us<\/a> \u2014 we will help you assess whether summary dismissal is still possible in your situation.<\/p>\n

    The one-month time limit under Article 52 \u00a7 2 of the Labour Code \u2014 how to calculate it and what not to do<\/h2>\n

    The one-month time limit is a trap that catches most employers. Not because they are unaware of it, but because they misunderstand when it starts and when it ends.<\/p>\n

    When to start counting<\/h3>\n

    The time limit starts when the person authorised to perform employment-law actions<\/strong> (Article 31 of the Labour Code) receives reliable, specific information about the breach. Not on the date of the incident. Not when the information was \u201ctechnically available\u201d in the system. Not on the day an IT employee or external provider learned of it.<\/p>\n

    In Judgment I PK 183\/16<\/a>, the Supreme Court confirmed that further reviews conducted after complete information has been obtained do not extend the time limit. In Judgment II PK 134\/16<\/a>, in turn, it held that an internal investigation may delay the start of the time limit \u2014 but only if the information was not yet sufficiently reliable.<\/p>\n

    What not to do<\/h3>\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    \n

    Mistake<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

    		\n

    Why it is costly<\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Waiting for the final calculation of the loss<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Knowing the extent of the loss \u2260 knowing the circumstances justifying summary dismissal. Serve the notice on time and pursue the amount separately through a demand for payment<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Dragging out the internal investigation \u201cto be safe\u201d<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The court will assess whether the investigation took a proportionate amount of time. If it finds that you prolonged it, the time limit may have started long ago<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Calculating the time limit from the date the document was prepared<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    The time limit concerns receipt<\/strong> of the declaration by the employee, not when it was written or sent<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

    \n

    Ignoring parallel time limits<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

    		\n

    Each ground has its own time limit. An allegation relating to an event 5 weeks ago is time-barred, even if the others are not<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    How much time you really have<\/h3>\n

    A month sounds comfortable. In reality, you need to deduct:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. \n

      3 days for trade union consultation<\/strong> (Article 52 \u00a7 3 of the Labour Code) \u2014 even if the employee has never mentioned union membership, ask the trade union organisation before serving the document<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    2. \n

      Time for service<\/strong> \u2014 a visit to the employee\u2019s home address, priority registered mail with acknowledgement of receipt, and possible delivery notices<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

    3. \n

      A buffer for unforeseen circumstances<\/strong> \u2014 the employee does not open the door, has changed address or does not collect the letter<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      In practical terms, you have a little over twenty days<\/strong>, not a month.<\/p>\n

      Continuing breaches and ongoing situations<\/h3>\n

      For a continuing breach (a series of repeated acts), the time limit may start from the last event in the series \u2014 Supreme Court, II PK 134\/16<\/a>. For an ongoing omission (for example, an employee\u2019s failure to account for expenses), the time limit does not start while the situation continues \u2014 Supreme Court, I PKN 700\/00<\/a>.<\/p>\n

      How to effectively serve a summary dismissal notice when the employee does not come to work<\/h2>\n

      The employee has stopped showing up. They do not answer the phone. They do not respond to messages. And your time limit is running.<\/p>\n

      Form of the declaration<\/h3>\n

      Article 30 \u00a7 3 of the Labour Code requires written form. This requirement is met only by:<\/p>\n

        \n
      1. \n

        A handwritten signature<\/strong> on a paper document<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

      2. \n

        A qualified electronic signature<\/strong> on a digital document<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

        A scan of a signed document, a photograph, a PDF without a qualified signature or a non-qualified signature \u2014 none of these meets the written-form requirement. Remove them from your procedure.<\/p>\n

        Parallel service<\/h3>\n

        Use both methods of service on the same day:<\/p>\n

          \n
        1. \n

          A visit to the employee\u2019s home address<\/strong> \u2014 two people should attend (at least one with written authorisation under Article 31 of the Labour Code). If the employee refuses to accept the letter, the refusal does not invalidate service because the employee had an opportunity to become acquainted with its contents. Prepare an official memorandum recording the date, time, address, participants, course of events and the employee\u2019s response<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

        2. \n

          Priority registered mail with acknowledgement of receipt<\/strong> \u2014 posted on the same day<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

          Delivery notice and effective service<\/h3>\n

          Proper notification of attempted delivery creates a rebuttable presumption<\/strong> that the recipient had an actual opportunity to become acquainted with the contents \u2014 as confirmed by the Supreme Court in Judgment I PK 37\/05<\/a>. Deliberately failing to collect a letter despite having a genuine opportunity to do so does not invalidate the declaration \u2014 Supreme Court Resolution III ZP 31\/98<\/a>.<\/p>\n

          But beware: the two-week deemed-service rule under the Code of Civil Procedure does not automatically apply<\/strong> to Article 61 of the Civil Code. The employment court will examine whether the employee was actually able to collect the letter \u2014 Supreme Court, II PSKP 112\/21<\/a>. The employer bears the risk.<\/p>\n

          Therefore, do not send the letter in the final days of the time limit<\/strong>. If the delivery notice is issued after the month has expired, you may lose the case even if the grounds were undisputed.<\/p>\n

          Summary dismissal during sick leave<\/h3>\n

          Article 41 of the Labour Code prohibits giving notice of termination<\/strong> during an employee\u2019s justified absence. It does not apply to termination without notice under Article 52 of the Labour Code. As a rule, summary dismissal is permitted during sick leave. Absence due to illness also does not suspend the one-month time limit under Article 52 \u00a7 2 of the Labour Code \u2014 source: Labour Code, Journal of Laws 2025, item 277<\/a>.<\/p>\n

          Four decisions you need to make before serving the notice<\/h2>\n

          Decision 1: whether summary dismissal is still possible<\/h3>\n

          Check two dates:<\/p>\n

            \n
          1. \n

            When the authorised person under Article 31 of the Labour Code learned of the breach \u2014 the one-month period starts on that date<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

          2. \n

            When the employee\u2019s notice period ends (if notice was effectively given) \u2014 after that date, summary dismissal becomes moot<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

            If both time limits allow it, take action. If not, consider other avenues (pursuing compensation, issuing a demand for payment or reporting a suspected criminal offence \u2014 but that is a separate issue).<\/p>\n

            Decision 2: how to structure your reasons<\/h3>\n

            Article 30 \u00a7 4 of the Labour Code requires the grounds to be specific, genuine and verifiable<\/strong>. Once the notice has been served, you cannot add any new arguments \u2014 the court will examine only what you described in the document.<\/p>\n

            Structure your reasons around several independent allegations. Each should include:<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n
            \n

            Layer<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

            		\n

            What it includes<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

            		\n

            Example<\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            Legal characterisation<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Identification of the duty breached under Article 100 of the Labour Code<\/a><\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u201cBreach of the duty to safeguard the employer\u2019s property (Article 100 \u00a7 2 point 4 of the Labour Code)\u201d<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            Facts<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            What happened, when, using which tool and based on what evidence<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u201cBetween X and Y, the employee carried out Z transactions in the ABC system, charging the company\u2019s account in the amount of\u2026\u201d<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            Reasoning<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Why this constitutes a serious breach<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u201cThe employee used an individual account, without their manager\u2019s approval, and took no steps to account for the transactions\u201d<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

            Loss of trust<\/strong> may appear only as a conclusion drawn from the breaches described and linked to the nature of the role (independence, lack of ongoing supervision, access to tools enabling liabilities to be incurred). It must never be used as a standalone ground \u2014 this follows from the structure of Article 52 \u00a7 1 point 1 of the Labour Code.<\/p>\n

            Address any known line of defence in the notice itself. If you know the employee will rely on verbal approval from their manager, describe the outcome of verifying that account (for example, that approval related to one transaction and the employee did not seek approval for subsequent ones).<\/p>\n

            Decision 3: what to do about the trade union<\/h3>\n

            Ask the workplace trade union organisation whether the employee is covered by its protection \u2014 do this during preparation, not on the day of service. The organisation has 3 days to raise objections (Article 52 \u00a7 3 of the Labour Code). Its opinion is not binding, but failure to consult it is a separate violation giving the employee grounds for a claim.<\/p>\n

            A trade union official covered by special protection (Article 32 of the Trade Unions Act) requires consent<\/strong>, not merely an opinion.<\/p>\n

            Decision 4: what to do about the loss and a settlement<\/h3>\n

            Do not sign a settlement containing a waiver of claims until you know the full extent of the loss. The scale of breaches often increases in stages \u2014 initial findings cover some transactions, while further verification reveals more.<\/p>\n

            In cases of intentional misconduct, the employee is liable for the full amount of the loss<\/strong> (Article 122 of the Labour Code), without the three-month salary cap under Article 119 of the Labour Code. A deduction from salary requires written consent to a specific amount known to the employee (Article 91 of the Labour Code) \u2014 blanket consent is not valid consent.<\/p>\n

            State only that verification is ongoing. Pursue the amount through a demand for payment accompanied by a list of transactions.<\/p>\n

            Checklist before serving a summary dismissal notice<\/h2>\n

            Make this checklist a mandatory part of your HR procedure. No document should leave the office until it has been completed.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n<\/colgroup>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
            \n

            No.<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

            		\n

            Item<\/p>\n<\/th>\n

            		\n

            Status<\/p>\n<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            1<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Date on which the breach became known recorded in writing, identifying the authorised person under Article 31 of the Labour Code<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            2<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            One-month time limit calculated backwards from the planned date of service (minus 3 days for trade union consultation and minus the time required for service)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            3<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Each ground checked against its own time limit<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            4<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Enquiry sent to the trade union organisation and 3 days allowed to pass<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            5<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Employee\u2019s current address in their personnel file verified<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            6<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Authorisation of the person serving the notice (Article 31 of the Labour Code) confirmed in writing<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            7<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Reasons include independent allegations supported by legal characterisation, facts and reasoning<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            8<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Information on the right to appeal to the employment court (21 days, competent court) included in the document<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            9<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Handwritten signature or qualified electronic signature \u2014 no scans and no PDFs without a qualified signature<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            10<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Evidence from systems secured BEFORE access is revoked (export including the date, identity of the person carrying it out and a description of the system)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            11<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Official memorandum of the visit prepared (template completed regardless of how the visit proceeds)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            12<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Priority registered letter with acknowledgement of receipt posted on the same day as the visit<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            13<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            Employment certificate citing Article 52 \u00a7 1 point 1 of the Labour Code (not the employee\u2019s notice)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            14<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            For an employee who does not speak Polish \u2014 bilingual version identifying the Polish version as binding, with the translation of the legal characterisation verified by a lawyer<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n

            \n

            15<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            For a foreign national \u2014 expiry date of the work permit and the obligation to notify the provincial governor checked (within 7 days after employment ends)<\/p>\n<\/td>\n

            		\n

            \u2610<\/p>\n<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

            We can help you with this<\/h2>\n

            Summary dismissal is more than a document. It is a timetable in which every day matters \u2014 from the moment the breach is discovered, through the internal investigation and trade union consultation, to service and preservation of evidence.<\/p>\n

            We help technology and service companies organise this process. Our support is available at three levels:<\/p>\n

            Operational essentials:<\/strong><\/p>\n

              \n
            1. \n

              A checklist tailored to your organisational structure<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

            2. \n

              A notice template structured around independent allegations and including information on appeal rights<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

              Solid foundation:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                \n
              1. \n

                A summary dismissal procedure (a timetable from discovery to service)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

              2. \n

                Templates for service records and official memoranda<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

              3. \n

                A policy on using company tools and systems for private purposes<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                Comprehensive protection:<\/strong><\/p>\n

                  \n
                1. \n

                  Procedure, bilingual versions and preservation of evidence from IT systems<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                2. \n

                  A process for recovering losses from the employee (demand, list of transactions, Article 122 of the Labour Code)<\/p>\n<\/li>\n

                3. \n

                  Support in court proceedings<\/p>\n<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

                  We combine employment law with the broader business context \u2014 IP, ownership structure and growth plans \u2014 ensuring that HR decisions are aligned with the company\u2019s direction.<\/p>\n

                  Write to us<\/a> \u2014 we will assess your situation and tell you what to do first.<\/p>\n

                  Summary<\/h2>\n

                  An employee\u2019s notice does not prevent summary dismissal, but it does start a race against the calendar. You have one month from learning of the breach and must also act before the notice period expires. In practical terms, that means a little over twenty days, not a month.<\/p>\n

                  The most common causes of failure are not a lack of substantive grounds, but procedural defects: missing the deadline, failure to consult the trade union, ineffective service, vague grounds or an incorrect form of signature.<\/p>\n

                  Preserve the evidence, structure your reasons around independent allegations, use parallel methods of service and do not sign a settlement until you know the full extent of the loss.<\/p>\n

                  If you need support with preparing a summary dismissal notice, auditing your procedure or securing claims for compensation, contact us<\/a>.<\/p>\n

                  Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n

                  The employee has given notice \u2014 can I still summarily dismiss them?<\/strong> Yes, as long as the employment relationship continues, meaning until the end of the notice period. If your declaration reaches the employee before that period expires, the contract is terminated by summary dismissal and the employee\u2019s notice ceases to have legal effect. The employment certificate should cite Article 52 \u00a7 1 point 1 of the Labour Code, not termination by notice. This was confirmed by the Supreme Court in Judgment II PK 372\/15<\/a>.<\/p>\n

                  I learned about the breaches in stages \u2014 when does my one-month period start?<\/strong> The time limit runs separately for each ground \u2014 from the moment the authorised person under Article 31 of the Labour Code receives reliable, specific information about the particular breach. For a continuing breach (a series of repeated acts), the time limit may run from the final event in the series. The court will disregard an allegation for which the time limit has expired, even if the remaining allegations were raised within one month. This is why it is worth structuring your reasons around several independent allegations.<\/p>\n

                  Can I wait to proceed with summary dismissal until the accounting department calculates the full amount of the loss?<\/strong> No. Knowing the extent of the loss is not the same as knowing the circumstances justifying termination. The calculation is required for a demand for payment, not for the summary dismissal notice. Serve the notice on time and pursue the amount separately \u2014 in cases of intentional misconduct, the employee is liable for the full amount of the loss (Article 122 of the Labour Code), without the three-month salary cap.<\/p>\n

                  The employee does not come to work or answer the phone \u2014 how should I serve the notice?<\/strong> Use both methods of service on the same day: a visit by two people to the employee\u2019s home address (at least one authorised under Article 31 of the Labour Code), plus priority registered mail with acknowledgement of receipt. If the employee refuses to accept the letter, the refusal does not invalidate service \u2014 prepare an official memorandum signed by both people. Do not send the letter in the final days of the time limit, because the employer bears the risk that notification of attempted delivery will occur after the month has expired.<\/p>\n

                  Can I send the summary dismissal notice by email or as a scan?<\/strong> The written-form requirement (Article 30 \u00a7 3 of the Labour Code) is met only by a handwritten signature or a qualified electronic signature. A scan of a signed document, a photograph, a PDF without a qualified signature and a non-qualified signature are insufficient. Service to a private email address is permitted only if two conditions are met jointly: the employee has previously consented to being contacted in this way on work-related matters, and the authorised person uses a qualified electronic signature.<\/p>\n

                  Do I have to consult the trade union about summary dismissal if the employee has never mentioned being a member?<\/strong> Ask the trade union organisation whether the employee is covered by its protection \u2014 do this during preparation, not on the day of service. The organisation has 3 days to raise objections (Article 52 \u00a7 3 of the Labour Code). Failure to consult is a separate violation giving the employee grounds for claims under Article 56 of the Labour Code, regardless of how strong the grounds for summary dismissal were.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

                  Learn when an employee\u2019s notice still allows summary dismissal in Poland, how the one-month limit works, and why union consultation and service matter.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"featured_media":3601,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":"","sip_alt_url":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/us\/publications\/poland-employee-notice-dismissal-serious-misconduct\/","sip_en_pl_url":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/publications\/employee-notice-summary-dismissal-poland\/","sip_pair_uuid":"8c4a2136-1549-468a-a9a3-484b5b614901","sip_pair_state":"partial"},"categories":[1442],"tags":[1540,1528],"specialization":[1212],"practice_area":[],"class_list":["post-3578","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-labor-law","tag-internal-procedure","tag-labor-law","specialization-labor-law"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3578","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3578"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3578\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3581,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3578\/revisions\/3581"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/3601"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3578"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3578"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3578"},{"taxonomy":"specialization","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/specialization?post=3578"},{"taxonomy":"practice_area","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sawaryn.com\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/practice_area?post=3578"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}