{"id":2421,"date":"2026-07-09T12:23:32","date_gmt":"2026-07-09T10:23:32","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/global-metodi.com\/?p=2421"},"modified":"2026-07-09T12:24:38","modified_gmt":"2026-07-09T10:24:38","slug":"nowe-przepisy-antymobbingowe-2026-jak-przygotowac-organizacje-i-managerow-do-zmian","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/global-metodi.com\/en\/2026\/07\/09\/nowe-przepisy-antymobbingowe-2026-jak-przygotowac-organizacje-i-managerow-do-zmian\/","title":{"rendered":"New anti-mobbing regulations 2026. How to prepare an organization and managers for change?"},"content":{"rendered":"

New regulations on counteracting mobbing: The Sejm passed the bill on June 19, 2026, the Senate adopted it on July 8, 2026, and the final stage is the signature of the President of the Republic of Poland.<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

Content of the Act: https:\/\/www.senat.gov.pl\/download\/gfx\/senat\/pl\/senatdruki\/14534\/druk\/767.pdf<\/a><\/p>\n

Changes to mobbing regulations are fast approaching. What do they mean for employers and managers?<\/strong><\/p>\n

Mobbing has long been one of the most difficult topics in employee relations. Not only because it involves behavior that violates an employee's dignity, but also because the current definition of mobbing in the Labor Code can be difficult to apply in practice\u2014for both employees and employers.<\/p>\n

This is expected to change soon. On June 19, 2026, the Sejm (lower house of parliament) passed a government bill on new rules for combating mobbing, discrimination, and other violations of the principle of equal treatment in the workplace. In July, the Senate passed the bill. The final stage of the legislative process is the signature of the President of the Republic of Poland.<\/p>\n

It's worth keeping an eye on the new regulations now, as once they come into effect, they will impose specific organizational obligations on employers. This will change not only the definition of mobbing but also the approach to prevention, internal procedures, reporting violations, and organizational accountability.<\/p>\n

Why should anti-mobbing regulations change?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The current definition of mobbing has been in the Labor Code for over 20 years. During this time, the labor market has changed significantly. Remote work, instant messaging, video conferencing, distributed teams, new collaboration models, and greater employee awareness mean that undesirable behavior in the workplace can take different forms than before.<\/p>\n

Current regulations require multiple criteria to be met simultaneously. In practice, this means that an employee must demonstrate not only persistent and long-term harassment or intimidation, but also a specific consequence, such as humiliation, ridicule, isolation, or a reduced assessment of professional suitability.<\/p>\n

The new solutions are intended to simplify the definition of mobbing and better align it with the realities of modern organizations. The project aims to more effectively protect employees from mobbing, discrimination, and other forms of workplace violence, while also providing greater transparency for employers, who need to understand how to respond to reports and create a safe work environment.<\/p>\n

A simpler definition of mobbing<\/strong><\/p>\n

One of the most important changes is the simplification of the definition of mobbing. According to the new regulations, its basic characteristic is persistent harassment of an employee<\/strong>.<\/p>\n

This is a significant simplification. Mobbing is intended to encompass repeated, recurring, or ongoing behavior. At the same time, the new regulations are intended to more clearly distinguish mobbing from incidental behavior. A one-time violation of an employee's dignity may still be inappropriate and require a response, but not every such incident will automatically be classified as mobbing.<\/p>\n

The new regulations are also intended to standardize forms of harassment and encompass various forms of action: physical, verbal, and non-verbal. In practice, this may include not only shouting, offensive comments, or public humiliation, but also isolation of an employee, gestures, exclusionary behavior, email messages, and actions taken during remote work. The parliamentary bill's description indicates that the new regulations are intended to introduce a simpler and clearer definition of mobbing and standardize forms of harassment.<\/p>\n

It's also important to note that the perpetrator of mobbing doesn't have to be a superior. Mobbing behavior can come from a coworker, a subordinate, a person in a similar position, a single person, or a group of people.<\/p>\n

Not all criticism is mobbing<\/strong><\/p>\n

A very important element of the new regulations is an attempt to more clearly distinguish mobbing from justified criticism, enforcement of employee duties and issuing official orders.<\/p>\n

This is particularly important from the perspective of employers and managers. Holding employees accountable for assigned tasks, providing feedback, pointing out errors, or enforcing work standards should not be considered mobbing if they are justified, proportionate, and expressed in an appropriate manner.<\/p>\n

The line is drawn not where a difficult conversation occurs, but where the method of communication begins to violate the employee's dignity, becomes persistent and leads to harassment.<\/p>\n

For organizations, this means a greater focus on management style. Pressure stemming from business goals alone generally doesn't constitute bullying. However, the way a manager communicates expectations, responds to mistakes, conducts corrective conversations, and resolves conflicts can be significant.<\/p>\n

The Rational Victim Model \u2013 A More Objective Assessment of the Situation<\/strong><\/p>\n

The new regulations also introduce the so-called. the rational sacrifice model<\/strong>. The point is that the assessment of behavior should not be based solely on the subjective feelings of the person reporting mobbing, but should also take into account the objective circumstances of the case.<\/p>\n

This solution aims to streamline the assessment of the situation from two perspectives. On the one hand, it can facilitate the protection of individuals who are actually experiencing persistent harassment. On the other, it aims to reduce the risk of unfounded allegations against the employer or other employees.<\/p>\n

In practice, the thorough conduct of investigations will become even more important. The organization should be able to reconstruct the course of events, gather information from the parties, analyze evidence, and document the decisions made.<\/p>\n

This means that an anti-mobbing procedure cannot be merely a statement. It must be a real tool that allows for the investigation of reports, protection of those involved, and appropriate action to be taken.<\/p>\n

Higher compensation for mobbing<\/strong><\/p>\n

The bill also proposes increasing the minimum compensation for mobbing. According to the bill, it would amount to at least six times the minimum wage.<\/p>\n

This signals that legislators want to move away from symbolic compensation and instead embrace real accountability for violations. This means greater financial risk for employers if effective preventive and reactive measures are not implemented.<\/p>\n

It's worth remembering, however, that an employer's responsibility doesn't end with paying benefits to an employee. The new solutions also reinforce the importance of personal responsibility for perpetrators, while maintaining the employer's obligation to prevent undesirable behavior.<\/p>\n

New obligations for employers: procedures, rules and prevention<\/strong><\/p>\n

The most practical change for companies concerns organizational obligations. The bill requires that policies for combating mobbing, discrimination, and other violations of the principle of equal treatment be defined in an internal document. According to the Ministry, this obligation will apply to employers employing at least nine people.<\/p>\n

This means that simply saying "we have an anti-mobbing policy" may not be enough. The new regulations emphasize prevention, not just reacting when conflict is already advanced.<\/p>\n

The key will be whether employees know:<\/p>\n