Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 15

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Over the last ten years, the Labor Code has signifi cantly expanded employees’ rights related to parenthood, and thus the role of the employer in the fi eld of their implementation has changed fundamentally. The employer remains obliged to fulfi ll the employee’s basic rights enumerated in the Labour Code as a parent. However, the Polish legislator excessively burdens the employer with the role of the sole contractor of these general social principles related to the protection of motherhood and family, which causes a clear upset in the implementation of the constitutional obligations of the state towards its citizens. Looking at individual stages of employment from the period of pregnancy, in which protection is particularly strong, through the obligation to exercise parental leave and obligations imposed on the employer to employ an employee after taking leave, on protection during the period of custody, these are clearly noticeable limitations and burdens for the employer. The burden imposed on a particular employer often remains completely disproportionate to its capabilities. The employer bears the costs of social policy, which should be implemented by the state, thus it is fulfi lling the role of the guarantor in securing social interests. The solutions adopted by the Polish legislator stand in clear opposition to the regulation of international law. The burdens currently imposed on the employer resulting from the provisions of the Labor Code could be implemented to a large extent by relevant public insurance systems. De lege ferenda, the obligation to protect motherhood and the family as a constitutional social obligation should be carried out jointly by the state and the employer. De lege lata, the lack of proportionality is clearly visible in the regulations in force and it signifi cantly limits the principle of economic freedom and employer’s property, in particular in relation to small entrepreneurs.
EN
Professional soldiers have their own social security system, separate from the general social insurance system, which provides social protection in the event of long service, total incapacity to serve and the death of the breadwinner (pension benefits). At the same time, a professional soldier can accumulate and receive two pensions from different systems, ie universal and reserve. However, the principle of accumulation of benefits based on the applicable provision is dedicated to a narrow group of entitled persons. The principle of non-cumulation is considered to be the basic and dominant one. It is an expression of the principle of risk solidarity in force in social insurance law and is not inconsistent with the constitutional principle of equality expressed in Art. 32 of the Polish Constitution. In the event of the overlapping of the right to several benefits specified in the Act, the pension authority is obliged to pay only one (higher) benefit, even if this right results from various acts, and the possibility of combining benefits must be clearly indicated in the provisions of law. Separation of the insurance and supply system allows each of these systems to fulfill separate obligations towards professional soldiers, not related to the general system. Maintaining the principle that for the same period of retirement pension insurance, two retirement benefits cannot be awarded simultaneously (Article 5 (2a) (2a) of the Pension Act). The exception to the principle of non-accumulation (ie the principle of collecting one benefit) in the case of a professional soldier remaining in service before January 2, 1999 is not determined by the date of admission to service, but the lack of the possibility to calculate the military pension taking into account the “civil” retirement age. The convergence of the right to benefits (from the general and military pension) with the parallel occurrence of these events is contrary to the constitutional principle of social justice. It is not socially just to deprive an insured person who has met the statutory requirements of the right to benefits solely on the basis of social solidarity. In such situations, a significant part of the retiree’s professional life is not reflected in the amount of received retirement benefits.
PL
Żołnierze zawodowi posiadają własny, odrębny od powszechnych ubezpieczeń społecznych system zabezpieczenia społecznego, przewidujący ochronę socjalną z tytułu wysługi lat, całkowitej niezdolności do służby i śmierci żywiciela (zaopatrzenie emerytalne). Nie jest przy tym wykluczona możliwość skumulowania i pobierania przez żołnierza zawodowego dwóch świadczeń emerytalnych przysługujących z różnych systemów, tj. powszechnego i zaopatrzeniowego. Zasada kumulacji świadczeń na gruncie obowiązujących przepisów dedykowana jest jednak wąskiej grupie uprawnionych. Za podstawową i dominującą uznaje się bowiem zasadę niekumulacji, która stanowi wyraz obowiązującej w prawie ubezpieczeń społecznych zasady solidarności ryzyka i nie pozostaje sprzeczna z konstytucyjną zasadą równości wyrażoną w art. 32 Konstytucji RP. Tak więc w przypadku zbiegu prawa do kilku świadczeń określonych w ustawie, organ rentowy ma obowiązek do wypłaty tylko jednego (wyższego) świadczenia (art. 95 ust.1 u.e.r. oraz art. 7 u.z.e.ż), nawet jeśli prawo to wynika z różnych ustaw, a możliwość ewentualnego łączenia świadczeń musi być wyraźnie wskazana w przepisach. Rozdzielenie systemów ubezpieczeniowego i zaopatrzeniowego pozwala na to, aby każdy z tych systemów realizował osobno zobowiązania wobec żołnierzy zawodowych bez związku z systemem powszechnym. Zachowując zasadę, że za ten sam okres ubezpieczenia emerytalnego nie mogą jednocześnie przysługiwać dwa świadczenia emerytalne (art. 5 ust. 2a u.e.r.). Wskazując na zbieg świadczeń (emerytalnych), należy wyodrębnić element zbieżny (wspólny), łączący oba świadczenia, i ów element winien odnosić się do przedmiotu, jakim jest świadczenie, nie zaś do podmiotu (uprawnionego), któremu świadczenia przysługują. O wyjątku od zasady niekumulacji (czyli zasady pobierania jednego świadczenia) w sytuacji żołnierza zawodowego pozostającego w służbie przed dniem 2 stycznia 1999 roku nie decyduje data przyjęcia do służby, lecz brak możliwości obliczenia emerytury wojskowej przy uwzględnieniu „cywilnego” stażu emerytalnego. Obejmowanie instytucją zbiegu prawa do świadczeń (z emerytury powszechnej i wojskowej) przy równoległości tych zdarzeń zaprzecza konstytucyjnej zasadzie sprawiedliwości społecznej. Nie jest sprawiedliwe społecznie pozbawianie ubezpieczonego, który spełnił ustawowe wymogi, prawa do świadczenia tylko przez wzgląd na solidaryzm społeczny. W takich sytuacjach znaczna część życia zawodowego emeryta nie ma żadnego odzwierciedlenia w wysokości otrzymywanych przez niego świadczeń emerytalnych.
EN
Labour law provisions meet the expectations of employees who are also parents and enable them to connect a professional work with parental responsibilities. There is always a guarantee of employment granted by employer to the employee after returning from parental leave and that is because of an articles 183² and 1864 of the Polish Labour Code which protect these employees. The protection is also granted to the employee who is entitled to a parental leave but he or she decides to lower his or her workload what is considered as alternative form of parental leave. If employee returns to work for his or her employment in a previously given post, equivalent post or other in accordance with his or her qualifications it should not adversely affect his or her financial situation. These labour law provision guarantees a salary which he or she would receive if he or she would not use a parental leave. These provisions do not forbidan employer to provide notice of changing termination or definitive termination, but as long as there is a possibility of mandate other work to the returning employee, definitive termination is not justified. The subject of analysis are valid labour law provisions in order to verify if assumption of the legislator about stabilization of employment for employees who are also parents returning to work after parental leave is fully implemented in practice. In conclusion, in relation with expanding the range of application article 186 (8) § 2 of the Polish Labour Code by jurisprudence, the position of an employee returning to work after using parental leave has been weakened.
4
100%
EN
One of the completely new rights given to employees as a result of the April 2023 amendments to the Labour Code is exemption from work due to force majeure in urgent family matters caused by illness or accident, if the employee’s immediate presence is necessary (Art. 1481 § 1 of the Labour Code). When interpreting the law, there is the concept of rationality of the legislator, which should be applied here. Which means that the employee does not so much have to request the employer to take time off from work due to force majeure above, but remains obliged to report absence from work in advance or report the need to leave the workplace for an urgent family matter caused by illness or accident. Applying in this case the interpretation developed on the basis of the provisions on leave on demand to Art. 1481 of the Labour Code does not remain justified. 
EN
The Teachers’ Charter Act forms two bases for the employment of a teacher, i.e. employment contract and appointment, but the choice of the appropriate one remains dependent on the possession of a certain degree of professional promotion and the existence of conditions for full-time employment at school for an indefinite period. The termination of the employment relationship with employees of this professional group is also comprehensively regulated in the Teacher’s Charter Act and guarantees a higher level of protection than the regulations of the Labour Code Act. The analyzed issue does not concern the question of protection, but the unjustified differentiation of rights to which teachers-employees employed on different legal bases are entitled, after their reinstatement due to unlawful termination by the employer. According to the case law, the reference in Article 57 § 2 and Article 47 to Article 39 of the Labour Code Act is a reference to the prerequisite of reaching the pre-retirement age together with the basis of employment, which is the employment contract. In the author’s opinion, this remains contrary to the principle of equality expressed in Article 32(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, since from the perspective of compensation for the time of unemployment, the criterion of the basis of the employment relationship is not relevant.
EN
Prof. Ph.D. Tadeusz Zieliński took an active part in the discussion on the future of labor law, he loudly demanded the necessity of making changes and set new directions for these changes. As he emphasized, in order to codify law, it is necessary to think in the long-term perspective, and not only thinking limited by legislative periods. Labor law is a branch of law so deeply involved in politics that it is difficult to achieve in it a long-lasting consensus between conflicting endeavors. According to Prof. Ph.D. Tadeusz Zieliński - the new Labor Code should be an act of primary importance and should not be a modification of the present, but it should also take advantage of and accept as its own institutions that have already proved their worth. The new Labor Code must be based partly on new general assumptions, contain a catalog of basic (general) principles of labor law, which will give it cohesion, with the principle of supremacy at the forefront, which in turn will guarantee its longevity. The Labor Code must be permanent, so its amendments should only be carried out in absolutely exceptional situations. A well-written code should be a complete act, an open legal system, a stable and edited pure Polish. According to Prof. Zieliński, the subject of interest of the new Labor Code should be broadly understood employment. Prof. Tadeusz Zieliński in his reflections on the codification of labor law indicated a clear lack of harmony between labor law provisions with the Constitution of the Republic of Poland. There is no doubt that the reform of labor law is in the light of the requirements of proper legislation a very difficult goal, because it should be adapted to the needs of the new system of work. Considerations on the directions of labor law codification according to Prof. Zieliński still remain very current. Professor Zieliński indicated that the future will show whether we are going to try to recruit labor law, but we will not fall into the trap of cutting our coat according to our cloth. At this moment, it is regrettable to say that unfortunately we have fallen into a trap, and the fiasco of the work of the last commission on new labor codes is not optimistic.
FR
La discrimination d’un travailleur qui outre les devoirs professionnels exerce aussi les devoirs parentaux est hautement répréhensible. Le travail professionnel ainsi que la vie familiale constituent les sphères de vie les plus importantes qui sont étroitement liées l’une à l’autre et mutuellement dépendantes, et en même temps fortement concurrentielles l’une par rapport à l’autre. La protection du travailleur-parent devrait consister non seulement à lui octroyer des droits appropriés, mais avant tout à créer des mesures de protection efficaces (juridiques, non juridiques) contre la discrimination. Si l’exercice de nombreux droits à titre de parentalité devient la cause d’un traitement inégal, nous avons affaire à la discrimination interdite en raison de la parentalité. Le choix de vie qu’est la parentalité et, par conséquent, l’accomplissent des devoirs qui y sont liés peut avoir une influence considérable sur le traitement et la position du travailleur dans le milieu professionnel, d’où il devrait être ‒ de lege ferenda ‒ inclus dans le contenu du code de travail comme le critère de la différenciation interdite. Toujours est-il que ce sont non seulement les travailleurs eux-mêmes qui devraient être protégés contre la discrimination eu égard à la parentalité, mais aussi les candidats qui cherchent du travail et les anciens travailleurs. Le législateur a créé pour le travailleur-parent quelques possibilités dont il peut faire usage dans le cas où la discrimination se produirait, telles que par exemple la résolution du contrat de travail sans préavis (mais pas dans tous les cas) ou les prétentions à indemnité, mais ‒ avec la protection réelle contre la discrimination ‒ elles semblent toutefois insuffisantes. La protection des travailleurs-parents contre la discrimination ne sera pas complète si elle s’appuie uniquement sur les solutions de code. Sans solutions concrètes dans le domaine de l’introduction obligatoire des procédures antidiscriminatoires par l’employeur, il ne sera pas possible d’assurer une protection complète et efficace. Néanmoins, afin de pouvoir appliquer les mesures de protection incluses dans le code, il faut avant tout les régulariser de telle sorte que leur caractère juridique et l’étendue ne soient pas douteux. D’où aussi la nécessité absolue de changer les règlements en vigueur.
EN
Discrimination of employees who, apart from their professional duties, perform also parental duties, remains highly exceptionable. Professional life, as well as family life, constitute the most important spheres of a person’s life, inextricably connected and interdependent, but also highly competitive. The protection of such a parent-employee should entail not only granting them appropriate privileges, but also creating effective countermeasures (legal, extralegal) against discrimination. If being granted numerous privileges becomes the source of unequal treatment, then what occurs is unsanctioned discrimination on account of being a parent. The life choice of becoming a parent, and consequently, the fulfillment of related duties can have substantial impact on the employee’s treatment and position in their professional environment, and thus should be, de lege ferenda, included in the rules as a forbidden differentiation criterion. However, such protection against discrimination should encompass not only the current, but also prospective and former employees. The legislator has created several possibilities for the parent-employee to utilize in case of discrimination, such as immediate resignation with no notice (though not applicable in all cases) or compensatory measures, though these are by no means sufficient when it comes to real, actual protection from discrimination. Such protection from discrimination against parent-employees will not be comprehensive if it remains restricted only to the Employment Code solutions. Without specific solutions with regard to obligatory introduction of appropriate antidiscrimination policies by the employers, it will be impossible to guarantee full and effective protection measures. However, in order to be able to implement the protective solutions delineated by the Code, they should first be regulated so that there remains no question of their legal character as well as scope. Therefore, a change in the already functioning regulations is necessary.
PL
Dyskryminacja pracownika, który poza obowiązkami zawodowymi wypełnia również obowiązki rodzicielskie, pozostaje wysoce naganna. Praca zawodowa, jak i życie rodzinne, stanowią najważniejsze sfery życia, które pozostają ze sobą ściśle powiązane i wzajemnie od siebie zależne, a jednocześnie względem siebie silnie konkurencyjne. Ochrona pracownika-rodzica powinna dotyczyć nie tylko przyznania mu stosownych uprawień, ale przede wszystkim stwarzać skuteczne środki ochrony (prawne, poza-prawne) przed dyskryminacją. Jeżeli korzystanie z licznych uprawnień z tytułu rodzicielstwa staje się przyczyną nierównego traktowania, to dochodzi do niedozwolonej dyskryminacji ze względu na rodzicielstwo. Wybór życiowy, jakim pozostaje rodzicielstwo a w konsekwencji wypełnianie obowiązków z nim związanych może mieć znaczący wpływ na traktowanie i pozycję pracownika w środowisku pracy stąd też winno być ono – de lege ferenda – zawarte w treści kodeksowej zasady jako kryterium niedozwolonego różnicowania. Przy czym ochroną przed dyskryminacją z uwagi na rodzicielstwo objęci winni być nie tylko sami pracownicy, ale również kandydaci do pracy oraz byli pracownicy. Ustawodawca stworzył pracownikowi--rodzicowi kilka możliwość, z których ten może skorzystać w przypadku wystąpienia dyskryminacji, takich jak np. rozwiązanie umowy o prace bez wypowiedzenia (choć nie w każdym przypadku) czy roszczenia odszkodowawcze, ale przy faktycznej ochronie przed dyskryminacją wydają się być one jednak niewystarczające. Ochrona przed dyskryminacją pracowników–rodziców nie będzie kompletna, jeśli pozosta-nie oparta jedynie na rozwiązaniach kodeksowych. Bez konkretnych rozwiązań w zakresie obligatoryjnego wdrażania przez pracodawcę stosownych procedur anty-dyskryminacyjnych nie będzie możliwe zapewnienie pełnej i skutecznej ochrony. Jednakże, aby móc sięgnąć do kodeksowych środków ochrony, należy przede wszystkim uregulować je tak, aby nie był wątpliwy ich charakter prawny oraz zakres. I stąd też zmiana obowiązujących regulacji pozostaje absolutnie konieczna.
EN
The jurisprudence and the doctrine remain generally consistent that remuneration for the period of unemployment (Art. 47 and 57 of the Labor Code) fulfills two important roles, i.e. it constitutes a kind of compensation for the employee reinstated to work, at the same time serving as a sanction for the employer for unjustified or inconsistent termination of the employment relationship by law. For particularly protected persons, the legislator provided for the payment of such remuneration for the entire period of unemployment. However, the author draws attention to the fact that courts exclude the possibility of granting this benefit for periods of incapacity for work, including the time of receiving maternity benefits. This means that a particularly protected employee whose employment relationship has been unlawfully terminated will not receive remuneration for the period of unemployment if, in the period between the termination of the employment relationship and taking up work as a result of reinstatement, he was incapable of working, but also if he exercised parental rights. Deducting the period of receiving maternity benefits from the period of unemployment for which remuneration is due is, in the author’s opinion, an unacceptable interpretation from the level of insurance regulations, but also violating the constitutional principle of maternity protection (Art. 18 of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland) and limiting the special protection of the durability of the employment relationship of parents’ employees.
EN
Reaching the next stages of an academic career is often associated with successively higher positions in higher education. With that said, the definition of an academic career remains much broader and includes in its scope not only an academic career, but also includes those elements that are associated with all professional promotions or functions held in academia. The object of this article is to draw attention to the situation of women in higher education, which seems to be better than it was a dozen years ago. Nevertheless, a fundamental question arises as to whether the course of academic careers of women and men is shaped similarly? What blocks the development of women in academia, and what impact did the situation caused by the Covid-19 pandemic have on women’s academic careers? The authors will attempt to answer both this and many other questions while trying to identify solutions that could help address any challenges faced by women in the academic work environment.
PL
Dochodzenie do kolejnych etapów kariery naukowej niejednokrotnie związane jest z obejmowaniem kolejno coraz wyższych stanowisk w szkolnictwie wyższym. Z tym że definicja kariery akademickiej pozostaje znacznie szersza i obejmuje swym zakresem nie tylko karierę naukową, ale również zawiera w sobie te elementy, które związane są ze wszelkimi zawodowymi awansami czy pełnionymi funkcjami w środowisku akademickim. Przedmiotem niniejszego artykułu jest zwrócenie uwagi na sytuację kobiet w szkolnictwie wyższym, która wydaje się być lepsza niż kilkanaście lat temu. Niemniej jednak nasuwa się zasadnicze pytanie: czy przebieg kariery akademickiej kobiet i mężczyzn kształtuje się podobnie? Co blokuje rozwój kobiet w środowisku akademickim i jaki wpływ na kariery akademickie kobiet miała sytuacja wywołana pandemią COVID-19? Autorki podejmą próbę odpowiedzi zarówno na to, jak i na wiele innych pytań, starając się jednocześnie wskazać rozwiązania, które mogłyby pomóc w sprostaniu wszelkim wyzwaniom stawianym kobietom w akademickim środowisku pracy.
EN
In this article the authors submit thorough analysis a new Directive (EU) 2019/1158 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 20 June 2019 on work-life balance for parents and carers as well as the repealing Council Directive 2010/18/EU that entered into force on August 1, 2019, paying special attention to adjusting domestic regulations to it. The solutions adopted in this Directive lay down minimum requirements designed to achieve equality between men and women regarding labour market opportunities and treatment at work, by facilitating the reconciliation of work and family life for workers who are parents, or carers. To that end, this Directive 2019/1158 provides for individual rights related to the following: paternity leave, parental leave and carers’ leave, flexible working arrangements for workers who are parents, or carers.
PL
W niniejszym artykule autorki poddają szczegółowej analizie nową dyrektywę Parlamentu Europejskiego i Rady (UE) 2019/1158 z dnia 20 czerwca 2019 r. w sprawie równowagi między życiem zawodowym a prywatnym rodziców i opiekunów oraz uchylającą dyrektywę Rady 2010/18/UE, która weszła w życie w dniu 1 sierpnia 2019, pod kątem konieczności dostosowania do niej przepisów krajowych. Przyjęte w dyrektywie rozwiązania mają zapewnić realizację zasady równości kobiet i mężczyzn pod względem szans na rynku pracy i traktowania w miejscu pracy, a także umożliwić rodzicom i opiekunom godzenie pracy z opieką nie tylko nad dziećmi, ale również nad innymi osobami pozostającymi pod ich opieką. W tym celu dyrektywa 2019/1158 przewiduje indywidualne prawa związane z urlopem ojcowskim, urlopem rodzicielskim i urlopem opiekuńczym, elastyczną organizacją pracy dla pracowników będących rodzicami lub opiekunami.
EN
The legislator has provided four exceptions from the rule of limited period of employment based on a fixed-term contract and a limit on the total number of contracts, modeled on existing solutions in European law and dictated by market realities. These relate to target contracts, i.e. contracts for replacement work, part-time, seasonal employment, term of office in employment, and the most controversial case of objective reasons for the employer. In relation to these contracts, neither a time limit nor a quantitative limit is applied, and in the literature they are referred to as unlimited, objectively justified or specific contracts. With the proviso that the conclusion of a contract for a definite period must serve to meet the employer’s demand for work, which is both real and periodic. In addition, when concluding a fixed-term contract justified by objective reasons, the employer remains obliged to notify the relevant district labor inspector – within 5 days – in electronic or written form about the conclusion of such a contract and indication of the reason for its conclusion. Violation of this obligation is an offense against the employee’s rights. The application of the general clause by the legislator provides flexibility, but may also result in the of abuse by the employer. Therefore, the existence of objective reasons justifying the conclusion of a fixed-term employment contract will be subject to the assessment of the labor court in cases regarding the establishment of a legal relationship concluded on the basis of an employment contract for an indefinite period.
EN
Labor law is the law of everyday life, which is why social expectations, socio-political and economic and economic changes significantly contribute to shaping its regulations. Labor law as a branch of law directly referring to human work is exposed to the processes of constant change that should be met, and therefore should contain universal regulations. The current model of labor law is not adapted to modern socio-economic relations, hence the decreasing importance, the need for its thorough, systemic change or even inclusion in civil law. The overriding function of law is the introduction and maintenance of social order, and in the area of labor law its two basic functions are most often distinguished, i.e. protective and organizational, which complement each other. The protective function of labor law does not remain an independent value and does not work in isolation from individual labor law regulations but provides a specific background for them. Her presence manifests itself in the content of individual labor law regulations, such as: establishing, changing and terminating an employment relationship, protecting employment permanence, parental and maternity rights, or regulations regarding material employee responsibility. Labor law should be seen as a regulation concerning the community, and in place of the protective (individualistic) function, the distribution and organizing function of labor law should be restored (with a significant correction of their content) due to the fact that labor law is a tool for equalizing and promoting opportunities in social life. The time of globalization and free market economy should strengthen the position of labor law and at the same time face its new challenges. 
EN
The aim of the study is to show the essence of labour law through the prism of its characteristic structures and goals. Work is one of the most important values in human life, both in the context of securing living and personal conditions. While working, one acquires additional competencies and skills, which transfer into personal development. On the other hand, unemployment has negative living and social effects. For these reasons, it is necessary to show the tools of labour law that prevent broadly understood social exclusion. Their importance becomes more evident in times of crisis, when employees are affected by its effects. Therefore, the crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is an important background for the ongoing considerations.
EN
Employees have different caring responsibilities at different stages of their life, some take care of the children, others of sick members of their family. For some years now, there have been attempts to find solutions how to resolve the key problem, which is the uneven participation of men and women in childcare, as well as in the care over other dependants. However, currently, an employee taking advantage of extended unpaid parental leave gets neither remuneration from the employment relationship nor maternity allowance, which results in the fact that most fathers still do not make use of their right to extended unpaid parental leave. Often, neither of the parents benefits from this entitlement, but they return to work right after the paid parental leave. The purpose of extended unpaid parental leave, just like in the case of other parent-related leaves of absence, is to take personal care of the child. Currently, there are a few solutions whose aim is to make it easier to the parents to combine their private and professional life. The possibility to undertake additional activities during the extended unpaid parental leave is one of them. According to the Labour Code regulations, an employee can undertake gainful employment or other activity at his/her existing or a new employer or can undertake some studying or training when he/she takes advantage of the extended unpaid parental leave on condition that it does not exclude the possibility to take personal care of the child (Art. 1862 § 1 of the Labour Code). Implementing the directive (UE) 2019/1158 into the national legal order might be an excellent opportunity to modify the already existing institution of the extended unpaid parental leave. The essential novum which the directive will introduce, and which is to encourage the fathers to take care of the children, is to entitle the working parents to two months of parental leave that is not transferrable to the other parent of the child. Certainly, financial aspects will be of significance to the parents. Therefore, it is essential that the state budget covers the two months of obligatory parental leave benefits which are solely dedicated to the fathers of the children.
PL
Sposób wykonywania pracy przez nauczyciela akademickiego ze względu na pandemię COVID-19 bardzo się zmienił, a w przyszłości zmiany te (szczególnie w zakresie dydaktyki) mogą już na trwałe wpisać się w jej standardy. Konieczność wykonywania pracy (dydaktycznej, badawczej i organizacyjnej) w formie zdalnej, często w warunkach domowych, uwypukliła szereg problemów. Niewątpliwie wyzwaniem dla nauczyciela akademickiego było (i wciąż pozostaje) odnalezienie się w realiach pracy zdalnej. Dla nauczyciela akademickiego będącego rodzicem (opiekunem) wyzwaniem pozostaje odnalezienie właściwego rytmu między sferą zawodową a prywatną. Pandemia COVID-19 wyeksponowała nie tylko problemy istniejące od dawna, a związane ze zjawiskiem pracy niewidzialnej (nieodpłatnej) czy nierównością płci w zatrudnieniu, ale stworzyła zupełnie nowe, związane z oczekiwaniami ciągłej gotowości i dyspozycji pracownika do pracy czy nałożeniem dodatkowych obowiązków, którymi pracodawca obciążył szczególnie pracowników dydaktycznych. Również istniejące wątpliwości dotyczące ewaluacji pracy naukowej zyskały znacząco na sile. Brak rozwiązań prawnych regulujących kwestie wpływu usprawiedliwionej nieobecności pracownika w świadczeniu pracy wywołanej urlopami rodzicielskimi (a w dobie pandemii COVID-19 nieobecności wywołanej koniecznością zapewnienia opieki) na ocenę jakości działalności naukowej stanowi znaczne obciążenie dla pracowników uczelni wyższych. Przywołane w artykule badania socjologiczne ukazują, iż ciężar opieki oraz wykonywania dodatkowych obowiązków spoczął przede wszystkim na barkach kobiet. W wielu przypadkach przełożyło się to bezpośrednio na liczbę napisanych artykułów, przeprowadzonych badań czy złożonych wniosków grantowych. Pandemia COVID-19 wymusiła nie tylko pewne zmiany w dotychczasowej organizacji pracy zawodowej nauczyciela akademickiego, ale ujawniła problemy, których zakres jawi się już nie tylko jednostkowo (indywidualne), lecz przede wszystkim społecznie. Celem artykułu jest prześledzenie wybranych wyzwań stojących współcześnie przed osobami zatrudnionymi w szkolnictwie wyższym i analiza odnoszących się do nich, obowiązujących rozwiązań prawnych oraz identyfikacja luk w prawie utrudniających ich łagodzenie. Interdyscyplinarne zbadanie przedstawionych zagadnień umożliwi poszukanie rozwiązań prawnych, jak i pozaprawnych, które przyczynią się do zniesienia barier w akademickim środowisku pracy, w którym wciąż panuje wiele stereotypów.
EN
The way of performing work by an academic teacher due to the COVID-19 pandemic has changed a lot, and in the future these changes (especially in the field of didactics) may already be permanently inscribed in its standards. The need to perform work (teaching, research and organization) remotely, often in a home environment, has highlighted a number of problems. Undoubtedly, it was (and still remains) a challenge for an academic teacher to find their way in the realities of remote working. For the academic teacher who is a parent (caregiver), it remains a challenge to find the right rhythm between the professional and private spheres. The COVID-19 pandemic has exposed not only long-standing problems related to the phenomenon of invisible (unpaid) work, or gender inequality in employment, but has also created completely new ones related to the expectations of constant readiness and availability of the employee to work or the imposition of additional obligations, which the employer has burdened teaching staff in particular. The existing doubts related to the evaluation of scientific work have also gained in strength. The lack of legal solutions regulating the issue of the impact of an employee's excused absence from work due to parental leave (and in the era of the COVID-19 pandemic, absence due to the need toprovide care) on the evaluation of the quality of scientific activity is a significant burden for University employees. The sociological research cited in the article reveals that the burden of caregiving and performing additional duties rested primarily on the shoulders of women. In many cases, this has translated directly into the number of articles written, research conducted, or grant proposals submitted. The COVID-19 pandemic has not only forced some changes in the current organization of the professional work of academic teachers, but above all has revealed problems whose scope is no longer only individual, but primarily social. The aim of the article is to trace selected challenges faced today by women and men employed in higher education and to analyze the legal solutions in force as well as to identify gaps in the law that make it difficult to mitigate them. An interdisciplinary examination of the presented issues will enable us to search for legal and non-legal solutions, which will contribute to the removal of barriers in the academic work environment, in which many stereotypes still prevail.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.