The Basic Law in Article 65(1) guarantees everyone the freedom to choose and pursue their profession and choose their place of work. However, in practice, this freedom of choice is often abused at the expense of the principle that obligations should be fulfilled (Latin: pacta sunt servanda). In workplaces with identical or very similar positions such as warehouses, car workshops, diagnostic stations or coal depots, staff transfers often occur. These establishments, often located in close proximity, hosts many vacancies for individuals with particular skills, and offer similar working conditions and wages. Under intense labor and competitive pressure, employers often have to compete with each other for regular workers.
Employees are naturally interested in earning as much as possible and working under the best conditions. Hence, competition among employers generally manifests in these areas. Consequently, it happens that in exchange for higher salary or better conditions, an employee may suddenly decide to work for a neighboring establishment. This situation often occurs when a new workplace opens in the vicinity of existing facilities, for instance, warehouses. The management of the new facility needs to quickly assemble a full team of experienced workers, which often leads to “poaching” employees from neighboring establishments expecting their immediate transfer.
An employment agreement, as the name suggests, is a contract. It is mutually binding. In return for providing work and complying with specific labor laws (both statutory and internal employer stipulations), an employee should receive, among other things, remuneration, work tools, and appropriate conditions for their performance. According to the principle that contracts should be kept, a reliable employer fulfilling their obligations can expect their employees to act fair and not abandon work overnight unless necessary. Labor law provisions provide for specific notice periods. Such periods allow employers to adjust the work organization to the employee’s decision, opportunity to find replacements, or reorganize shifts, schedules or vacations. A sudden and unjustified employee disappearance could entirely halt or seriously impede the work process and may have a negative effect on the morale of the team. The employer may also suffer financial and reputational losses due to unfulfilled contracts.
Although an employee can terminate the contract without notice or instantly, certain conditions must be met. An employee can do so if a medical certificate is issued stating harmful work effects on the employee’s health, and the employer does not relocate them to another job suitable for their health state and professional qualifications within the specified period or the employer has committed a serious violation of the fundamental obligations towards the employee.
Whether such a termination was justified, impulsive or solely an opportunity to change the employer for a neighboring competitor needs individual assessment. Importantly, the employee in their statement must accurately indicate and potentially later prove the reasons for an instant contract termination.
In the event an employee unjustifiably terminates an employment contract without a notice period, the employer has the right to claim compensation. The purpose of compensation is not to equalize the actual employer’s damages due to the illegal employee’s contract termination without a notice but serves as a sanction against the employee for such illegal and unjustified action. But whether it is advisable to claim compensation from an employee needs individual assessment. However, for the good of the entire workplace, employers should express that if an employee unjustifiably terminates a contract, the employer will pursue the protection of their rights.
Author: Wojciech Országh, Chałas i Wspólnicy Law Firm
