Article prepared by experts at NESSE Center of Excellence for nessletter readers.
On 5 November 2026, new Polish rules on workplace bullying (mobbing) come into force. On shop floors and in offices we are already hearing the question: “So what, am I not allowed to point things out any more?”
You are. And you have to. The new rules clearly state that justified accountability for work and criticism expressed in the right form are not bullying. What matters is both the basis of the assessment and the way it is delivered.
That is good news for every manager who delivers results through people. Provided they know where the line is – and can hold it under pressure.
What changes from 5 November – in brief, for leaders
The amendment to the Polish Labour Code of 19 June 2026 changes the definition of workplace bullying and the employer’s obligations. This is how the National Labour Inspectorate (PIP) describes it. The most important points for you:
A new definition. Workplace bullying is persistent harassment of an employee – recurring, repeated or continuous behaviour.
A clear line. Justified accountability for assigned work expressed in the right form, criticism of work and the proper exercise of the employer’s rights are not bullying.
The company’s obligations. The employer must prevent, detect and respond. Companies employing at least 10 people must set out rules and procedures in their work regulations or collective agreement – they have 6 months to do so.
Higher stakes. The minimum compensation for workplace bullying is six times the minimum wage.
What does this mean in practice? The rules don’t take away your right to set requirements. They shift the focus to two questions: does your assessment have a basis and do you deliver it in the right form. Both are in your hands.
Two messages, one situation
Let’s look at two messages:
“You’ve messed up again. You can never be relied on.”
“The report was due on Tuesday. I got it on Thursday, so we had to postpone the decision for the client. What happened, and how will you make sure the next deadline is met?”
| Message 1 | Message 2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Requirement | hidden in a label | stated directly |
| Pointing out the mistake | “you’ve messed up” – nothing specific | deadline: Tuesday vs Thursday |
| Consequence | none | postponed decision for the client |
| Assessment | of the person (“never”) | of the behaviour (this report) |
| Employee’s voice | none | “What happened?” |
| Accountability for the future | none | “How will you make sure the next deadline is met?” |
The second one still contains a requirement. It points out the mistake. It includes accountability for what happens next. The employee also gets a chance to explain the situation.
The first one isn’t tougher – it’s weaker. It doesn’t say what went wrong, it doesn’t say what you expect, and it shuts down the conversation. Repeated regularly, it starts to look like a pattern rather than accountability for work.
How to prepare a conversation that sets requirements
A conversation like this needs preparation. Five minutes before it, go through three steps:
Separate facts from judgement. What happened – dates, numbers, agreements? If you can’t write it down in one sentence without adjectives, you don’t yet have a basis for an assessment.
Name the consequence. For the client, for the team, for the result. That is what shows the requirement is justified, not personal.
Agree what you expect going forward. What exactly needs to change, and by when? Ask for a plan instead of imposing one – and write down what you agree.
Under pressure it’s easy to fall back on labels: “irresponsible”, “entitled”, “not committed enough”. A label is quick because it replaces three steps with one word. But it judges the person, not the work – and it doesn’t fix anything.
Sentences to unlearn – and what to say instead
| Instead of | Say |
|---|---|
| “You can never be relied on.” | “That’s the second missed deadline this month. What’s going on, and what are we changing?” |
| “You’re irresponsible.” | “The shift was left without a handover. The night shift didn’t know about the breakdown on line 3.” |
| “Same thing again.” | “We agreed on a check before dispatch. It didn’t happen today. Why?” |
| “If you don’t like it, you know where the door is.” | “I hear that you disagree. The requirement stays – let’s talk about how to meet it.” |
A single sentence pattern doesn’t determine whether the whole relationship is sound. But it’s a good place to start looking at your own way of managing.
Which sentence should leaders in your organisation unlearn? Write to us – we’ll discuss the most common answers in a future issue.
A safe company means prepared leaders
The new rules place a duty on employers to prevent workplace bullying. Regulations and a procedure are the first step. The second is leaders who know how to set requirements so that their assessment has a basis and the right form – even at 2 pm on a Friday, when the line has stopped.
At NESSE Center of Excellence we work with leaders on difficult conversations, feedback and enforcing agreements. In our workshops we don’t discuss theory – we practise concrete words, reactions and decisions based on situations from your everyday work.
Why it’s a safe choice for your company:
Documented preventive action. Training leaders is part of systematic bullying prevention that can be demonstrated.
Quality confirmed by certification. NESSE operates a quality management system certified to ISO 9001 by DEKRA.
Experience with manufacturing and logistics. Since 2009 we have worked with management teams in manufacturing, automotive and logistics companies.
There is one month left until 5 November. Write to us and we will tailor a workshop to your team.
This article is for information only and does not constitute legal advice.
Source: PIP – Workplace bullying and discrimination: new regulations (in Polish)