That is, the rules and exceptions to the payment of remuneration
In previous articles, we've already mentioned that a necessary element of an employment contract is the specification of remuneration for work performed. Indeed, the key element is the performance of the work. This distinguishes an employment contract from other contracts known to us. To be considered an employment relationship, remuneration must be present.
In today's article, we'll explore the topic of remuneration for work. What are the criteria for determining remuneration? Is remuneration only for work performed?
Remuneration criterion
The Labor Code does not provide a definition of remuneration; it merely specifies a set of characteristics of this benefit, based on which both legal doctrine and case law construct specific concepts of remuneration for work. According to the Supreme Court, remuneration for work is a necessary benefit of a profit-making and financial nature, which an employer is obligated to pay periodically to an employee in exchange for work performed under the employment relationship, appropriate to the type, quantity, and quality of work performed .
Moreover, remuneration should correspond, in particular, to the type of work performed, qualifications, and quantity and quality of work performed. This is an open-ended list, meaning that the provision does not exhaust all the factors that determine remuneration; these factors may also include, for example, age or professional experience.
Moreover, everyone has the right to fair remuneration, which is one of the fundamental principles of labor law, implemented through state policy, in particular by ensuring a minimum wage. According to the Supreme Court, fair remuneration should be understood as remuneration that is appropriate, proper, fair, reliable, and honest. (Supreme Court judgment of August 25, 2010, II PK 50/10, Legalis).
Remuneration for work performed
Generally, remuneration is due for work performed. This reflects the principle of reciprocity between remuneration and work. This means that an employee is entitled to remuneration for work actually performed. However, the regulation provides an exception, stating that an employee retains the right to remuneration in the event of non-performance of work, where this is permitted by labor law. So how should remuneration be determined during periods of non-performance? In such situations, the rules governing holiday pay apply.
When is remuneration not due despite work performed?
It should be noted that when determining remuneration, consideration should be given to, among other factors, the quality of the work performed. If a product or service performed by an employee has defects and this defect is due to the employee's fault, remuneration for its performance is not due. If, as a result of defective work performed due to the employee's fault, the quality of the product or service is reduced, remuneration is also reduced accordingly.
Therefore, how should defective performance of products or services be assessed? This assessment should be made primarily from the perspective of applicable quality standards and through the principle of employee conscientiousness or diligence. In this context, conscientiousness is understood as a subjective measure of the quality of work performed; it reflects the employee's attitude toward work and their desire to utilize their qualifications and talents. The employee should exercise the diligence generally required in a given type of relationship.
The scope of this obligation is therefore measured by an objective standard, the standard of an average diligent employee. It requires performing work accurately, in accordance with the general technical requirements, guidelines, and instructions related to the type of work.
It should be emphasized that an employee does not retain the right to remuneration in the event of defective work, i.e., when the employee is at fault. In such a case, a causal link must be demonstrated between the failure to perform or improper performance of duties by a specific employee and the provision of the defective product or service.
However, in this case, the burden of proving fault rests with the employer. According to case law, it is insufficient for the employer to demonstrate that the entire team, including the plaintiff, is responsible for the defective products (Judgment of the Administrative Court in Katowice of February 29, 2008, III APa 272/06, Legalis).
If a product defect is removed, does the employee retain the right to remuneration?
An employee who repairs a defect in a product or a poorly performed service retains the right to remuneration that reflects the quality of the product or service. This remuneration may be full remuneration if the product or service has been restored to full value, or reduced remuneration if the quality of the repaired product or service remains impaired. It should be emphasized, however, that remuneration is not due for the time spent repairing the defect. Consequently, according to case law, this type of work cannot constitute overtime (Judgment of the Administrative Court in Warsaw of November 20, 1997, III APa 63/97, Legalis).
Summary
Despite the general belief that an employee is always entitled to remuneration, there are exceptional situations that constitute a deviation from the "whether you stand or lie..." principle. An interesting and complex issue is the failure to receive remuneration or a proportionate reduction in remuneration due to the improper performance of a service or product. It is important to remember that an employer must prove fault and a causal relationship to be able to reduce or withhold remuneration. This leads to the conclusion that it is difficult not to pay an employee even if the product or service is defective. In this case, the right to remuneration is protected by law as one of the most important obligations of an employer.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.
Legal status as of November 16, 2023
author:
