Recommendations or order?
Many people may wonder whether the regulations contained in the ordinance of the Minister of Labour and Social Policy dated 1 December 1998 on safety and hygiene of work in the work-places equipped with screen monitors (Journal of Laws dated 10 December 1998, Journal of Laws.98.148.973) are recommendations only or an order. And what legal consequences can there be for the employer as a result of non-compliance?
The Minister of Labour and Social Policy’s ordinance in force since March 1999 specifies in detail the employer’s obligations as regards requirements in ergonomics by defining them as an order.
The ordnance was issued on the basis of a statutory delegacy contained in the Labour Code. The Code regulations treat the issues of safety and hygiene at work as the most important obligations of the employer (art. 94 item 4 of the Labour Code).
Violation of the obligations is an offence (art. 283 of the Code) and is subject to a fine.
The ordinance of the Council of Ministers dated 30 July 2002 (Journal of Laws no. 132, item 1115) includes a list of occupational diseases which contains a group of diseases that may be caused by inappropriate working conditions and non-compliance with the ergonomics principles at a work-place. The group is called a chronic diseases of locomotor system and of peripheral nervous system related to the way the job is performed.
Occupational diseases are covered by social insurance (art. 237 of the Labour Code).
The employer’s liability for damages is also possible on the general principles as defined in the Civil Code even if a disease is not an occupational disease according to the list but it was caused in connection with the working conditions (as allowed by art. 236 of the Labour Code).
Prepared on the basis of “Legal Information” (see entire text) and Ordinance of the Council of Ministers dated 30 July 2002 (Journal of Laws No. 132, item 1115).
| 
