Social protection of trainees in Polish law. Considerations in the context of current and planned EU traineeship regulations

Abstract

The Polish legal regulation of traineeships, similarly to that of most other EU countries, is not uniform. It covers many types of traineeships, resulting in differentiation of the legal status of persons undertaking them. Trainees may have the status of an employee – with full coverage by labour law. Alternatively, however, they may not be treated as employees, provided that they are guaranteed certain basic employee rights (e.g. the right to healthy and safe working conditions). For this latter group, the issue of the admissibility of unpaid traineeships, as well as the scope of other employee rights – especially in the area of social protection, which trainees should be covered by – remains controversial. The article examines to what extent the type of traineeship justifies the differentiation of the scope of social protection to which trainees are entitled. Is it justified to grant full social protection to trainees while depriving them of employee status? Does limiting social protection and other rights, such as the right to annual leave, encourage the treatment of trainees as unpaid (cheap) labour, an alternative to employing workers? In order to answer these research questions, the article analyses the Polish legal regulation of traineeships, taking into account both existing and planned EU regulations.

Introduction

Traineeships are regarded as an instrument to provide work experience and practical skills for jobs (by means of an important learning and training component), thus facilitating permanent employment. Particular importance is attributed to traineeships for young people joining the labour market, for whom they often become a bridge between the education system and the first job. However, the value of a traineeship depends on its quality. A high-quality traineeship requires fair and transparent working conditions and appropriate educational content. At the same time, it should not be treated as a way to obtain cheap (unpaid) labour to replace hired workers, lowering labour standards (Owens and Stewart, 2016: 679–709). It is therefore crucial that traineeships are properly regulated by law, to determine in which cases the traineeship system can be used, and the legal status of their participants. This obvious conclusion turns out to be more complex in view of the diversity of types of traineeship, and of the way they are regulated in EU countries (for an in-depth discussion, see Stewart, 2021: 17–33; Stewart et al., 2021: 335–348). The type of traineeship will determine the status of trainees, which may be different depending on the solutions adopted in each country. While traineeships carried out on the basis of an employment contract guarantee full protection by labour law, and thus full social protection, the dilemma (still present) is how to shape working conditions and social protection in the case of traineeships carried out outside of an employment relationship.

Polish legal regulation of traineeships, as in most other EU countries, is not uniform in nature. There are many types of traineeship, resulting in a differentiation in the legal status of trainees. Employee status, as a rule, is guaranteed only to participants in traineeships where completion is a prerequisite for access to a profession or employment in a particular position, and whose purpose is theoretical and practical preparation for that profession or position. Other types of traineeships, i.e. traineeships carried out as part of ALMP, traineeships on the open labour market, as well as traineeships that are an optional or mandatory part of academic and/or vocational curricula, take place outside of an employment relationship. ¹

This article will attempt to determine whether the Polish legislator recognises the need to guarantee social protection to trainees without employee status, and its scope. It is also important to indicate how the Polish model of social protection for trainees fits in with both existing and proposed traineeship regulations at the EU level.

Traineeships necessary to access a specific profession or employment in a specific position – full social protection

In the case of traineeships that are required to access a specific profession or employment in a specific position, the Polish legislator has chosen to grant their participants employee status. This type of traineeship includes, among others, the ‘postgraduate traineeship’ for doctors and dentists, ² the ‘assistant traineeship’ ³ which judicial assistants are obliged to complete within the first two years of their employment, and the ‘clerical traineeship’ ⁴ providing practical and theoretical preparation for the performance of official duties. All these traineeships are carried out on the basis of a fixed-term employment contract, as explicitly expressed in the legal acts regulating them. As a result, these trainees are employees who benefit from the full protection provided by labour law, and consequently, also from full social protection. Individuals undertaking traineeships based on an employment contract are mandatorily subject to all social insurance schemes from the day the employment relationship is established. They are therefore, in accordance with the Act on the Social Insurance System of 13 October 1998 ⁵ (hereafter SSS), covered by pension insurance, disability insurance, sickness insurance (insurance in case of illness and maternity), ⁶ and accident insurance (insurance for work-related accidents and occupational diseases). Each type of social insurance corresponds to a specific social risk, upon the occurrence of which legal protection is triggered in the form of a designated benefit. Furthermore, pursuant to Article 66(1)(1a) of the Act of 27 August 2004, on Health Care Services Financed from Public Funds ⁷ (hereafter PHCS), trainee employees are mandatorily covered by health insurance. This insurance, under the rules specified in the aforementioned Act, entitles them to health care services aimed at preserving health, preventing diseases and injuries, early detection of illnesses, treatment, nursing care and the prevention and limitation of disability. ⁸

Traineeships as part of ALMP– social protection related to unemployment status and receipt of a grant during the traineeship

Traineeships as part of ALMP are very popular in Poland. In 2016–2023, they were the most common basic form of labour activation. Depending on the unemployment rate, the number of participants in this period ranged from 100,000 to 200,000 participants per year. In 2023, 100,278 people participated in ALMP traineeships, and 72,433 people found employment ⁹ after completing this form of activation – 80.36% of those who completed traineeships. The employment efficiency of traineeships is therefore relatively high, especially compared to, for example, that of training, which is 52.31% (Ministry of Family Labour and Social Policy, 2024).

ALMP traineeships are governed by the Labour Market and Employment Services Act of 20 March 2025 ¹⁰ (hereafter LMES), and are defined as the acquisition of knowledge and skills by an unemployed person by performing tasks in the workplace without establishing an employment relationship with the employer. ¹¹ The Polish legislator thus explicitly deprives this group of trainees of employee status. Traineeships as part of ALMP may last from 3 to 6 months, and those that can be concluded with a certification of acquired knowledge or skills granted by an authorised institution last from 3 to 12 months. ¹² The traineeship is carried out on the basis of a contract concluded by the employment authority with the organiser and the unemployed person. During each month of the traineeship, the unemployed person is entitled to a grant paid by the employment authority equivalent to 160% of unemployment benefit (this is the amount that does not guarantee the minimum wage). ¹³ Pension, disability and accident insurance contributions are determined and paid by the employment authority based on the grant. ¹⁴ The period of receipt of the grant is counted as part of the period of work required for the acquisition or retention of labour rights and contributory periods. However, according to Article 240 of the LMES, this period cannot be counted as part of the period required to acquire the right to unemployment benefits and to determine the amount and duration of benefits. As trainees are unemployed during the ALMP traineeship period, they are also covered by health insurance under Article 66(1)(24b) of the PHCS. If the legislature had not decided that grants would be allocated to trainees, these trainees would not be covered by social security, but only by health insurance.

ALMP trainees are excluded from sickness insurance. This is because, in light of Article 234(7) of the LMES, for the period of documented inability to work, an unemployed trainee retains the right to 50% of the usual grant. This reduced amount received during the period of inability to work should be approached critically. The legislator modelled the regulation of salary reduction on the rule for employees in a similar situation. Pursuant to Article 92 of the Labour Code of 26 June 1974 ¹⁵ (hereafter LC), for the period of an employee's incapacity to work due to, for example, illness, lasting up to 33 days in total during a calendar year – and for a total of 14 days in the case of an employee who has reached the age of 50 – he retains the right to 80% of his salary. However, if the illness occurs during pregnancy, for example, the employee retains 100% of her salary. After the periods specified in the LC, the employee acquires the right to sickness insurance benefits. In the case of trainees, the reason for the inability to complete the traineeship is completely disregarded – the amount of the reduced allowance is the same in every case. ¹⁶ In case of illness occurring after the traineeship, trainees, as they are not covered by sickness insurance, will receive no cash benefits in case of illness and maternity. The exception to this is the situation of a trainee entitled to unemployment benefits at the end of the traineeship. ¹⁷

The social protection granted to ALMP trainees has been structured on similar principles as for employees – although not fully, due to the lack of sickness insurance. However, it would be difficult to claim that they have been entirely deprived of protection in this regard, considering the points mentioned above.

A comprehensive analysis of the legal regulation relating to ALMP traineeships suggests that the Polish legislator ‘artificially’ deprives participants of employee status. Indeed, in addition to social protection, trainees have a number of other rights under the ‘rules provided for employees’, including healthy and safe working conditions, preventive health protection, the right to rest periods, days off with retention of the right to a grant (2 days for each 30 days of traineeship), and protection against harassment. ¹⁸ Also, the duties incumbent on the trainee are similar to those of an employee. Pursuant to Article 117 of the PHCS, the unemployed person, during the traineeship, among other things, conscientiously and diligently performs the tasks covered by the traineeship programme and complies with the instructions given by the organiser of the traineeship and by his/her supervisor, provided that these instrutions are not contrary to the law, observes the regulations and rules set by the organiser of the traineeship, in particular the work regulations, professional secrecy and occupational health and safety rules. The trainee is thus de facto subject to the organiser's management on an employee-like basis (Skąpski, 2015: 252).

The non-employment nature of the trainee's status is not due to the characteristics of his factual situation, but to the will of the legislator. The legal form of traineeship that does not result in establishment of an employment relationship is intended to encourage employers to organise traineeships (Skąpski, 2015: 238). This formula does not burden the organiser with obligations under labour law and social law, which they could be afraid of incurring in relation to people without practical skills and professional experience (at least in the legislator's assumption, ALMP traineeships are primarily targeted at such people).

On the one hand, given the existence of abusive practices when work is organised outside of an employment relationship, it is a positive development that ALMP trainees are guaranteed such extensive protection. On the other hand, since the trainee is supposed to be involved in the work process, performing productive work that benefits the entity hosting the traineeship – as evidenced by the obligations imposed – the statutory exclusion of an employment relationship raises doubts (Nikoloudakis, 2021: 252). The grant to which trainees are entitled is financed from the Labour Fund, so these funds could be used in relation to an employment contract, to subsidise the salary of the employee, who would cover the remainder from his own pocket. Indeed, it is not entirely convincing under the existing legislation to exempt the traineeship organiser from bearing the salary costs of an unemployed person who, after all, performs full-time work for him. This encourages the treatment of trainees as free labour and reinforces the belief that labour is a low-value good (Skąpski, 2015a: 434).

Traineeships on the open labour market – no social protection related to the traineeshi

Traineeships on the open labour market are governed by the Act of 17 July 2009, on Graduate Practices ¹⁹ (hereafter GP). Although the Polish legislator used the term ‘practices’, these schemes nevertheless fall within the concept of traineeship formulated in the Recommendation of 10 March 2014 on the Quality Framework for Traineeships ²⁰ ; in the European Commission reports on the application of this document, they are categorised as traineeships on the open labour market (European Commission, 2016, 2023). Article 1(2) of the GP states that the purpose of practices is to help graduates gain experience and acquire practical skills necessary for performing work. Graduate practices have a limited scope in terms of both the subjects and duration – they are intended for individuals who have completed at least junior high school or eight years of primary school and have not yet reached the age of 30 on the day the practice begins. The practice is thus open to both post-primary school graduates and students during their studies, as well as university graduates – provided they are under 30 years of age. The practice may last no longer than three months. Practices are carried out on the basis of a graduate practice contract, which specifies, among other things, the type of work through which the practice apprentice is to gain experience and acquire practical skills. This graduate practice contract does not establish an employment relationship – it is a civil law employment contract (Skąpski, 2015: 225). Article 4 of the GP states expressis verbis that the provisions of labour law do not, except for those enumerated (including the rules on working time standards, prohibition of discrimination), apply to graduate practices. However, the entity accepting the practice sets health and safety conditions for the trainee, ‘on the principles applicable to employees’ (Article 6 of the GP).

In contrast to ALMP traineeships, a graduate practice may be either paid or unpaid. If paid, the amount of the monthly financial benefit may not exceed twice the minimum wage. ²¹ It seems that the introduction of a minimum benefit guarantee would be more appropriate than a limitation (Drabek, 2013: 149). The legislator does not specify the consequences of exceeding the limit on the amount of benefit due. These can be found in the regulations of civil law ²² (given that the graduate practice contract is a civil law contract). However, there is no unified position on the consequences. According to one viewpoint, the provision ²³ or the entire legal act ²⁴ would thus be made invalid (Skąpski, 2015: 233). According to another viewpoint, the benefit, rather than the limit, would then be undue, so that the person accepting the practice would be entitled to a claim for unjust enrichment (Nycz, 2020: 81). It is also possible to conclude that, under the guise of practice, work is provided under conditions justifying the conclusion of an employment contract (Drabek, 2103: 150).

The graduate practice contract constitutes a non-permanent legal relationship. If the practice is unpaid, it may be terminated at any time; in the case of a paid practice, a seven-day notice period applies.

Regardless of whether the practice is paid or unpaid, individuals undertaking it are deprived of social protection in the area of social security and health insurance (Antonów, 2015: 710). Regarding health insurance, one possible solution for a trainee is to register with the employment office as unemployed (provided they are not insured under another status: e.g. as a student). ²⁵ They will then be covered by health insurance under Article 66(1)(24) of the PHCS. Importantly, Article 64 of the LMES emphasises that participation in a graduate practice does not prevent someone from acquiring or maintaining unemployed status.

A trainee who is registered as unemployed may also become entitled to unemployment benefits, provided the conditions set out in Article 238 LMES are met. In such a case, the person will be covered by mandatory pension and disability insurance. ²⁶ However, if the practice is paid and their remuneration exceeds half of the minimum wage, the trainee has no right to unemployment benefits. Nevertheless, once the graduate practice ends and the individual is no longer receiving the aforementioned remuneration, they may become entitled to unemployment benefits. It is worth noting, however, that individuals undertaking graduate practices are typically young people who, in most cases, will not qualify for unemployment benefits, as they lack the employment periods required. ²⁷

The legislator thus creates a situation in which an unemployed trainee is covered by only health insurance – yet not by virtue of the practice itself, but solely due to his/her status as unemployed. In my opinion, this solution is at odds with the very definition of an unemployed person – since the trainee is, in fact, performing work, while one of the key conditions for acquiring unemployed status is to not be performing work. Confirmation that the trainee performs work is, among others, given in Article 7 of the GP, which states that the entity accepting the practice, at the request of the trainee, is obliged to issue a written certificate regarding the type of work performed and the skills acquired during the practice.

Due to the lack of social insurance, the trainee is not covered by accident insurance. Even if an unemployed trainee is entitled to unemployment benefits, they are not covered by accident insurance. ²⁸ There is no doubt that the risk of an accident incurred when participating in graduate practices is similar to that incurred when performing work under an employment relationship. Based on Article 2(1)(15) of the Act of 30 October 2002, on Benefits for Accidents or Occupational Diseases Arising in Special Circumstances, ²⁹ if an accident occurs during a graduate practice, the trainee is entitled to benefits specified by the law (one-off compensation, disability pension). Instead of the risk of an accident at work, the concept of the risk of an accident ‘in special circumstances’ has been applied. While the risk of an accident at work is incurred by the employer, covered by accident insurance at the expense of those exposed to this risk, the accident ‘in special circumstances’ is a public risk based on the solidarity of society as a whole – protected through accident benefits at the expense of this community, i.e. the state budget (Jończyk, 2006: 17).

The regulation of social protection for trainees raises serious concerns, as trainees are deprived of basic rights in this area simply by the fact of undertaking a practice. The legislator allows graduate practices to be undertaken without remuneration, relieving the entities accepting trainees of any costs. The unpaid nature of graduate practices has repercussions on social security. The main goal of social insurance is to compensate for the loss of current income from work in the event of social risks. Therefore, when the essence of a given employment is different (lack of remuneration), the condition for applying the insurance legal structure is no longer met (Antonów, 2015: 732). Even if the practice is remunerated (which is rare, given that unpaid practices are legally allowable), the legislator did not decide to include the remuneration received by the trainee in the scope of social and health insurance. ³⁰ As a result, the period of the practice will not count towards work experience, which is crucial for various social security and labour law entitlements. The only possibility of partial social protection is for the trainee to obtain the status of unemployed, which would allow them to access health insurance and possibly unemployment benefits, provided they meet the criteria for entitlement. Given that graduate practices can be undertaken multiple times (although they must be carried out with different entities), the legislator creates a situation in which young people may have practical experience for performing a certain job but are excluded from social protection.

Traineeships that are an optional or mandatory part of academic and/or vocational curricula – no social protection related to the traineeship

Traineeships which are part of formal education constitute a complex and heterogeneous group. In the Polish legal system, they are primarily known as ‘practices’. Practices are an integral part of the programme in each field of study with a practical profile, while in the case of studies with a general academic profile, practices may be an integral part of the programme, provided they are included in the curriculum of these studies. As stated in Article 67(5) of the Act of 20 July 2018, the Law on Higher Education and Science, ³¹ the curriculum of practical study programmes includes professional practices lasting at least six months for first-degree and unified master's degree studies, and at least three months for second-degree studies. The legislator does not specify the basis on which practices take place, nor does it clarify whether students are entitled to remuneration during this time. Most commonly, this will involve an agreement between the university and the entity to which the student is directed, as well as a referral issued by the university. Based on Article 66(1)(20) of the PHCS, students (regardless of whether they are undertaking a practice) are obligatorily subject to health insurance unless they are covered under another status. However, they are not covered by social insurance. It cannot be ruled out, however, that, for example, a student will undertake a practice under an employment contract, which would result in them being covered by compulsory social insurance and health insurance on this account.

An example of a traineeship (a term explicitly used by the legislator) that can be included in this group is the ‘student traineeship’ regulated by the Act of 14 December 2016, the Education Law ³² (hereafter EL). According to Article 121a of this Act, in order to gain experience and acquire practical skills necessary to perform work in the profession for which they are studying, students of technical schools and first-degree vocational schools who are not young workers may, during their studies, complete a student traineeship in real working conditions. The student traineeship is carried out on the basis of a written agreement concluded by the entity accepting the traineeship with the student or the parents of an underage student. As in the case of graduate practices, the legislator does not specify the legal nature of this contract – however, it is not an employment contract, because the provisions of labour law, except for those enumerated ³³ (including selected working time regulations, prohibition of discrimination) do not apply to traineeships. The entity accepting a student traineeship provides the student with healthy and safe working conditions for the traineeship subject to the principles applicable to employees. Since the essence of student traineeship and graduate practice is similar, the student traineeship contract should be seen as a civil law contract. It may even seem that the legislator, in regulating the student traineeship contract, modelled itself to some extent on the regulation of the practice contract (Nycz, 2020: 73). A student traineeship agreement cannot be concluded for a period longer than the period of study at a technical school or a first-degree vocational school. Pursuant to Article 121a(6) EL, a student on a student traineeship receives a monthly cash benefit, unless the parties to the student traineeship agreement decide that the traineeship is unpaid (as with graduate practices, unpaid student traineeships are therefore permissible). In the case of a paid student traineeship, the amount of the benefit to which the trainee is entitled cannot exceed the minimum wage. A student traineeship does not imply a right to social insurance, but in the light of Article 121a(25) of the EL, the period of the student traineeship, on the basis of the certificate received, is included in the period of employment on which employee entitlements depend. Moreover, as stated in Article 7(13) of the Act of 17 December 1998 on Pensions and Disability Benefits, ³⁴ the period of a completed student traineeship is considered a non-contributory period – that is, a period for which there was no obligation to pay contributions, but which, for social reasons, is taken into account in the insurance record. Regarding accident insurance, similarly to graduate practices, participants in student traineeships are entitled to certain benefits under the Act on Benefits for Accidents or Occupational Diseases Arising in Special Circumstances. ³⁵ As regards health insurance, pursuant to Article 66(1)(17) of the PHCS, students (regardless of whether or not they are on a traineeship) are compulsorily subject to health insurance, unless they are covered by such insurance on another basis.

Compliance of the Polish model of social protection for trainees with current standards and planned changes in EU law

Under existing EU law, the document that refers entirely to traineeships is the Council Recommendation on a Quality Framework for Traineeships, recital 9 of which highlights the problem of lack of social security. Point 7 of the Recommendation encourages traineeship providers to specify whether they also offer health insurance and insurance against accidents at work and sick leave. The Recommendation allows traineeships to be unpaid (cf. point 8). The evaluation of the Recommendation carried out in 2023 by the European Commission (European Commission, 2023) found that it has had a positive impact on the quality of traineeships in the EU. Nevertheless, it can hardly be considered a document that provides an adequate standard of protection (including social protection) for trainees, firstly due to its non-binding nature, and secondly because of its limited scope – it covers only traineeships that are part of ALMP programmes and traineeships on the open labour market (cf. recital 28). The extent to which the Recommendation is taken into account in national law varies depending on the Member State – its provisions are followed more closely in national regulations on ALMP traineeships than in those regulating traineeships on the open labour market (European Commission, 2016: 4). The situation is similar in the Polish legal regulation of traineeships. While trainees completing ALMP traineeships are guaranteed social protection in line with principles similar to those of employees (although not fully so and linked to unemployed status), graduate practice trainees have no mandatory social insurance coverage – even if these placements are paid. The right to health insurance is linked to the possible acquisition of the status of unemployed (if the person in not entitled to such coverage by virtue of another status).

In connection with the ‘weak’ formulation of the Recommendation, as well as the unclear legal status of trainees – which has been pointed out in the literature for a long time (Rosin, 2016, 158) – the latest legislative trends in EU law should be viewed positively. There are currently two proposals tabled: the European Parliament proposal ³⁶ and the European Commission proposal ³⁷ (for an in-depth discussion, see Helme, 2024: 679–710).

The European Parliament proposal includes a draft directive and a decision. The directive would apply to traineeships on the open labour market, traineeships within ALMP and traineeships that are a mandatory part of vocational training. Traineeships would be based on fixed-term contracts, the legal nature of which is determined in Article 2(c) – they would be employment contracts providing remuneration in accordance with Directive 2022/2041 of the European Parliament and of the Council. ³⁸ Pursuant to Article 3(c), trainees would be provided with access to social protection in accordance with national systems, including health insurance, unemployment benefits and pension contributions. For the Polish legislator, this would mean the need to eliminate unpaid traineeships on the open labour market and to grant employee status to both open labour market trainees and those linked to ALMP.

The second document proposed in the European Parliament Resolution is a draft decision that would update and strengthen the 2014 Recommendation. Point 17 of the draft decision indicates that it would only cover trainees undertaking a traineeship in order to obtain educational qualifications – without granting them employee status. The draft decision significantly improves the situation of trainees to whom it would apply. First of all, it was decided that traineeship agreements should indicate appropriate remuneration provided to the trainee by the entity offering the traineeship (Article 2). With regard to the conditions of traineeships, Member States would be obliged to ensure social protection for trainees in accordance with applicable EU and national law. Trainees would be covered by at least health and accident insurance, as well as being entitled to sick leave (Article 4).

In response to the 2023 Resolution, the European Commission presented a proposal for a ‘Trainees Directive’ and a Recommendation on a Reinforced Quality Framework for Traineeships. The proposals presented by the Commission differ significantly from those in the European Parliament Resolution. Recital 16 of the draft directive emphasises that it would apply to trainees who are bound by an employment contract or employment relationship defined by law, collective agreements or practice in force in the Member States, taking into account the case law of the CJEU, which has established criteria for determining the status of worker. Traineeships are thus classified according to worker status and not according to their type (Helme, 2024: 706). Article 6 of the draft obliges Member States to take the necessary measures to ensure that all relevant provisions of EU law applicable to workers are fully implemented and enforced in relation to trainees, including by drawing up guidelines for employers of trainees on the legal framework for trainees, covering relevant aspects of labour law and social protection. Articles 4 and 5 of the draft directive oblige Member States to ensure effective mechanisms for detecting practices consisting in replacing regular employment relationships with trainees, through checks and inspections carried out by the competent authorities.

The proposal for a Council Recommendation on an enhanced Quality Framework for Traineeships extends the scope of the 2014 Recommendation to traineeships that are part of a formal education and training programme and traineeships that are compulsory for access to a specific profession. The enhanced Recommendation would apply to all trainees, regardless of their employment status, including trainees who are employees, only to the extent that EU law does not provide for equivalent or more favourable provisions. Its core is the recommendation to ensure fair remuneration for trainees, taking into account elements such as the trainee's tasks and responsibilities, the intensity of their work and the importance of the learning and training component. Although the Recommendation points out that traineeships are to be based on a written agreement (points 3 and 4), which should include, among other things, information on social protection, including sickness insurance and healthcare, as well as accidents at work and occupational diseases, the legal nature of this agreement is not predetermined – it certainly is not required to be an employment contract. In the area of social protection, important provisions are included in paragraph 16 of the draft Recommendation, according to which trainees should be guaranteed access to ‘adequate’ social protection, including the necessary level of protection in accordance with national law and, where applicable, taking into account the 2019 Council Recommendation on access to social protection for workers and the self-employed. ³⁹ Recital 17 of this Recommendation states that social protection is considered to be adequate when it allows individuals to uphold a decent standard of living, replace their income loss in a reasonable manner and live with dignity, and prevents them from falling into poverty while contributing, where appropriate, to activation and facilitating the return to work. When assessing adequacy, the Member State's social protection system as a whole needs to be taken into account, which means that all social protection benefits of a Member State need to be considered. In light of the current traineeship regulations in Poland, it is difficult to speak of ‘adequate’ social protection for the trainees to whom the Recommendation would apply (in principle, only ALMP traineeships guarantee ‘adequate’ access to social protection).

For the Polish legislator, this proposed Recommendation would mean, firstly, a need to do away with unpaid traineeships; given the proposal to apply the Recommendation to all types of traineeships, this could prove to be quite a challenge, due to conceptual confusion. However, it seems that it is not the name of the practice/ traineeship which determines whether or not the Recommendation applies, but rather the conditions attached to such placements (whether they correspond to the concept of traineeships as defined in the draft Recommendation). Even in the case of paid traineeships, such as ALMP traineeships, the remuneration to which interns are entitled would have to be compared with the recommendation on fair remuneration. The social protection guaranteed to trainees would require revision (Staszewska-Kozłowska: 28). The most extensive expansion of social protection would apply to those traineeships which, in Poland, do not currently provide such protection. These are primarily traineeships on the open labour market and educational traineeships. However, the draft Recommendation outlines the scope of social protection for trainees in rather general terms, explicitly referring in point 4, mentioned above, only to sickness insurance, health insurance and accident insurance.

The draft act on traineeships – a Polish legislative initiative in response to legislative trends in EU law

In September 2025, work began in Poland on a draft Act on Traineeships, ⁴⁰ aimed at regulating the organisation of traineeships offered in the open labour market to ensure their high quality, in line with the proposed EU Recommendation on a reinforced Quality Framework for Traineeships. The Act is intended to guarantee an appropriate educational and professional training component for trainees, protect their rights, eliminate unpaid traineeships, and minimise the risk of traineeships being used as a substitute for employment. The proposed legislation would also repeal the Act on GP. The Act will concern traineeships on the open labour market. Excluded from its scope will be traineeships that form part of formal education programmes, ALMP traineeships, and traineeships necessary to gain access to a regulated profession.

The main assumptions of the proposed solutions, compared to the current regulations, include an obligation for the traineeship organiser to provide a monthly financial benefit to trainees, at least equal to 35% of the average national wage. The proposed benefit will be lower than the minimum wage as the drafters argue that it reflects the lower intensity of work performed by trainees, the lower level of responsibility and the inclusion of an educational and training component. However, it is comparable to the grant provided to ALMP trainees.

Importantly, trainees on the open labour market would be covered by social protection. Trainees would be subject to social insurance on the same terms as individuals working under civil law contracts (contracts of mandate). This means they would be covered by pension, ⁴¹ disability, ⁴² accident, ⁴³ and health insurance, ⁴⁴ while sickness ⁴⁵ insurance would remain voluntary. ⁴⁶ However, it should be noted that, pursuant to Article 6(4) in connection with Article 6(1)(4) of the SSS Act, secondary school students or students up to the age of 26 are not subject to compulsory pension and disability insurance if they work on the basis of civil law contracts (contracts of mandate). Under Article 7 of the SSS, these persons are entitled to voluntary pension and disability insurance. However, this is not an advantageous solution, because persons insured under Article 7 pay contributions entirely at their own expense. ⁴⁷ Furthermore, according to Articles 11(2) and 12(2) of the SSS, persons voluntarily covered by pension and disability insurance are not covered by voluntary sickness insurance or compulsory accident insurance. The systemic deprivation of persons up to the age of 26 who are studying and performing work under contracts of mandate of the right to social protection in the event of sickness or an accident at work exhibits characteristics of discrimination. These persons are employed under the same conditions and are exposed to the same risks as their insured co-workers (Bigos, 2020: 63).

The period of receiving a financial benefit would be counted toward the period of employment required to acquire or retain employee rights, as well as toward contributory periods within the meaning of the provisions on pensions and disability benefits from the Social Insurance Fund.

The National Labour Inspectorate would be authorised to monitor the legality of traineeships. If the above draft were adopted by the Polish legislature, it would result in a significant improvement in the legal status of traineeships conducted on the open labour market.

Conclusions

An analysis of the Polish legal regulation of traineeships in terms of social protection of their participants reveals its extreme diversity and the inconsistency of the legislation.

There is no coherent framework defining which categories of traineeships ensure social protection. As a result, participants may either be entitled to full social protection or be entirely excluded from it. Even in the case of traineeships with similar objectives, there are differences in the standards of this protection. This is most evident in ALMP traineeships and graduate practices. In both cases, their aim is to acquire practical skills to perform work by including trainees in the work process. Trainees generally undertake these traineeships because they cannot find employment guaranteeing employee status, due to a lack of professional experience. Thus, the legislator guarantees full social protection to one group de facto at the state's expense, and deprives the other group – even if the traineeship is paid. In the case of traineeships on the open labour market, ALMP traineeships, but also, for example, student traineeships, the Polish legislator often refers to the situation of and standard for employees, for example, in relation to health and safety conditions, working time standards or the prohibition of discrimination. In the case of ALMP traineeships, even the obligations incumbent on trainees make it clear that the trainee is performing full-time work. However, the scope of social protection (but also employee rights, such as the right to days off) remains different.

In the case of traineeships, which in principle do not guarantee social protection, the legislator often tries to provide trainees with at least health insurance (e.g. through the status of unemployed) and the right to certain benefits under the Act on Accident Insurance, completely disregarding other kinds of insurance. As De Le Court rightly points out, it is not only work-related risks, such as accidents at work, that should be considered, but also risks that are seemingly less related to the protection needed by young people, such as old age. The evolution of pension regulations, requiring a longer working life to access a decent pension, means that young people should start building up pension contributions as soon as possible (De le Court, 2021: 270). The Polish legislator seems to have completely overlooked this, and what is more, disturbing trends in this regard can also be seen in the regulations on social protection for employment under civil law contracts (other than traineeships). In the case of, for example, a contract of mandate or other service provision contract (extremely popular in Poland as a cheaper alternative to an employment contract), secondary school students and students up to the age of 26 who perform work under these contracts are not covered by pension and disability insurance (Article 6(4) in connection with Article 6(1)(4) of the SSS). ⁴⁸

Another significant problem with the Polish legal regulations on traineeships is that entities accepting trainees may be exempted from bearing the costs (this is the situation with ALMP traineeships and graduate traineeships). In such cases, trainees may be exploited as free labour. In the case of ALMP traineeships, there are no age limits, ⁴⁹ which means that these traineeships are often taken up by older people (due to unemployment) who already have experience – it will therefore be work carried out under the guise of a traineeship, causing a ‘substitution’ effect. However, if the trainee acquires new knowledge and skills, the chances of him finding a job related to the traineeship programme and the new skills obtained (including their updating) will be increased. In addition, an unemployed person may be brought back onto the labour market, which is particularly important for the long-term unemployed. This seems to be confirmed by the high employment effectiveness rate of ALMP traineeships.

In conclusion, while the scope of protection provided to trainees may be a subject of consideration, it is nevertheless necessary to guarantee a certain immutable standard when participants in given traineeships are in a comparable situation (also in terms of subordination) – as in the case of ALMP and open labour market traineeships. It is therefore necessary to attempt to establish a model of social protection for participants in traineeships, in which they are included in the work process and are subject to the same influences of the work environment as employees – which should, with regard to future law, be brought to the attention of the legislator. Actions taken at the EU level (regardless of the final shape and legal formula) should become an impetus for the revision of existing regulations – especially regarding remuneration for traineeships and the related social protection of trainees (Staszewska-Kozłowska, 29). The Polish legislator has already taken the first steps by initiating work on the draft Act on Traineeships which, if adopted, would significantly improve the status of trainees on the open labour market by guaranteeing financial benefits and social protection. It therefore remains to be seen whether trainees will ultimately be granted a proper legal status, both under EU law and within the national legal systems of the Member States.