ATTENTION – THIS IS AN AUTOMATIC TRANSLATION from Polish
In its judgment of February 10, 2026 (VII P 405/23), the Lublin-Zachód District Court in Lublin resolved a dispute concerning a violation of the principle of equal treatment in employment at a medical facility. The case concerned a midwife who claimed compensation, citing unequal remuneration compared to other midwives employed at the same hospital. The court dismissed the claim, finding that the differences in remuneration were justified and resulted from objective criteria related to professional qualifications and the scope of work actually performed.
One of the key elements of the ruling was a reminder that the principle of equal treatment in employment does not automatically mean equal remuneration for all employees in similar positions. For a violation of this principle to be considered, it is necessary to demonstrate that the employees perform the same work or work of equal value. This assessment requires an analysis not only of the position title, but above all, of the actual scope of duties, level of responsibility, effort, and qualifications required to perform the work.
In the case at hand, the diversity of professional qualifications among the staff was significant. Midwives with master’s degrees and specializations were not only remunerated according to the higher remuneration ratio required by law, but were also more frequently involved in additional tasks beyond basic patient care.
These duties included, among others, organizational and educational activities, and participation in developing procedures and standards for the department’s operations. In the Court’s opinion, this translated into both greater responsibility and a broader scope of work actually performed.
The judgment serves as an important reminder that the principle of equal opportunities in employment does not eliminate the possibility of differentiating remuneration if it is based on objective and rational criteria. In the healthcare sector, the level of education, specialization, and willingness to undertake additional organizational and substantive responsibilities are particularly important in this regard.
The judgment also emphasizes the importance of continuous professional development by medical personnel. In the realities of the modern healthcare system, the level of education and specialized knowledge are not only an element of professional development, but also a significant factor influencing employment conditions and remuneration.