The ban on discrimination in the workplace in Poland is being more and more effectively enforced. As employers adapt to new requirements, they must remember that legislation applies to the recruitment process as well.

For several years discrimination in the form of harassment in the work place has been a hot topic in the legal world, employment tribunals and the media. Even the majority of lawyers, however, are still unaware that anti-discrimination laws also cover job offers appearing in the press or on the internet.

When putting together an advertisement, employers have to decide on a job title and job description as well as what they are looking for in a candidate. However, if the requirements and conditions they expect employees to meet rule out certain candidates on grounds such as gender, race or religious beliefs, they could be considered a form of discrimination.
 Discrimination is prohibited under international and EU law and in Poland is covering employment. The ban on discrimination aims to ensure that employment is carried out on the principle that everyone is equal before the law and should be treated in the same manner as other employees in comparable circumstances.

Anti-discrimination legislation was introduced to the Polish legal system in November 2000, establishing a general framework of conditions for equal treatment in the work place. This was followed by a directive in September 2002, which stipulates equal treatment for men and women when applying for job, during professional training and when they are promoted. EU regulations also prohibit discrimination prior to employment, which covers employees during the recruitment process.

The criteria for discrimination is open to interpretation with employment regulations differing only in terms of the reason why a person is being discriminated against, such as sex, age, disability, race, religion, nationality, political views, memberships of a union, ethnic background, religious beliefs or sexual orientation. All  form of discrimination are prohibited even those which are not directly referred to in the legal code. Other examples of grounds for discrimination include physical appearance, marital status or certain character traits. The most common reasons for discrimination are age and sex. It's therefore important that employers are aware of what could potentially be interpreted as discrimination when advertising a position in the media.
 Sexual discrimination covers cases when an employer is looking exclusively for male or female candidates. However, if candidates of one gender are required due to the nature of the job, it is not considerer to be discrimination. For example if doing the job could be damaging to a woman's health.

The suspicion of discrimination can also arise in veiled insinuations that an employer would prefer an employee of a certain gender. In Poland examples of this include using gender-specific job titles or listing requirements which could only be met by candidates of one sex.
 This is not to say that using gender-specific job titles is automatically discrimination - as using the male form of positions like engineer or accountant does not necessarily mean that an employer has ruled out employing a woman. This issue is becoming more important for human resources departments who are increasingly choosing to refer to candidates in job advertisements using words which are either not gender specific or including both the male and female version.

Age discrimination is also problem, with some employers accused of choosing candidates on their birth certificate and their ability to do a certain job. Using phrases such as "candidates should be 30-40 years old" in a job advertisement is certainly discrimination. Under EU, the use of number of other phrases is also prohibited. They include "young", "dynamic", "energetic", "with at least ten years experience", "mature" and "the candidate must have completed their studies a maximum of five years ago".

Anti-discrimination legislation therefore covers candidates at both ends of the age spectrum. Discriminating against potential employees on the grounds of disability is also relatively common.

This form of discrimination is evident in advertisements that list requirements which could only be met by someone who is not disabled. There have also been examples of positive discrimination towards disabled people. An employer who wants to employ a disabled person for tax reasons is in reality discriminating against non-disabled candidates. The situation is far from clear-cut as tax rebates granted to employers hiring disabled people do not sanction them to look exclusively for disabled candidates.

For many jobs in Poland candidates are asked to meet two other criteria - a clean criminal record and meeting obligations to the armed forces, either by having completed military service or receiving an official exemption. These conditions, through, are sometimes a requirement due to the nature of the job, and are a legitimate requirement for people working in security or positions of public trust.

References to a candidate's lifestyle or personal life can also be considered discriminatory. Sometimes job advertisements state that a condition of employment is living in a certain place or owning your own car. Saying that the job requires availability could also be interpreted as indirect discrimination.

References to education and personal characteristics are also controversial. take the example of an employer who requires that a candidates has a higher education when in reality they would not need to have a higher education to carry out the job. Whether this is discrimination or whether it remains within the bounds or reasonable expectations on the part of employers in debatable. If an employers states that they are looking for a lawyer who has graduated from a state university, could lawyers trained in private institutions feel discriminated against?

Character traits or physical assets is also a grey area. If an employer demands that a candidate is "well presented", "looks good" or "has a sense of humor", this is a question of taste and it will always be difficult to verify whether an employer has crossed the line of discrimination.

Employers are safe from accusations of discrimination as long as the requirements they list in job advertisements are based on the nature of the job. Employers looking for a miner or a chef in a Chinese restaurant are not being discriminatory if they specify gender or nationality.