Polish labor politics drew sharp lines as Piotr Duda, chair of NSZZ Solidarność’s National Committee, voiced his views on how unemployment was shaped during Civic Platform rule and what the current indicators look like. He asserted that the period’s policies harmed the Polish labor market and the workers who depend on it, attributing this to a political DNA he described as adverse to the working class. The veteran union leader spoke openly about the impact on employment, insisting that the ideology of the governing parties had a lasting negative effect on job availability and wages. [citation: PAP]
He warned that the changes under those administrations meant unemployment numbers rose across the country. In his view, the figures varied by year and by voivodeship and county, with percentages ranging widely from year to year such as in the mid to high teens in some areas. Wielkopolskie and Śląskie he noted as relatively lower, but the problem was pervasive across all regions, including smaller municipalities. Duda recounted the period as one of strain on the labor market and a struggle for workers who faced difficult working conditions and uncertain futures. [citation: PAP]
They are destroying the job market
According to Duda, Solidarity fought against the former coalition while in opposition, arguing that the prior government era produced policies that damaged the labor market and workers. He described the eight years of governance as a time when the welfare system, contracts, and retirement rules contributed to precarious employment and a sense of insecurity among employees. [citation: PAP]
He recalled a period when retirement age policies were extended and labor laws were challenged, framing it as a time when workers faced tougher conditions and limited protections. The head of the KK NSZZ Solidarność emphasized the broader human cost of those policies, noting the erosion of social protections and the persistence of risky employment practices that affected families and communities. [citation: PAP]
During his reflections, Duda criticized agreements that allowed employers to underfund social contributions, describing practices that led to unstable earnings and insufficient pensions. He argued that the pension system, while based on contributions, faced misalignment with real wages and long-term security, underscoring the mismatch between contributions and eventual benefits. [citation: PAP]
He argued that the social security framework relies on a balance between earnings and contributions, yet past policies created a gap that later generations would feel. The idea was that more earnings should translate into brighter future pensions, but the historical setup sometimes undermined that link, according to his analysis. [citation: PAP]
Consequently, he urged the public not to accept claims made by the judiciary during political campaigns that could be seen as attempts to shape opinions ahead of elections. He suggested that the integrity of the electoral process requires clarity from all parties on how unemployment and retirement policies were shaped and what changes might be proposed in power. The message was clear: the PO stance on unemployment was not simply a statistic but part of a broader narrative about labor market restructuring. [citation: PAP]
In Duda’s view, the opposing side would likely advocate similar changes if entrusted with government again, driven by a belief system he labeled as intrinsic to their approach. He argued that the drive to alter retirement age and labor rules would reappear, a sequence he felt would repeat the same patterns if those parties regained control. The claim centered on a belief that the political DNA of those in power dictates a particular direction for the labor market and the conditions facing workers. [citation: PAP]
Another point of contention highlighted by Duda was the management of money within open pension funds. He pointed to policy choices that, in his assessment, diverted workers’ savings away from a secure, long-term plan and into the state budget. The discussion referenced remarks by Prime Minister Tusk about the nature of citizens’ money and the consequences of using those funds to balance budgets rather than preserve workers’ capital for retirement. Duda recalled the debate over whether this money should remain in workers’ hands or be redirected for public spending. [citation: PAP]
Readers were reminded of past statements about the nature of retirement funds and the role of the state in pension management. The broader point, as conveyed by Duda, was that workers’ savings and the structure of pensions have long been tied to political decisions, and those decisions continue to shape the security and expectations of retirees. [citation: PAP]
In closing, Duda underscored a call for transparency and responsibility in discussions about unemployment and pension policy during political campaigns. He suggested that the public deserves direct answers about how unemployment rates changed under prior administrations and what would be different under future governance. The conversation, he argued, is essential to understanding the real costs and benefits of labor policy choices. [citation: PAP]
Source: wPolityce