Signalist, or architecture (not)trust. What are the Polish notification procedures?

With Michał Jarosławski, the author of reports on the situation of signalers in Poland, we talk about the collision of assumptions with our practice, common distrust, “Oazs of trust” and perspectives.

Margaret Jankowska: June 23rd we celebrate International Signalling Day, and on 14 June the second anniversary of the adoption of the Polish Act on the Protection of Signallers passed. This is the perfect time for a balance sheet.

As part of the European WAKE-UP project, you have carried out a complex qualitative survey of the current situation. He appeared prepared by you "Polish National study on the Protection of Signallers in Poland". A study on socio-cultural perception studies will shortly be published. You did all the interviews and analyses yourself. From the position of the researcher, what was the collision with the practice of Polish institutions?

Michał Jarosławski: It was, rather simply, a powerful methodological challenge. I conducted a full of 21 in-depth interviews, talking to auditors, worker council members, lawyers and activists. But in order to scope these 21 people, I had to make many attempts to make contact, telephone and email, which most frequently ended in failure.

→ Why does nobody want to be a signaler in Poland? Balls of investigation you won't read in the journals •Michał Jarosławski

But the most interesting thing is why I was refused. The institutions claimed that since they had not received a single application since the entry into force of the Act in June 2024, they had nothing to talk about with me at all, due to the fact that the strategy had not yet worked. This common, diagnosed in the study "a deaf silence" became the starting point for my further analysis.

I rapidly realized that the deficiency of reports in boxes does not mean that there is no corruption in Poland or mobbing. It just means that people are afraid to usage these boxes.

In “National Report” you compose about “technological regression” in public administration and at universities. It sounds almost anachronistic in the age of artificial intelligence. How does that work?

And this is 1 of those flavors that exposes our Polish deficiency of trust. It would seem that offices or universities will support the implementation of modern, encrypted IT platforms. Meanwhile, my investigation shows that any of these institutions have deliberately fled into completely analog solutions.

Hard and without anesthesia

– this is how we have been operating since 2020. Journalism that is not indifferent. The civilian Affairs Weekly announces abuse, educates and gives tools for a real, civic change.

Donate and become our contributor

Why? Out of pure fear of surveillance from their own IT departments.

Auditors and attorneys feared that the corporate network admin would track down the IP address of the individual who sent an uncomfortable study in 5 minutes.

Therefore, old, proven methods have been returned – at universities, papers land in physical armored cabinets, and in city offices, the procedures of the "double envelope" are ruled by an anonymous envelope placed in the second envelope to bypass the main circulation of papers and the prying looks of colleagues from the office.

The second paper prepared by you – “Report on Socio-cultural Perception Research” – reveals our mentality. The experts you've been talking to are very strong. They argue, for example, that the fresh law is simply a ‘Law-Trap’ and compare it to a ‘fish net with enlarged meshes’ that only catches authoritative hurdles and passes through thick, corrupt fish. But isn't that besides extremist and one-sided?

Of course you should look at it wider. The experts I spoke to are indeed ruthless in their assessments. However, it should be remembered that this legislative opposition and caution of the legislators did not gotta come from bad will or political conspiracy. In Poland, we simply did not have specified mechanisms before. Both institutions and business are learning them. Therefore, in my opinion, it is good that the bill yet appeared in the Polish legal order.

As far as employers are concerned, they are defending themselves against very real risks. In tiny communities or very competitive teams, there is simply a phenomenon that my interlocutors called a “signalist-cameleon”

– is simply a individual who can instrumentally usage the notification procedure to destruct intra-company competition or within a individual vendetta. Employers are afraid of false accusations that can ruin a reputation built in years of company in 1 day. This dualism – on the 1 hand, a individual who fears the failure of money for life, on the another hand, a board that fears speech – creates an environment sometimes paralyzing mistrust.

→ Polish employers don't give a crap about signaling reports •Joanna Kochaj-Dyrda, Max Fojtuch

Speaking of distrust. Reports emphasize the historical burden of the word "signalist" in Poland. You usage expressions specified as “tribal loyalty” or “syndrom pack”.

It is the largest barrier to the implementation of the EU paradigm in Poland. The European model assumes that reporting pathology is an act of civic concern. In our country, with the baggage of the Polish People's Republic and partitions, going ahead is inactive frequently a betrayal of the herd, a breach of " tribal loyalty" towards colleagues from the change.

In common language, the signaler is inactive Informer, snitch and impounder.

There is simply a tragic taste. 1 of NGO's urban progressive organizations, wanting to print a guide on citizen reporting of irregularities, called it directly... "Confidential Guide". Our language is so steeped in this stigma that we deficiency affirmative terms for legism.

In interviews with employees' rights defenders, you besides uncover the instrumental usage by employers of the Criminal Code – the celebrated article 212 on defamation. The bill was expected to give a protective umbrella in the form of a reversed burden of proof [if the whistleblower experiences negative consequences at work, it is the employer's work to prove that they did not consequence from signaling and nonsubjective reasons – ed.]. Why isn't it working?

Because the reversed burden of proof is about dramatic failure of the Polish justice system. My interviewers study that work court cases can go on for 5 to 8 years. A specified citizen, with no wages and no credit, simply can't stand it financially and mentally. Although there are organizations that effort to soften conflicts inside, putting on soft mediation, but in a collision with a large corporate legal machine, the fired worker remains in a pre-lost position.

Where, then, is hope? During your research, did you find a place where the strategy simply works and performs its function?

Yeah, and here's another paradox. The best “oases of trust” were international, abroad corporations in Poland. They completely abandoned the stigmatizing word "signalist", replacing them with, for example, the word "Code of Ethics". The worker doesn't report, he just takes care of the company's common profitability.

But the key to their success is the alleged Green Line system. Applications from Polish production halls or offices bypass entirely local, Polish management and go straight to the office – e.g. in Frankfurt or the USA.

The Polish worker trusts external, abroad auditors much more, knowing that they are not active in local arrangements and dudery.

→ Who is protected by the Signalling Protection Act? •Jakub Romanowski, Rafał Górski

Finally, look to the future. We're in 2026. The legislator, as planned, should shortly carry out a comprehensive Impact Assessment (OSR) ex post, i.e. the government's evaluation of the operation of these provisions 2 years after their entry into force. What conclusions would you anticipate from this evaluation?

First of all, as I mentioned earlier, I am glad that this bill has yet come to light. It took a while.

I'm hoping the government's OSR will diagnose what I heard downstairs from people. Firstly, restoring the right to work to the statutory catalogue of applications. This would seem to unlock the engagement of trade unions and aid educate millions of workers. Secondly, the statutory order for substantive submissions of credible anonymous applications.

In tiny towns and municipalities, without full guarantees of anonymity, no 1 will hazard their family's career and safety.

These are the foundations. The remainder is simply a long-term pop culture education, so that in a decade we do not treat the defender of the common good as a "confident" from the times rightly passed.

The authoritative position of the Institute of civilian Affairs addressed to the government decision-makers, including Agnieszka Dziemianowicz-Bąk, Minister of Family, Labour and Social Policy, will surely be the consequence of the findings I made on both reports. During the consultations that await us on the occasion of the revision of the Polish Act on the Protection of Signallers, which is to take place this year, the Institute will definitely speak.

Your analysis has been created as part of the WAKE-UP project. What's it about?

WAKE-UP, or Whistleblower Advocate for Knowledge, Empowerment, Unity, and Protection, is an global European task investigating signal protection systems in 5 EU countries: Italy, Latvia, Romania, Estonia and Poland.

The Polish part of this research, which I had the pleasance of carrying out on behalf of the Institute of civilian Affairs, a Polish partner of the task consortium, was based on conducting qualitative interviews in depth with auditors, application agents, trade unions and experts.

The main nonsubjective was to identify the implementation gap between the letter of law created by the EU Directive, the Polish Act on the Protection of Signallers and our regular organisational practice.

I gotta say, this task gives me an highly large satisfaction. Until now, I have not had the chance to cooperate in the implementation of EU projects with abroad partners. WAKE-UP teaches me a lot, allows me to practically continuously grow cognition and skills on many levels.

After us first, meeting of members of the global task team Romania. We conduct cyclical distant meetings where we study on progress. The next stages of the task will include training from effective implementation of mechanisms related to the Polish Act on the Protection of Signallers.

Certainly the biggest challenge for us, as a Polish partner, will be to prepare and hold a large global conference in 2027, which will sum up the task and the proposals developed during implementation. This will surely be a very crucial and simply crucial event in the European Union for signaling.

The most interesting thing about this task is getting to know people, interacting, exchanging views and opinions, different views on the same subject. This is highly developing for me.

Thank you for talking to me. We encourage all readers to read "Polish National study on the Protection of Signallers in Poland". shortly we will present the full conclusions of the "Report on Social and Cultural Perception Research".