Dispute between the authorities of Dino Polska and trade unionists from OPZZ Confederation of Labor enters the mediation stage – writes portalspozywczy.pl. The union declares its readiness to talk and is waiting for the employer’s position, at the same time emphasizing that failure to reach an agreement may lead to a strike.
Dispute in Dino. Mediations with trade unionists are starting
The trade unionists provided the mediator appointed by the Ministry of Family, Labor and Social Policy with information about their readiness to conduct negotiations at any possible time, and also presented their main demands towards the employer. They demand salary increases of PLN 900 for employeesestablishing the Company Social Benefits Fund and increasing employment.
“Agreement or strike! We are on full alert!” – we read in a post posted on Facebook.
Trade unionists also point to staffing problems in some stores. According to information provided in some institutions employment contracts are not extended to reduce costswdespite staff shortages.
In recent weeks, the union has also received signals regarding bvery low temperatures in stores. The case was reported to the National Labor Inspectorate, which since the beginning of January 2026 has carried out 140 inspections at selected Dino facilities throughout Poland.
-
Bratislava is putting pressure on Brussels. Robert Fico wants Russian oil
-
War hits world markets. A possible spike in inflation and a decline in economic growth
The conflict has been going on for months. Trade unionists point to monitoring and working conditions
The dispute between OPZZ Confederation of Labor and the management board of Dino Polska has been going on for several months. Trade unionists accuse the company of being unwilling to enter into a dialogue on remuneration. According to them, previous attempts to contact the management board were unsuccessful.
One of the points of contention was the method of using video monitoring in stores. As we wrote in Interia Biznes, on February 24, the organization reported signals from employees that the cameras were to be used not only to ensure safety or property protection, but also to constantly monitor the pace and quality of work.
Some facilities were also supposed to receive surveillance photos with comments indicating, among others, that: a given shelf is insufficiently stocked or that the goods were not displayed quickly enough. According to the union, such practices may raise “serious legal doubts.”
The organization reminds that in accordance with Art. 22 of the Labor Code, video monitoring may only be used for specific purposes, such as: ensuring employee safety, property protection, production control or keeping secret information that may expose the employer to damage. However, it should not be used to assess the employee’s progress on an ongoing basis, to verify the pace of performance of duties or to constantly control the quality of work.
