Demanding Employee

The Well Poisoner in the Team: More Than Just a Bad Mood

This story is not unique. The impact of toxic behaviour is not just emotional; it has very specific and measurable financial consequences. A Harvard Business School study showed that nearly half of employees exposed to uncivil behaviour reduce their work effort, and 38% intentionally decrease the quality of their work.

It's not just about a drop in productivity. Employee turnover increases, along with the associated costs of recruiting and training new people. A 2024 survey by the Grafton Recruitment agency for the Czech Republic confirmed that workplace relationships and a supervisor's personality are among the key reasons for employees leaving. The cost of replacing a quality employee can reach a significant amount (statistics indicate six to nine months' salary).

Inaction and hoping the situation will resolve itself is the riskiest strategy for a company. Ignoring the problem leads to the departure of key and high-performing people who do not want to work in a toxic environment. Furthermore, unresolved conflicts can escalate into bullying (mobbing or bossing), for which the employer bears legal liability. 

Two Key Sections You Need to Know

The Labour Code does not recognise grounds for dismissal such as "disrupting the team" or "passive aggression." An employee's behaviour must always be correctly legally classified and subsumed under one of the exhaustively listed grounds in Section 52 of the Labour Code. Any mix-up or inaccuracy can lead to the invalidity of the entire dismissal.

Path No. 1: Breach of Employee's Obligations (Section 52(g) of the Labour Code)

This path is relevant if the employee's behaviour can be described as a culpable breach of a specific obligation. The Labour Code in Section 301(a) explicitly imposes on employees the duty to "cooperate with other employees." According to established interpretation, a breach of this duty includes, for example, deliberately obstructing teamwork, ignoring colleagues, verbal attacks, or bullying.

To apply this ground for dismissal, it is crucial to prove the employee's fault, at least in the form of negligence. For cases of "silent disruptors," the most relevant category is a systematic, less serious breach of obligations. According to established case law, a systematic breach generally involves at least three breaches that are reasonably close in time.

Based on this procedure, a dismissal can be based on the provisions of Section 52(g) of the Labour Code, i.e., a systematic, less serious breach of obligations arising from the employment relationship. Typically, this will involve a breach of the duty to cooperate in the workplace under Section 301(a) and (d) of the Labour Code, or an infringement of the employer's legitimate interests. Consistent documentation is key – remedial notices, records from performance reviews, witness statements from colleagues, and the measurable impact on the team. 

As an employer, you must prove that you have set clear rules, given the employee an opportunity to improve, and that their continued employment has a negative impact on the company's operations. It is essential to build an evidentiary framework that will stand up in a potential court dispute – i.e., not to base the dismissal on feelings or subjective assessments, but on specific actions, evidence, and consequences. In this way, even an "untouchable" employee's employment can be terminated legally, transparently, and without unnecessary risks.

Path No. 2: Failure to Meet the Requirements for Proper Performance of Work (Section 52(f) of the Labour Code)

This ground for dismissal is used in situations where the employee's behaviour is not a direct breach of a regulation, but rather their inability, incapacity, or irresponsible approach.

Under Section 52(f) of the Labour Code, this procedure can be used if, despite formally completing tasks, the employee objectively fails to achieve the expected results – for example, because their behaviour demotivates others, disrupts communication flows, and worsens the performance of the team as a whole. Fault is not required for this ground; what is essential is an objective finding that the employee simply does not meet the set requirements.

It is necessary to distinguish between "prerequisites" (set by law, e.g., a driver's license) and "requirements," which are set by the employer. These can include, for example, the ability to work effectively in a team, communicate constructively, or represent the company in a certain way (cf. Supreme Court judgment file no. 21 Cdo 3366/2022 of 21 December 2023).

This is precisely where the behaviour of a toxic employee can fall, who, while formally fulfilling their tasks, their passive aggression and unwillingness to cooperate are in stark contrast to the legitimate requirements for the job position.

The correct legal classification of an employee's behaviour is absolutely crucial and often decides the success or failure of any potential dispute. The lawyers at ARROWS have extensive experience in assessing these borderline situations, and as part of a legal opinion, our Czech legal team will help you choose the correct and legally defensible strategy.

From Warning to Dismissal: A Legally Bulletproof Step-by-Step Procedure

The foundation of success is precise and consistent documentation. In a potential court dispute over the invalidity of a dismissal, the burden of proof lies entirely with the employer. This means that as an employer, you must prove that the ground for dismissal actually existed and was fulfilled. A manager's subjective impressions are not enough.

The documentation must be specific, objective, and factually defined in such a way that the described conduct cannot be confused with any other. General phrases like "unwillingness to cooperate" are therefore insufficient; it is necessary to state specific dates, situations, witnesses, and the impact on the team or project.

Tool for Path No. 1 (Section 52(g)): The "Warning Letter" - Notice of Breach of Obligations

Its purpose is to give the employee written notice of a less serious breach of obligations and of the possibility of dismissal if the behaviour is repeated. The warning letter must contain a precise description of the factual events (what, when, and how it happened), a reference to the breached obligation (e.g., Section 301 of the Labour Code or a specific article of the work rules), and an explicit warning about the possibility of dismissal. 

For a dismissal for systematic breach, a warning must be delivered within the last 6 months, and there must be at least three documented breaches.

Tool for Path No. 2 (Section 52(f)): "Call to Remedy Deficiencies"

This document serves to give the employee a written call to remedy their unsatisfactory work results, which may also consist of a lack of soft skills, such as an inability to work in a team, an inability to communicate constructively with the team, or demotivating colleagues.

It is advisable to support these criticisms with specific, measurable values of performance decline or other negative impacts on team performance. The call must also specifically describe in what way the results are unsatisfactory, how you envision the remedy, and set a reasonable deadline for achieving it.

The call must be delivered to the employee within the last 12 months before any potential dismissal. All these documents must be delivered to the employee personally, ideally at the workplace. If the employee refuses to accept them, a record must be made in the presence of witnesses; the refusal does not affect the validity of the delivery.

Uncertainty in drafting these documents is the most common cause of lost labour law disputes. At ARROWS, we will not only prepare all the necessary documentation to protect you from the risk of invalidity and penalties, but we will also help you create internal regulations (e.g., work rules or a code of ethics) that clearly define expected behaviour and obligations. This will significantly strengthen your position.

Before You Resort to Dismissal: Alternative Solutions and Prevention

Dismissal is a last resort. The Labour Code also offers other tools that may be more effective and less confrontational in some situations. At the same time, it is crucial to think about prevention, which is always cheaper than dealing with the consequences.

The Role of Internal Rules: Prevention is the Best Medicine

Clearly defined rules of conduct in the work rules or a code of ethics make it much easier to prove a breach of obligations. By explicitly defining expectations regarding communication, cooperation, and conflict resolution in an internal directive, you transform unwritten rules into enforceable obligations. It is on the basis of these documents that you can then build a strong argument for a warning letter or dismissal.

Training as an Investment in a Healthy Workplace

Training for managers in conflict resolution, assertive communication, and labour law gives supervisors the tools to address problems in a timely and correct manner. On the other hand, training for employees, for example in non-violent communication methods, can improve the overall company culture and prevent the creation of a toxic environment.

At ARROWS, we provide not only reactive legal assistance but also proactive solutions. We offer expert training for employees and management, tailored to your company, to help you build a resilient corporate culture. Our legal consultations allow you to address problems in their infancy, before they escalate into a costly dispute.

Certainty in an Uncertain Situation: How to Avoid a Lawsuit

The risks associated with an invalid dismissal are significant. If a court rules in favour of the employee, the employer is obliged to pay them compensation for wages for the entire duration of the dispute, which can be years. To this must be added the costs of legal representation and damage to the company's reputation. 

Specific, objective, and verifiable evidence must be presented in court. Key evidence includes email communication, witness statements from colleagues, records from project systems, minutes from meetings, and, above all, formally correct and timely delivered warning letters and calls for remedy.

A lawsuit is always uncertain and costly. Our goal is to prepare the entire process so precisely that it doesn't have to happen at all. However, if a dispute does arise, our experience in representing clients before courts and administrative authorities gives you the maximum chance of success. We know what evidence courts require and how to build an argument that will stand up.

Overview of Risks and Solutions When Dealing with a Problematic Employee

Protect Your Team and Your Business – Act with Confidence

Solving the problem of a toxic employee is not about emotions, but about strategy and a precise legal procedure. The key to success is the correct identification of the problem (breach of obligations vs. failure to meet requirements), consistent and specific documentation, and adherence to all formal steps. The Labour Code gives you the tools to defend yourself, and you should not be afraid to use them.

If you are dealing with a similar situation in your team, do not risk mistakes that can cost you time, money, and reputation. We will help you with analysing the situation, preparing all the documentation that will protect you from fines and penalties, setting up internal rules, and, if necessary, representing you in court.