Defending Against Bullying and Discrimination Allegations Under 2026 Law
An allegation of bullying or discrimination is a major legal and managerial challenge for any employer. This article provides an overview of obligations under the 2026 legislation and procedures for defending against unfounded accusations. You will learn what steps to take, what risks arise from mishandling the situation, and how to secure expert legal assistance to minimise exposure.
Article contents
Quick summary
Allegations of bullying and discrimination are among the most serious legal risks faced by modern employers. The employer is responsible for ensuring equal treatment and a safe working environment.
Ignoring suspicions or mishandling complaints may lead to fines of up to CZK 1,000,000 imposed by the State Labour Inspection Office (Státní úřad inspekce práce) and, in the event of a breach of the Whistleblower Protection Act, to additional sanctions.
There is also the risk of court disputes with substantial financial claims for adequate satisfaction, compensation for non-pecuniary harm, and lasting damage to the company’s reputation. The lawyers at ARROWS advokátní kancelář have long-standing experience defending employers in these situations and can help you avoid legal pitfalls and minimise risks.
Legal framework for protecting employees against bullying and discrimination
The employer must first understand the legal context in which it operates. Czech legislation protects employees very strictly. The basic legal framework stems from the constitutional order, in particular the Charter of Fundamental Rights and Freedoms.
The Labour Code enshrines the fundamental principle of equal treatment of all employees and the prohibition of discrimination, which applies both when determining working conditions and remuneration. An important role is also played by the Whistleblower Protection Act, which requires employers to implement an internal reporting system and protect whistleblowers reporting unlawful conduct against retaliatory measures.
For employers, it is critical to understand that bullying is not merely an interpersonal problem, but a breach of a statutory duty to actively protect employees and ensure a safe working environment.
Definitions of discrimination and bullying
Distinguishing between discrimination and bullying is important in practice because each has different legal consequences, although they often overlap.
- Direct discrimination is conduct where someone is treated less favourably than another person would be treated in a comparable situation on grounds such as race, sex, or age.
- Indirect discrimination is an apparently neutral provision or practice that, in substance, disadvantages a particular group of persons.
- Harassment is behaviour that is reasonably perceived by the affected person as unwelcome and is aimed at undermining the person’s dignity.
- Sexual harassment is any form of unwanted conduct of a sexual nature that has the purpose or effect of interfering with a person’s dignity.
- Victimisation is adverse treatment following after a victim of discrimination has decided to assert their rights.
Employer liability
The key rule is that the employer is responsible for ensuring that discrimination does not occur in its workplace. This liability is, in many respects, strict. If discrimination has occurred, the employer can hardly avoid liability merely by claiming that it did not know about it.
If bullying is committed by rank-and-file employees and the employer knew about it and failed to intervene, the employer is liable for the resulting non-pecuniary harm as well as damage. From a defence perspective, it is therefore critical to prove that the employer took all reasonable steps to prevent it.
Employer obligations when bullying is suspected
As soon as an employer becomes aware of suspected bullying or discrimination, it enters a legally regulated process. The law and court case law infer specific procedures that must be followed.
Obligation to initiate an objective investigation
Upon any report, the employer must initiate an objective, impartial, and thorough investigation. The investigation must not be conducted by a person with a conflict of interest, for example a direct supervisor against whom the complaint is directed.
The ideal approach is to involve an impartial person, and ARROWS advokátní kancelář routinely provides external investigator services, ensuring the impartiality and professionalism of the process.
Thorough documentation is essential, because every interview and every conclusion must be recorded in writing. In any potential court dispute, which may arise even several years later, missing documentation is often the reason an employer loses.
Protection of the reporting person and prohibition of retaliatory measures
A critical obligation, strengthened by the Whistleblower Protection Act, is to protect the person who filed the complaint. The Act strictly prohibits so-called retaliatory measures, meaning that the reporting person must not be sanctioned for making a report.
In court disputes, it often happens that even if the original discrimination is not proven, the employer loses the case due to subsequent conduct towards the reporting person. Courts may assess such conduct as retaliation, i.e., victimisation.
Implementing remedial measures
If the investigation confirms misconduct, adequate and effective remedial measures must follow. These must be steps that prevent the continuation of the unlawful situation and also have a preventive and punitive character. Depending on the seriousness, this may include:
- a written warning;
- reduction or withdrawal of the variable component of wages;
- reassignment to different work;
- summary termination or notice of termination.
Inconsistency in imposing sanctions is risky. If you dismiss one employee for a certain act and only reprimand another, you expose yourself to the risk of a claim challenging the validity of the termination of employment.
Information and GDPR
The employer must inform both the reporting person and the person against whom the complaint was made about the outcome of the investigation. However, it is necessary to proceed sensitively with regard to GDPR and protection of personality rights. The outcome and the general measures adopted are communicated, not necessarily all details from the case file documentation.
Key risks and sanctions for employers
|
Risks and sanctions |
How ARROWS helps (office@arws.cz) |
|
Fine from the Labour Inspectorate up to CZK 1,000,000: For breach of the obligation to ensure equal treatment or failure to act against discrimination, the State Labour Inspection Office (SÚIP) may impose a substantial fine. |
Representation in proceedings before inspection authorities: ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, will represent you effectively during an inspection as well as in misdemeanour proceedings and help minimise the amount of the sanction. |
|
Court disputes and compensation for non-pecuniary harm: An affected employee may seek an apology and appropriate monetary satisfaction before the courts. |
Representation in court disputes: Our Prague-based employment law specialists will defend you in civil court proceedings and help build a strong litigation strategy. |
|
Termination of employment declared invalid by the court: If you terminate the employment of the alleged aggressor incorrectly, the court will declare the termination invalid. |
Legal assessment and preparation of the termination notice: We will ensure that the termination of employment is formally and substantively flawless and will stand up in court. |
|
Reputational risk and employer branding: Bullying cases spread on social media and in the media, deterring talent and damaging the brand. |
Crisis communication and legal PR: We will help set up internal and external communications so that they are factual, truthful, and minimise reputational damage. |
How to defend yourself against unfounded allegations
It happens that employees use allegations of bossing or discrimination opportunistically. It is often a defence against justified criticism of their poor work performance, which they try to overturn by attacking.
Burden of proof
In court disputes concerning discrimination, the so-called shared burden of proof applies under the Czech Code of Civil Procedure. If an employee presents facts from which discrimination can be inferred, the burden of proof shifts to the employer.
The employer must then prove that there was no breach of the principle of equal treatment. The employer must actively demonstrate that its decision was based on objective and factual reasons unrelated to a discriminatory ground.
The importance of high-quality documentation
Winning a dispute often depends on the quality of HR documentation. An employer that carries out regular employee evaluations and records shortcomings in work performance in writing is in a significantly better position. Documentation must be created on an ongoing basis, not only when a dispute is looming.
Consistent measures as a defence
If the employer proves that it has an effective prevention system in place and that it duly and objectively investigated the complaint, this is a strong argument for its defence. Courts take into account whether the employer sought to address the situation in accordance with internal regulations.
Specific legal areas – remuneration and termination
1. Discrimination in remuneration
Under the Czech Labour Code, the same wage is due for the same work or work of equal value. Employers often make mistakes by not having an objective wage system.
Differences in wages must be justifiable by statutory criteria such as complexity, responsibility, and the strenuousness of the work. If the employer cannot explain the difference by these factors, it faces an obligation to pay the wage difference, up to 3 years retroactively.
2. Discrimination in termination of employment
Dismissing an employee shortly after they complained about bullying is extremely risky. Courts examine the temporal link and causal nexus very carefully. If an employer wants to dismiss such an employee, the organisational change must be genuine and not pretextual.
Prevention as the best strategy
Prevention is always cheaper than litigation. The basis of a successful strategy is compliance with several key points:
- Internal regulations: A high-quality work rules policy and a code of ethics that clearly defines zero tolerance for bullying.
- Training: Regular training for managers on what is and is not bossing and how to manage people in compliance with Czech law.
- Reporting system: A functional channel for safely submitting complaints.
- Culture: Building an environment where issues are addressed openly.
International element
In multinational corporations, different legal cultures often collide. What is a common management style in the USA may be considered bossing in the Czech Republic.
The attorneys at ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, thanks to the international ARROWS International network, can bridge these differences and set up compliance processes to meet both Czech law and corporate standards.
Conclusion
Addressing bullying and discrimination requires a cool head, knowledge of the law, and a precise procedural approach. A mistake at the beginning of a case can backfire years later in court. The attorneys at ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, are ready to provide you with immediate support and have high professional liability insurance coverage.
If you are dealing with a similar issue, do not hesitate to contact us at office@arws.cz for a non-binding consultation.
FAQ – Most common legal questions
1. What are the risks if I ignore a complaint?
You expose yourself to the risk of a fine from the Labour Inspectorate (up to CZK 1 million) and losing any subsequent court dispute over compensation for non-pecuniary harm. The employer has a statutory duty to ensure a safe environment. Passivity is often assessed more harshly than an unsuccessful attempt to resolve the issue.
2. Can I dismiss an employee who falsely accused a colleague of bullying?
Yes, but you must prove that the accusation was knowingly untrue and made with intent to harm. If it was merely “not proven”, but the employee subjectively believed it, they are protected against retaliation. A false accusation may be considered a breach of obligations.
3. Does an internal investigation have to involve a lawyer?
The law does not require it, but it is highly recommended. A lawyer will ensure that the process is procedurally correct and impartial, and that you do not obtain evidence unlawfully. ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, routinely provides these services.
4. What about recording in the workplace as evidence?
In employment disputes, courts often admit even covert recordings as evidence if it is the only way to prove misconduct. The employer should take this risk into account, even though the Czech Civil Code generally protects manifestations of a personal nature.
Notice: The information contained in this article is of a general informational nature only and is intended to provide basic guidance on the topic based on the legal framework as of 2026. Although we take the utmost care to ensure accuracy, legal regulations and their interpretation evolve over time. We are ARROWS advokátní kancelář, an entity registered with the Czech Bar Association (our supervisory authority), and for the maximum protection of our clients we maintain professional liability insurance with a limit of CZK 400,000,000. To verify the current wording of the regulations and their application to your specific situation, it is necessary to contact ARROWS advokátní kancelář directly (office@arws.cz). We accept no liability for any damages arising from the independent use of the information in this article without prior individual legal consultation.
Read also:
- Workplace Bullying in the Czech Republic: Legal Duties and Remedies
- Flexible Employment in the Czech Republic: Legal Pitfalls and Compliance Risks
- Agency Employment in the Czech Republic: Training and 2026 Legal Risks
- Managing Repeated Employee Sick Leave: Employer Rights Under Czech Law
- Who Is Really Liable in the Czech Republic When the Company Gets Fined: The Firm or the CEO?