Workplace Bullying: Employer Duties, OHS Compliance and Legal Risks

Workplace bullying is a significant legal and managerial risk for companies. It is not only about workplace relationships, but also about complying with statutory obligations in the areas of occupational health and safety (OHS) and equal treatment. If an employer underestimates the situation, they may face substantial fines, lawsuits for damages, and reputational harm. This article provides an overview of the employer’s obligations and guidance on how to proceed properly when bullying is suspected.

Workplace bullying

Quick summary of the issue

Business practice shows that workplace bullying is not a one-off conflict, but long-term and systematic humiliating or intimidating conduct. It undermines an employee’s dignity and manifests repeatedly over a longer period of time.

It does not matter whether you use the term “mobbing” or “bossing” in the workplace. From a legal perspective, what matters is the specific conduct and its real impact on the victim, not the terminology used in internal documents.

Under Czech legislation, the employer has a statutory duty to ensure a safe working environment that does not endanger health, to guarantee equal treatment, and to prevent discrimination and harassment. If the employer knows about bullying—or should have known—and fails to intervene, it is liable for the resulting pecuniary and non-pecuniary harm and exposes itself to significant fines. Czech courts have long been strengthening employee protection against psychological harm and confirming the employer’s liability.

From a company management perspective, it is therefore essential to have effective prevention in place. This means a clear internal policy on bullying and harassment, trained managers, safe reporting channels including a system under the Whistleblower Protection Act, and a standardised process for investigating complaints. If you are unsure whether your mechanisms are properly set up, the attorneys at ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, can help you implement processes in line with applicable legislation.

What workplace bullying is from a legal perspective

Czech legal regulations do not expressly define the term “workplace bullying”. Nevertheless, there is a relatively established professional definition drawing on employment-law legislation, case law, and psychological research.

Workplace bullying is generally understood as repeated, long-term, and systematic harm inflicted on an employee in the workplace, of a humiliating, intimidating, or disadvantaging nature, which undermines their dignity or health. Workplace bullying means repeated, long-term, and systematic harm inflicted on an employee, of a humiliating nature, which undermines their dignity.

Professional literature often distinguishes between mobbing and bossing. Mobbing refers to bullying among colleagues at the same or a similar level, where an employee is systematically pushed out of the team. By contrast, bossing is bullying by a superior against a subordinate.

Bossing is typically characterised by the fact that individual partial manifestations may, on their own, appear to be tougher management. Taken together, these partial manifestations constitute unlawful psychological pressure that significantly interferes with personality rights.

Equally important is the definition of sexual harassment, which Czech law treats as a specific and serious form of discrimination. The Anti-Discrimination Act defines it as unwanted conduct whose purpose or effect is to violate a person’s dignity.

Sexual harassment includes any form of unwanted verbal, non-verbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature. In cases of sexual harassment, the employer’s legal risks multiply, because it involves bullying, discrimination, and not infrequently criminal conduct.

Who can you contact?

When it constitutes bullying: repetition, long-term nature, and imbalance of power

In practice, drawing the line between an ordinary workplace conflict and bullying is crucial for employers. It determines when the duty to intervene with full seriousness is triggered and when the situation can be addressed more as a one-off misunderstanding.

Czech legal practice agrees that bullying is primarily a long-term phenomenon, where attacks last at least several months. In the case of an intense and serious attack, bullying may be inferred even over a shorter period if serious harm to health occurs. An important feature is also the imbalance of power between the aggressor and the victim—the so-called power asymmetry. This may be formal in relation to a superior, but also informal, for example where there is an informal authority figure within a team.

As a result of this pressure, the victim ends up in a defensive position in which they objectively cannot defend themselves effectively. The combination of repetition and power imbalance distinguishes unlawful bullying from standard performance management. When assessing bullying, the overall context and the aggregate of individual acts are always considered, not isolated episodes. Occasional conflicts or sharp remarks alone do not necessarily amount to unlawful bullying.

Therefore, in an internal investigation it is not sufficient to assess only the specific reported incident. In an internal investigation, it is always necessary to comprehensively map the development of workplace relationships over time, not just an isolated incident.

Bullying as workplace violence and a psychosocial risk

A modern legal view describes workplace bullying as a form of violence and a psychosocial risk that directly endangers employees’ health. In addition to physical attacks, this includes verbal abuse, manipulation, or social isolation.

Bullying often has consequences comparable in severity to physical trauma. Psychological pressure and bullying lead to clinical depression, anxiety, and long-term incapacity for work. In employment law, bullying is not addressed merely as a relationship problem, but as a breach of obligations in the area of occupational health and safety (OHS). It is a breach of equal treatment.

Courts today recognise psychological harm as a fully-fledged impairment of health. Courts today recognise psychological harm as a fully-fledged impairment of health and penalise neglect of prevention.

Long-term stress from bullying may result in the company being obliged to compensate for harm to health, lost earnings, diminished social functioning, and non-pecuniary harm in money. It is the task of company management to perceive bullying as part of risk management (compliance). It is the task of company management to perceive bullying as part of risk management and thereby prevent legal disputes.

Failure to fulfil these obligations often has a cumulative effect in the form of unannounced inspections, high fines, protracted court disputes, and serious damage to the company’s reputation.

Statutory obligations of the employer and legal risks of bullying

The fundamental duty of every employer in the Czech Republic is to ensure a safe working environment. The Labour Code imposes an obligation to create conditions that protect employees’ health.

This protection does not concern only physical safety, but also includes preventing psychosocial strain such as bullying and violence. Health protection does not concern only physical safety, but also includes preventing psychosocial strain such as bullying. If an employee suffers psychological or physical harm as a result of bullying, the employer is liable for damage and non-pecuniary harm under the Labour Code.

The company must compensate for damage caused by a breach of legal obligations or by intentional conduct contrary to good morals. The employer is liable for damage caused by a breach of duties even if it was caused by other subordinate employees. Case law of the Supreme Court expressly confirms a company’s liability for an employee’s mental illness caused by long-term stress resulting from inappropriate conduct by a superior.

For entrepreneurs, this means it is not enough merely to formally comply with basic occupational health and safety (OHS) obligations under Czech law. For companies, this means it is not enough merely to formally complete basic OHS training; they must actively manage psychosocial risks. If an employer knows about bullying and fails to intervene, it exposes itself to a real risk of liability for damages. This also applies where the employer should have known about the problem, for example from high staff turnover.

The consequences may include compensation for health damage, lost earnings, diminished social functioning, and financial compensation linked to discrimination. The financial impact may include compensation for health damage, lost earnings, and diminished social functioning.

Equal treatment, prohibition of discrimination and harassment

The general duty to ensure a safe working environment is accompanied by the duty to comply with the principle of equal treatment. The Labour Code imposes an obligation to treat all employees equally.

Equal treatment applies to working conditions, remuneration, and career progression. The Anti-Discrimination Act supplements the definitions of discrimination, harassment, and unwanted sexual harassment.

Harassment is unwanted conduct linked to discriminatory grounds that undermines a person’s dignity. In this context, bullying therefore constitutes a direct breach of the prohibition of discrimination.

This has fundamental procedural implications for the company. In court disputes concerning discrimination, a shared burden of proof applies, which significantly complicates the employer’s position. It is sufficient for the employee to present facts indicating discrimination. The employer then bears the burden of proving that the principle of equal treatment was not breached.

This regime is much more demanding for employers. In a standard bullying-related claim for damages, the claimant employee bears the full burden of proof regarding the harm and causation. In discrimination cases, the injured party may seek, in court, removal of the consequences, cessation of such conduct, and appropriate financial satisfaction.

In internal investigations, it is therefore necessary to determine whether the bullying shows discriminatory features. An internal investigation must always verify whether the bullying shows discriminatory characteristics, such as age or health status.

Liability for damage, compensation and case law

The employer’s general liability for damage also applies in cases where harm is caused by bullying, bossing, or other psychological violence in the workplace.

The employer is fully liable for damage caused by a breach of legal obligations or by intentional conduct contrary to good morals by persons acting on its behalf. The employer is fully liable for damage caused by a breach of duties or by intentional conduct contrary to good morals.

As a result, an employee may claim compensation for health damage, loss of earnings, diminished social functioning, and non-pecuniary harm in money. The courts confirm that damage to health also includes psychological harm. Long-term stress from bossing or mobbing may lead to recognition of a clinical mental disorder as a fully-fledged health injury.

The employee must prove a causal link between the conduct and the occurrence of psychological harm. In court practice, this is proven by expert opinions in the field of psychiatry. For employers, this means that meticulous documentation of the internal investigation and preventive measures plays a crucial role in the defence in any potential court dispute. 

Meticulous documentation of the internal investigation plays a crucial role in the employer’s defence in any potential court dispute. In addition to employment-law claims, an employee may seek protection of personality rights under the Civil Code if the bullying interfered with their human dignity, honour, or privacy.

In these disputes, financial compensation for non-pecuniary harm has a preventive and punitive function. Financial compensation for non-pecuniary harm has a preventive and punitive function and is intended to deter the company from future misconduct. The Constitutional Court emphasises that general courts must take into account the seriousness of the interference, its duration, its impact on the victim’s professional life, and any power imbalance in favour of the wrongdoer.

Sanctions by the Labour Inspectorate and other authorities

Breaches of obligations relating to a safe environment, equal treatment, and the prohibition of discrimination are subject to strict supervision by public authorities. The State Labour Inspection Office and regional labour inspectorates carry out inspections of compliance with regulations. The Labour Inspectorate may impose fines reaching millions of Czech crowns for breaches of equal treatment rules or OHS regulations.

The Whistleblower Protection Act imposes on entities with more than 50 employees an obligation to implement an internal reporting system and protect whistleblowers against retaliation. Serious forms of bullying or discrimination meet the elements of administrative offences with high penalties. Serious forms of bullying or discrimination meet the elements of administrative offences, and are therefore often reported through internal channels.

For failure to comply with obligations related to implementing an internal reporting system, the employer faces a fine of up to CZK 1,000,000. In the most serious cases, criminal liability may arise for specific individuals, and potentially also criminal liability of the company itself.

In serious cases of bullying, criminal liability may arise for specific managers as well as for the legal entity itself. Mobbing or bossing are not, in themselves, separate criminal offences. However, their manifestations may fulfil the elements of coercion, extortion, or bodily harm.

Preventing bullying: internal rules, culture and whistleblowing

Many companies declare zero tolerance for bullying only in their code of ethics. From both a legal and managerial perspective, however, this formal approach is insufficient.

Courts and the Labour Inspectorate examine whether the employer actively prevents risks and genuinely responds to reports. Formal declarations without functional processes in place may, in any potential court dispute, be assessed to the employer’s detriment. Effective prevention requires systematic process set-up. The foundation is an internal policy that clearly defines unacceptable conduct and investigation procedures.

Regular training of managerial employees is essential so that they can distinguish legitimate exercise of managerial authority from bossing, and reporting channels must be implemented. It is essential to regularly train managerial employees so that they can distinguish legitimate management of work from unlawful bossing.

Attorneys at ARROWS advokátní kancelář encounter in practice that companies underestimate the real interconnection of these elements and lack a clear investigation manual. Attorneys at ARROWS advokátní kancelář encounter in practice an underestimation of how interconnected these elements are and help companies set up a clear investigation manual.

Employees’ lack of trust in reporting channels then leads to escalation of disputes outside the company. Complaints end up with the Labour Inspectorate, the Ombudsman, or directly with the courts.

Internal policies on bullying and harassment

A high-quality internal policy must be based on the legal definitions of harassment, discrimination, and protection of personality rights under Czech law. At the same time, it must be written in clear, understandable language.

The policy should include a substantive definition of unwanted conduct with an illustrative list of unacceptable behavioural manifestations, such as mobbing or bossing. The policy must contain a clear definition of unwanted conduct with practical examples of unacceptable behaviour in the workplace.

At the same time, it must clearly draw the line between bullying conduct and the legitimate exercise of the employer’s managerial powers when assigning tasks. A key part of the policy is the procedural framework for filing a complaint. The directive must precisely define the investigation procedure and clearly designate independent persons authorised to receive complaints.

Employees must have absolute certainty that submitting a report in good faith will not lead to any disadvantage or informal retaliation against them. The policy should also include a warning against abusing the system for knowingly false accusations, which may be classified as a breach of duties. Abuse of the reporting system for knowingly false accusations must be expressly defined as a serious breach of employment duties.

The policy must guarantee protection for whistleblowers and cooperating persons against retaliatory measures, including within ordinary workplace relationships. In practice, this means an absolute prohibition of any direct or indirect retaliation against an employee for submitting a complaint in good faith. The employer must guarantee an absolute ban on any retaliatory action against an employee for submitting a complaint in good faith.

Whistleblowing as part of bullying prevention

The Whistleblower Protection Act imposes an obligation on companies in the Czech Republic to implement an internal reporting system for the safe reporting of unlawful conduct.

Although the Act applies to criminal offences and selected administrative offences, reporting systems are in practice linked with the agenda of addressing bullying. In-house reporting systems are, in practice, logically linked also to the agenda of timely handling of bullying and harassment.

Workplace bullying constitutes a breach of occupational health and safety (OHS) obligations, which may meet the elements of administrative offences under the Labour Inspection Act. By introducing a single channel, the employer fulfils its statutory duty and gains a tool for the early detection of pathological phenomena in the workplace. 

By introducing a single channel, the employer gains an effective tool for the early detection of pathological phenomena in the workplace. For the system to function, it is necessary to appoint a trustworthy competent person who will receive reports impartially and propose remedial measures.

Failure to comply with protection requirements exposes the company to high fines and a loss of control if employees turn to external authorities. If whistleblower protection is not complied with, the company risks losing control over the entire case if employees contact the police. The effectiveness of reporting channels fundamentally depends on the overall corporate culture and on trust in the impartiality of the entire investigation process.

If people fear retaliatory reactions from their superiors, they will rather ignore problems, which leads to their later dangerous escalation. If people fear retaliatory reactions from their superiors, they will rather ignore problems, which leads to their escalation.

Lawyers from ARROWS advokátní kancelář recommend designing the reporting system as a core part of the risk management and employee protection framework. Lawyers from ARROWS advokátní kancelář recommend designing the reporting system as a key part of human resources protection and will be happy to assist you with it.

Related questions on bullying prevention

1. Is it necessary to have a separate anti-bullying directive, or are work rules and a code of ethics sufficient?
A separate internal policy is very useful in practice because it allows the complaint investigation procedure to be described in detail. In the event of an inspection by the Labour Inspectorate or in court proceedings, it serves as evidence of the employer’s active fulfilment of preventive duties. Our attorneys in Prague at ARROWS advokátní kancelář can help you prepare a comprehensive directive linking bullying prevention and the internal reporting system.

2. Is it necessary to train all employees in bullying prevention, or is it sufficient to train only managers?
From the perspective of preventing legal risks, training managerial employees is a priority, as their conduct is attributable to the employer and they are most often faced with accusations of bossing. However, training should also include rank-and-file employees in some form so that they are familiar with internal reporting channels and with what behaviour is already unacceptable in the workplace.

3. What is the best way to link an internal anti-bullying policy with the Whistleblower Protection Act?
A suitable solution is process integration, where the internal policy governing bullying prevention expressly refers to the internal reporting system as one of the safe channels for submitting a complaint. This ensures that reports will be investigated in compliance with strict standards of confidentiality and protection against retaliation, with which ARROWS advokátní kancelář can assist you.

How should an employer proceed when bullying is suspected

The moment a report is received pointing to bullying is a critical point in terms of the employer’s legal liability.

The law does not prescribe exact steps for the investigation; however, case law requires the employer to proceed without undue delay, objectively and impartially. Case law requires that, when bullying is suspected, the employer proceed without undue delay, objectively and impartially.

The employer must not downplay the complaint under any circumstances. Ignoring the report constitutes a direct breach of statutory duties. The first step is the formal registration of the report. A complaint may be submitted in writing, orally into the record, or via the reporting system.

The first procedural step is the formal registration of a report submitted in writing, orally, or via the internal system. The record must include a specification of the conduct, identification of the persons involved, a time frame, any witnesses, and the identification of evidence.

The reporting person should be provided with basic information about the next steps, the investigation time limit, and the measures for their protection. The reporting person must receive basic information about the next steps of the investigation and about specific measures for their protection. Immediately after receiving the complaint, the employer must assess the need for interim measures to protect the affected employee.

Such measures include adjusting working hours, reassignment to other work, home office, or temporary relocation to another workplace. Interim measures to prevent contact include adjusting working hours, reassignment to other work, or home office. The measures must not operate as a sanction against the victim. In serious cases, the suspected person may be suspended from work with wage compensation.

Objective, impartial and thorough investigation

The internal investigation process must be conducted objectively and impartially. The designated person must not have a conflict of interest.

In highly exposed cases, it is recommended to entrust the investigation to an independent external entity, such as a law firm in Prague. In sensitive cases, it is recommended to entrust the investigation to an independent external entity, which guarantees a high degree of objectivity. The investigation typically includes detailed interviews with the victim, the person identified as the aggressor, and witnesses. Minutes are taken of the interviews.

It is necessary to collect and assess documentary evidence, such as email communications, records from internal systems, or minutes from meetings. It is necessary to collect and assess documentary evidence, such as email communications or internal records. The entire investigation process must be carefully documented so that the documentation is fully defensible before a court or the Labour Inspectorate.

At the end of the investigation, the designated person will prepare a final written report on the outcome of the entire investigation. At the end of the investigation, the designated person will prepare a final written report on the outcome of the entire investigation.

The report must include a description of the facts, a legal assessment, and a proposal for specific remedial and disciplinary measures. The complainant and the accused employee must be informed of the investigation results to an appropriate extent and in compliance with the GDPR. The complainant and the accused must be informed of the investigation results to an appropriate extent and in compliance with the GDPR.

Remedial measures and sanctions against the aggressor

If bullying is proven, the employer has a duty to adopt effective remedial measures without delay. Disciplinary measures under the Czech Labour Code may be considered, for example a written warning of the possibility of termination. Disciplinary sanctions include a written warning of the possibility of termination or the withdrawal of discretionary components of salary.

In serious cases, the employment relationship may be terminated by notice or by immediate termination. In parallel with sanctioning the aggressor, the employer must ensure remedial action and psychological or legal support for the victim of bullying. At the same time as sanctioning the aggressor, the employer must ensure safety, support, and remedial action for the victim of bullying.

Working conditions must be adjusted to prevent any further contact between the victim and the proven aggressor. An active and sensitive approach by the employer to compensation significantly reduces the risk of the dispute escalating to court or to the Labour Inspectorate. Active and prompt resolution of compensation significantly reduces the risk of the dispute escalating to court or to the Labour Inspectorate.

After the incident has been resolved, the employer should carry out an analysis and determine whether the failure occurred due to poorly configured processes. If there is suspicion that a criminal offence has been committed, it is necessary to consult the next steps with an attorney with regard to statutory obligations. If there is suspicion that a criminal offence has been committed, it is necessary to consult the next steps with a specialist attorney.

Related questions on internal handling of bullying

1. Must an employer investigate a completely anonymous bullying complaint?
Although the Whistleblower Protection Act does not impose an obligation to investigate anonymous reports, as part of risk prevention and occupational health and safety (OHS), it is recommended to pay attention to anonymous tips as well if they contain specific, credible, and verifiable information about serious unlawful conduct in the workplace. Ignoring such a tip could backfire on the employer if health damage subsequently occurs.

2. How should a situation be handled where a key employee or a senior manager is accused of bullying?
From a legal perspective, the principle of equal treatment and health protection applies regardless of the person’s position. If bullying is proven, the employer must proceed just as uncompromisingly as with any other employee; overlooking the conduct of key individuals due to their apparent indispensability creates a huge risk of court disputes and potentially ruinous fines imposed by the Labour Inspectorate.

3. Is it possible to inform the bullying victim about the specific sanction imposed on the aggressor?
The employer must comply with GDPR requirements and should not provide the victim with copies of documents containing the aggressor’s personal data or details of salary-related sanctions. However, it is fully consistent with the law and good practice to inform the complainant in writing that their complaint was assessed as justified and that appropriate measures have been taken against the aggressor to prevent a recurrence of such behaviour.

External resolution: the Labour Inspectorate, the Ombudsman, the police, and courts

If an employee is not satisfied with the outcome of the internal investigation, they are entitled to submit a complaint to the competent Regional Labour Inspectorate.

The Inspectorate is obliged to address the complaint and carry out an inspection at the employer. By law, it must maintain confidentiality regarding the identity of the reporting person. By law, the Regional Labour Inspectorate is required to strictly maintain confidentiality regarding the identity of the person who submitted the complaint. A Labour Inspectorate inspection focused on bullying, discrimination, or OHS is often very demanding for the employer both administratively and legally.

Inspectors require internal policies, training records, and in particular documentation of how the employer handled the complaints submitted. Inspectors require internal policies, training records, and in particular documentation of how the employer handled complaints. If deficiencies are identified, the Inspectorate may impose a fine of up to CZK 1,000,000 and order binding remedial instructions. Lawyers from ARROWS advokátní kancelář recommend having documentation prepared for such cases and using professional legal representation. 

Lawyers from ARROWS advokátní kancelář recommend having documentation prepared for these inspections and using professional representation. An attorney will help correctly interpret internal processes, prepare responses to the findings, and minimise the risk of high sanctions.

The Public Defender of Rights (Ombudsman) and discrimination

In cases where bullying shows signs of discrimination, an employee may contact the Public Defender of Rights. Although the Ombudsman does not have the power to impose direct fines, they provide victims with methodological support and help formulate submissions for lawsuits. Although the Ombudsman does not have the power to impose direct fines, they provide victims with methodological support and help draft lawsuits.

The conclusions of the Public Defender of Rights carry significant weight and, in any court dispute, may serve as important evidence. Moreover, publishing cases as part of the Ombudsman’s outputs represents a significant reputational risk for any company that underestimates the problem. Publishing cases as part of the Ombudsman’s outputs represents a significant reputational risk for a company that underestimates the problem.

Criminal complaint and criminal liability

If the intensity of bullying reaches an extraordinary level, it may fulfil the elements of one of the criminal offences. In practice, this most often involves oppression, blackmail, dangerous stalking, or bodily harm as a result of severe trauma. In practice, this most often involves oppression, blackmail, dangerous stalking, or bodily harm as a result of psychological trauma.

With the development of technology, cyberbullying also occurs in workplaces and may be classified as unauthorised access to systems. If there is suspicion that a criminal offence has been committed, the victim or anyone else is entitled to file a criminal complaint with the Police of the Czech Republic. If there is suspicion that a criminal offence has been committed, the victim or anyone else is entitled to file a criminal complaint with the Police of the Czech Republic.

If the police initiate criminal proceedings, the employer is legally obliged to provide full cooperation. Criminal prosecution may be conducted against the aggressor, but also against the company itself due to neglect of preventive mechanisms. Criminal prosecution may be conducted not only against the aggressor, but also against the company itself due to neglect of prevention.

Cooperation with ARROWS advokátní kancelář in such cases ensures a professional and secure legal defence for the company. Cooperation with ARROWS advokátní kancelář in such cases ensures a professional and secure legal defence for the company. Experienced attorneys will set up communication with the police and ensure maximum protection of the company’s legal interests and those of the affected individuals.

Court disputes over damages and protection of personality rights

If the dispute is not resolved amicably, the employee may assert their rights through the courts. In practice, this involves a claim for compensation for health damage under the Czech Labour Code, or a claim under the Anti-Discrimination Act. In practice, this involves a claim for compensation for health damage under the Czech Labour Code or a claim under the Anti-Discrimination Act.

It is also common to use an action for protection of personality rights and compensation for non-pecuniary harm in money under the Czech Civil Code. In court disputes concerning bossing and mobbing, a key role is played by assessing whether the employer has fulfilled its preventive obligations. In court disputes concerning bossing, a key role is played by assessing whether the employer has duly fulfilled its preventive obligations.

If it is proven that the company ignored the situation, courts award injured employees high financial compensation. The Constitutional Court has repeatedly confirmed that compensation for non-pecuniary harm must serve its compensatory and preventive-sanctioning function. The Constitutional Court has confirmed that compensation for non-pecuniary harm must be sufficiently tangible to fulfil its sanctioning function.

A company’s success in litigation depends on the quality of its procedural defence and the existence of convincing evidence. ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, provides comprehensive legal representation in these disputes and helps analyse weak points in the claim. ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, provides comprehensive legal representation in these disputes and helps analyse weak points in the claim. In cases where it is economically advantageous for the client, we negotiate favourable terms of an out-of-court settlement.

Practical risks for employers and how to manage them

The following table summarises typical practical issues that employers encounter in connection with workplace bullying, and the ways in which ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, helps in these situations.

Possible issues

How ARROWS helps (office@arws.cz)

Missing or outdated policy on bullying and harassment: the company has no clear internal rules, employees do not know how to proceed, there is a risk of remarks from the Labour Inspectorate and a weaker position in any potential dispute

We will prepare or review an anti-bullying policy, a code of ethics and related documents so that they comply with current legislation and case law while remaining understandable for your business.

Poorly handled internal investigation of a complaint: conflict of interest, insufficient documentation, unclear conclusions; the victim turns to the Labour Inspectorate, the Ombudsman (Public Defender of Rights) or the courts

We will set up procedures for an objective investigation, help with interviews and documentation, and prepare written conclusions and recommended measures in line with the law and personal data protection requirements.

Labour Inspectorate inspection or a submission to the Ombudsman: risk of fines, remedial measures and reputational damage

We will represent you before the Labour Inspectorate, prepare supporting documents, communicate with public authorities and propose a strategy to minimise sanctions and negative impacts.

Court dispute over damages or discrimination: high compensation claims, reversed burden of proof in discrimination cases, risk of a precedent-setting decision

We will assess the risks and prepare a procedural strategy, represent you before the courts and seek an amicable outcome or the most favourable result possible for you.

Implementation of the Whistleblower Protection Act: uncertainty in setting up an internal reporting system, concerns about waves of complaints, risk of fines for non-compliance

We will design and implement an internal reporting system, set up processes for receiving and investigating reports, train the relevant persons and ensure compliance with the legal framework and workplace bullying practice.

A strategic perspective for management and owners

For company owners and management, bullying is not merely an isolated legal issue, but above all a serious economic and reputational risk.

A toxic environment demonstrably generates increased turnover, high sickness absence, reduced productivity and the loss of key talent. A toxic workplace environment demonstrably generates increased turnover, high sickness absence and reduced productivity.

Costs associated with litigation, compensation and fines imposed by supervisory authorities then directly affect the company’s overall profitability. Investing in robust prevention and professional process set-up is a fully rational step within overall risk management. Investing in robust prevention and process set-up is a rational step within overall risk management.

Instead of ad hoc crisis management under emotional pressure, it is more advantageous to have a comprehensive prevention system and transparent channels. Lawyers from ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, help set up compliance systems, carry out audits and provide support in crisis management. Lawyers from ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, help set up compliance systems and provide support in crisis management.

For companies with an international structure, it is essential to harmonise the Czech legal environment with the global standards of parent groups. The issue of employee protection (part of ESG) is increasingly often a subject of due diligence in mergers and international internal audits. 

The issue of employee protection within the ESG agenda is increasingly often a key subject of due diligence in mergers. Through the ARROWS International network, we can effectively coordinate investigations and address specific forms of bullying in hybrid teams.

Final summary

Workplace bullying today represents a complex legal and managerial discipline with an impact on the risk profile of every employer.

Czech legislation creates a strict and interconnected legal framework for protecting employees’ dignity and health through a range of laws. Czech legislation creates a strict legal framework for protecting employees’ dignity and health through a number of interconnected laws.

Case law clearly confirms that psychological harm caused by bossing or mobbing constitutes a full-fledged impairment of health. From a management perspective, prevention and procedural preparedness are orders of magnitude cheaper than dealing with escalated disputes. A company’s prevention and procedural preparedness are orders of magnitude cheaper and safer than dealing with escalated court disputes.

The cornerstone of a defence strategy is implementing an internal policy, training managers, having a reliable system and the ability to investigate a complaint. If shortcomings are identified, the employer must act decisively and apply appropriate employment-law sanctions. If shortcomings are identified, the employer must act decisively and apply appropriate employment-law sanctions.

If you want to eliminate the legal and financial risks associated with workplace bullying, work with proven experts in the field.

Lawyers from ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, focus on employment law matters and will help you navigate every process safely. Lawyers from ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, focus on employment law matters and will help you navigate the entire process safely.If you need a review of internal regulations or representation before authorities, you can contact us by email at office@arws.cz. 

FAQ: Most common questions on addressing workplace bullying

1. How quickly must I, as an employer, respond to a bullying complaint?
Although the law does not set a specific deadline in terms of days, case law and the Labour Inspectorate require a response without undue delay. An internal investigation should be initiated within a few days of receiving the complaint. Inaction or postponing the matter is assessed as a breach of the duty to ensure a safe working environment and increases the risk of liability for damages. To set up the initial procedural steps safely, contact the attorneys at ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, at office@arws.cz.

2. What if the person accused of bullying is a line manager or a member of top management?
The fact that the accused holds a key role in the company’s operations does not relieve the employer of responsibility. On the contrary, courts assess situations involving managerial employees more strictly, as these employees directly represent the employer. In such cases, it is crucial to ensure maximum impartiality of the investigation, protect the reporting person from retaliation, and, if bullying is confirmed, draw appropriate consequences, including the possibility of terminating employment. Given the managerial and reputational risks, we recommend consulting the approach with ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, at office@arws.cz.

3. What risks do I face if I underestimate workplace bullying or try to ignore it?
You expose yourself to the risk of a claim for compensation for health damage and compensation for non-pecuniary harm in money, which may reach significant amounts. You also face fines from the Labour Inspectorate for breaches of equal treatment and occupational health and safety (OHS) regulations, as well as fines for breaches of the Whistleblower Protection Act. A further significant risk is the initiation of criminal proceedings, media coverage of the case, and irreversible damage to the company’s reputation in the labour market. To eliminate these risks, contact ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, at office@arws.cz.

4. How should I proceed as an employer if the bullying is also discrimination?
If the bullying is motivated by protected characteristics such as age, gender, nationality, health condition, or religion, the strict regime of the Anti-Discrimination Act applies. In potential court proceedings, the burden of proof shifts, meaning the employer must prove that discrimination did not occur. The employee may seek removal of the consequences of the interference and appropriate financial satisfaction. To prepare a procedural defence strategy, contact ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, via office@arws.cz.

5. Do we, as a company, have to implement an internal reporting system also for reporting bullying?
If you have 50 or more employees, you have a statutory obligation to implement an internal reporting system under the Whistleblower Protection Act. Although the Act primarily applies to unlawful conduct reaching the intensity of criminal offences, integrating bullying and discrimination matters into this system is highly recommended. Such conduct often meets the criteria of serious administrative offences in the area of workplace safety. ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, can help you set up the reporting system at office@arws.cz.

6. Does it make sense to address bullying through mediation, or is a strict disciplinary approach always necessary?
Mediation can be an effective tool for less serious workplace issues, especially communication and relationship conflicts, where both sides are interested in restoring the relationship. For more serious forms of bullying—especially bossing accompanied by abuse of power or sexual harassment—mediation is inappropriate. In such cases, the employer must proceed with an authoritative investigation and apply uncompromising employment-law sanctions against the aggressor. To assess the most suitable approach, contact ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, at office@arws.cz.

Notice: The information contained in this article is of a general informational nature only and is intended for basic guidance on the topic based on the legal status as of 2026. Although we take maximum care to ensure accuracy, legal regulations and their interpretation evolve over time. We are ARROWS, a Prague-based law firm, an entity registered with the Czech Bar Association (our supervisory authority), and for maximum client security we are insured for professional liability with a limit of CZK 400,000,000. To verify the current wording of regulations and their application to your specific situation, it is necessary to contact ARROWS 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: