The law allows for access to the labour market for asylum seekers after six months from the date of submission of an asylum application if a final decision has not been taken within this time and if the delay is not attributed to any fault of the asylum seeker. The Head of the Office for Foreigners upon the asylum seeker’s request, issues a certificate, which accompanied by a temporary ID document entitles the asylum seeker to work in Poland. The temporary ID document is valid for 90 days and can be subsequently prolonged for renewable periods of 6 months. The certificate is valid until the day the decision concerning international protection becomes final. However, in practice, if an asylum seeker seeks judicial remedy and the court suspends the enforcement of the negative asylum decision, the certificate regains its validity.
In practice, the issuance of the above-mentioned certificate is not often requested. Most probably it results from the fact that the asylum proceedings often last shorter than 6 months, or the asylum seekers leave Poland before they can access the labour market, or they have no knowledge that they can work in Poland after 6 months. Moreover, there is a relatively high percentage of refusals in this regard. According to the Office for Foreigners, asylum seekers tend to apply for a certificate too early (before 6 months have passed) or too late (the final asylum decision is delivered before the decision on the certificate is reached).
Access to employment is not limited to certain sectors but can be problematic in practice. Many employers do not know, that the above-mentioned certificate with a temporary ID document gives an asylum seeker a right to work or do not want to employ a person for such a short time (i.e. up to 6 months, as the employers are unaware that the procedure may actually take longer than the validity of a single temporary ID document), which causes that those certificates have no practical significance. Moreover, the certificate is valid until the asylum decision becomes final, but employers are not informed that such a decision was issued by the Polish authorities, they must trust that the asylum seekers will inform them about it on time. Furthermore, asylum seekers often live in centres which are located far away from big cities and in areas with a high level of poverty and unemployment in general, which makes it difficult to find a job in practice. Additionally, most asylum seekers do not speak Polish well enough to obtain a job in Poland. Asylum seekers also face the problem of limited recognition of education and skills acquired outside the country, so they are often employed in positions that do not reflect their professional background. Moreover, foreigners endure discrimination in employment, e.g. they are offered lower salaries than Polish nationals.
Furthermore, even receiving the above-mentioned certificate may be in some circumstances problematic. Asylum seekers who reach the age of majority during asylum proceedings initiated and continued by their parents, and who declare that they do not wish to apply for asylum separately, are denied the right to work. In order to receive such a certificate, they have to initiate asylum proceedings separate from their parents, which is criticised by the NGOs.
Experts point out that the fact that asylum seekers cannot work for the first 6 months of the asylum procedure is one of the factors which leads to their lack of independence and reliance on social assistance.
 Article 35 Law on Protection.
 Article 35 (3) Law on Protection. The Refugee Board’s decision is final. If an asylum seeker does not appeal against the decision of the Office for Foreigners, the latter becomes final 14 days following notification of such decision.
 Information provided by the Office for Foreigners, 4 March 2021.
 M. Pachocka, K. Pędziwiatr, K. Sobczak-Szelc, J. Szałańska, ‘Reception Policies, Practices and Responses: Poland Country Report’, 2020, RESPOND Working Papers 2020/45, available at: http://bit.ly/3jLCvsV, 55.
 W. Klaus, ‘Rozwiązania prawne stosowane w odniesieniu do osób starających się o ochronę w Polsce’ in A. Górny, H. Grzymała-Moszczyńska, W. Klaus and S. Łodziński, Uchodźcy w Polsce. Sytuacja prawna, skala napływu i integracja w społeczeństwie polskim oraz rekomendacje, PAN 2017, available (in Polish) at: http://bit.ly/2DVccfr, 23.
 M. Pachocka, K. Pędziwiatr, K. Sobczak-Szelc, J. Szałańska, ‘Reception Policies, Practices and Responses: Poland Country Report’, 2020, RESPOND Working Papers 2020/45, available at: http://bit.ly/3jLCvsV, 82-83.
 Lukasiewicz, K., ‘Exile to Poverty: Policies and Poverty Among Refugees in Poland’, International Migration Vol. 55 (6) 2017, 61, 66. See also M. Pawlak, ‘Zatrudnienie’ in A. Górska, M. Koss-Goryszewska, J. Kucharczyk (eds), W stronę krajowego machanizmu ewaluacji integracji: Diagnoza sytuacji beneficjentów ochrony międzynarodowej w Polsce, Instytut Spraw Publicznych 2019, 35.
 The persisting problem with the recognition of non-EU education and qualifications was confirmed and criticized by the Supreme Audit Office in 2021, see Supreme Audit Office, ‘Uznawanie kwalifikacji zawodowych cudzoziemców spoza Unii Europejskiej’, April 2021, available in Polish at: https://bit.ly/35AcZ7g.
 O. Dobrowolska, ‘Zaświadczenie uprawniające do wykonywania pracy dla pełnoletnich dzieci wnioskodawcy’ in SIP, SIP w działaniu. Prawa cudzoziemców w Polsce w 2018 r., 2019, available (in Polish) at: https://bit.ly/39b6qUZ, 21-22.