According to various statistics, four to five million citizens work on civil law contracts in Poland.
For the vast majority of them who do not have a classic employment contract (the so-called full-time contract), they are the only sources of income.
To this should be added the self-employed. According to CSO data, without including farmers, there are 1.15 million sole proprietorships on the market.
Civil law contract = no credit?
According to bankers, an employment contract is the only right contract. Of course, we are simplifying it a bit.
However, the secret of the Good Finance is the fact that, despite the declaration, working on a civil law contract for a loan, we have nothing to count on.
Banks’ requirements for people employed in this way are much higher than for those who have a celebrated employment contract.
The loan application will be accepted most often when our mandate contract has been in continuity for at least a year, and preferably with one and only employer.
It doesn’t matter that we can do several jobs for different people each month. The amount of earnings does not matter. If we earn USD 5,000 in one month, but nothing in the other (because, for example, the execution of orders is prolonged), then we are an incredible customer for banks.
Those who work on a contract of work may have even worse.
What else is a person employed under a contract of employment? Even with much lower earnings is a better customer. Although you may lose your day-to-day work like other people, full-time employment is a magic word that opens many gates.
Banks in this way limit the number of their potential customers themselves.
Not only those interested in loans. Simply, a customer who has once been cleared away is unlikely to be willing to set up an account in such an institution or entrust it with its savings on the deposit.
It would seem that in the face of such a high saturation of the labor market by civil law contracts, banks will be more open, but there is a lot to be missed.
The president wants to help but …
Politicians have noticed the problem. Recently, the President took the floor in this matter and said that the availability of loans for people working under civil law contracts is a matter of “very simple changes in the internal regulations of public finance supervision and transferring them to the practice of banks”.
Without new provisions in the form of a bill, the president asked the Good Finance Investment Corporation to deal with the issue of the availability of loans for self-employed people and those working under a specific task and commission contract.
Will something come of it? Can the actions of the president and the GFIC cause a wider opening of banks? The truth is that banks are independent institutions that are guided by their internal rules.
Bank employees themselves calculate the creditworthiness of their customers. No politician or official has any influence on how banks behave or how they will treat the credibility of people who want to use their services.
Theoretically, the Good Finance Investment Corporation could issue a new recommendation or change the existing provisions. Although banks are not obliged to comply with its provisions, they are “only” recommendations.
However, they have always taken them into account. It is worth recalling here, for example, the issue of mortgage loans in Swiss franc or withdrawing from offers deposits bypassing the Good Finance tax, even before the entry into force of the regulations that changed the rules for calculating interest on deposit accounts.