All papers published in Z Problematyki Prawa Pracy i Polityki Socjalnej  are subject to review by two external, independent reviewers (from outside the academic institution affiliating the author of the publication, as well as not connected with him or her in any other way). These individuals are selected from the Journal's Committee of Reviewers or appointed ad hoc to review individual paper. Authors may not suggest to the editors that a particular person is asked to undertake a review. The names of reviewers of publications published in Z Problematyki Prawa Pracy i Polityki Socjalnej are disclosed collectively with respect to a given volume of the Journal.

Z Problematyki Prawa Pracy i Polityki Socjalnej does not charge fees for submitting material  to review process.

Before being sent to external review, papers submitted to the Journal are subject to preliminary evaluation by the editors. Papers may be rejected already at this stage (see the editorial workflow chart) if they:

- do not meet the criteria required for academic publications, i.e. are not based on data obtained in the course of reliable and impartial scientific research,

- address issues that do not correspond to the topic of the Journal,

- raise justified doubts as to the originality of the paper,

- have been previously published elsewhere.

Reviews in Z Problematyki Prawa Pracy i Polityki Socjalnej are based on the so-called double-blind review, which means that the author or authors of the publication and reviewers do not know their identities.

Reliable, impartial and objective (devoid of personal criticism) reviews are prepared on a standard form (see sample below). Reviews are in writing and contain the reviewer's clear conclusion as to whether the text should be accepted for publication or rejected, and whether any corrections (minor or major) should be made before publication. Reviewers give constructive comments to authors, in a way that allows them to answer the presented opinion. Authors respond to reviews in an author’s statement submitted to the Journal after the paper is accepted for publication, or in separate statements addressed to the Editorial Board. Authors who have justified objections to the reviews are entitled to express them in a communication to the Editorial Board. The editors verify the reviews and reserve the right to reject the reviewers' remarks and suggestions.

Reviewers shall draw the Editorial Board’s attention to any perceived similarities of the reviewed paper - in whole or in part - with works of other authors, or of the same author, already published elsewhere. In such cases it is considered that plagiarism or duplication of material (self-plagiarism) is suspected and the editors implement a procedure in accordance with the COPE diagrams.

After receiving the reviews, the Editorial Board may decide to reject the paper, require corrections or accept the paper for publication. The final decision to accept the material for print in any case rests with the editors of the Journal.

A paper evaluated by reviewers and editors as requiring changes will only be published if the author makes the necessary modifications or justifies retaining the original version of certain parts of the text (if the author does not agree with the reviewer on certain points, he or she should provide the explanation thereto). In the case of significant changes made by the author, reviewers opine the revised version of the paper.

After the paper is accepted for publication, the author has the opportunity to submit the final version of the publication (e.g. updates or minor additions). The text is then sent for linguistic and technical processing to an editor at the publisher – Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Śląskiego. Before publication, the author receives a proof printout in order to make final corrections.

The average waiting period for an author to receive information on acceptance or rejection of a text is two months (including review by the editors, selection of 2 reviewers, and review preparation). This period does not include situations where changes must be made to the text (e.g. a positive conditional review).

ARTICLE PUBLISHING REVIEW FORM TO THE MAGAZINE PL
ARTICLE PUBLISHING REVIEW FORM TO THE MAGAZINE EN
ARTICLE PUBLISHING REVIEW FORM TO THE MAGAZINE FR