The first part of the paper revisits some of the well established arguments against treating passive as a grammatical category in Polish. More precisely, it is argued that there is no passive transformation. Firstly, a sentence, such as '(Szkola) jest zbudowana', does not have a precise active counterpart, for it may express a form of present perfect and, thus, temporal meaning which is absent from '(Oni) buduja' or 'zbuduja (szkole)'. Secondly, no active counterpart at all can be construed for a passive without overt subject, such as 'W pokoju bylo napalone'. These facts suggest that passive in Polish is not the result of some syntactic operation. Again in line with well established existing proposals, The author concludes that passivization belongs to word formation. Crucially, a form, such as 'zbudowana', is an adjective derived from a verb whose most prominent argument has been blocked from surfacing as subject. Hence passivization is based on a change to verbal argument realization. It is at this point where the present paper goes one step further than existing accounts. If passivization is an operation that alters argument realization, it is in essence not different from similar derivational processes. As in other languages, these are frequent and diverse in Polish too, such as the complete suppression of the most prominent argument as a result of reflexivization (Szklanka sie stlukla), as well as morphologically unmarked forms of multiple argument realization, e.g. 'Marek napelnia basen woda - Woda napelnia basen'. Thus, in conclusion, it is proposed that passive voice in Polish (as well as certain types of reflexives) represent the same type of derivation as other alternations to verbal argument realization.