Canada: Employee Rights/ Labour Relations

WorkSafeBC has launched a public consultation on proposed amendments to the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation that would introduce comprehensive new requirements for addressing workplace harassment, violence, and psychosocial hazards. The proposed Part 4.1 would replace current provisions with an expanded framework requiring employers to develop harassment prevention programs, implement control measures for violence incidents, and identify and assess psychosocial hazards that could expose workers to

Employment agreements are often treated as risk management tools. Employers rely on them to set workplace expectations and limit liability on termination. But an agreement only serves that purpose if it actually survives judicial scrutiny, and for the past few years, termination clause litigation in Ontario has increasingly turned on whether a court can find some theoretical reading of a clause that would violate the Employment Standards Act, 2000 ("ESA"), even where that plainly is not what the parties meant.

In Haynes v Alberta (Human Rights Commission and Tribunal), 2026 ABKB 575 [Haynes] the Court of King’s Bench took a closer look at the discretion held by the Director of the Commission and the Chief of the Commission and Tribunals, and it provided further clarity on a complainant’s ability to proceed before the Tribunal when they have other more appropriate forums available for resolution.

Manitoba et l'Île-du-Prince-Édouard ont récemment adopté de nouvelles restrictions législatives limitant la capacité des employeurs à exiger des attestations médicales pour les absences de courte durée. Ces changements s'inscrivent dans une tendance pancanadienne visant à réduire le fardeau administratif et financier imposé aux employés et aux systèmes de santé.

Ontario courts have grappled with whether employment contracts allowing termination "at any time" or "for any reason" violate the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The Court of Appeal has now provided clarity on this contentious issue through two landmark cases heard together, establishing a new framework for interpreting termination clauses in employment agreements.

When an Ontario employer terminates an employee for cause based on alleged misconduct, courts will scrutinize whether the conduct was truly dishonest or whether it reflected longstanding, accepted workplace practices. The Wilsher v Olympic Wholesale decision demonstrates how informal, undocumented policies and inconsistent enforcement can expose employers to significant liability, including extended notice periods and reputational harm.

August continues to be a busy month for the Court of Appeal of Ontario with another significant decision for Ontario employers and employees.[1] In Wigdor v Facebook Canada Ltd., the Court of Appeal provided clarification...

Starting October 20, 2026, federally regulated employers in Canada must comply with new equal treatment requirements that prohibit wage differences based on employment status for comparable work. The regulations establish specific criteria for comparing employees, outline permissible exceptions to equal treatment, and impose new obligations on temporary help agencies.

Since the adoption of the Act respecting the laicity of the State in 2019, which affirmed secularism and enshrined the principle of state religious neutrality in Québec, issues relating to secularism and religion have been at the forefront of Québec’s political and legislative landscape.