Canadian Payroll Reporter - sample

March 2018

Focuses on issues of importance to payroll professionals across Canada. It contains news, case studies, profiles and tracks payroll-related legislation to help employers comply with all the rules and regulations governing their organizations.

Issue link: https://digital.hrreporter.com/i/945279

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 7 of 7

Advantages, challenges come with new benefi t will have up to 30 days to notify the employee in writing of their decision. Employers will be al- lowed to approve the request fully or partially, deny it or sug- gest an alternative. Employers who deny a request or offer an alternative will have to tell the employee why. The CLC will only allow em- ployers to deny a request under certain circumstances. They in- clude requests that would result in additional costs that would be a burden for the employer and changes that would negatively affect the quality or quantity of work, the ability to meet custom- er demand, or any other aspect of performance in the workplace. An employer could also re- fuse a request if it was not able to reorganize work among exist- ing employees or hire extra staff to manage the change, or if the change would result in there not being enough work for the employee requesting it. Other reasons could be allowed under CLC regulations in the future. When the federal amend- ments were still at the proposal stage, NDP MP Pierre-Luc Dus- seault raised concerns during committee hearings that the rules could give employers too much latitude to deny requests. "As I see it, the scope is so broad that the employer could, practi- cally speaking, refuse to grant any request at any time, without having to provide any sort of evi- dence," he said. "It would be very easy for the employer to claim that the requested change would have a detrimental impact on the quality or quantity of work in the establishment." Margaret Hill, senior director of strategic policy and legisla- tive reform in the Department of Employment and Social De- velopment, said that the require- ments were in keeping with rules used in other countries that have legislated flexible work arrange- ments. "The model that was used for the right to request is very much informed by practice in New Zealand and the United King- dom, which introduced a right to request several years ago. These provisions mirror very closely those that are in the Unit- ed Kingdom," she said. "There is ample evidence that suggests they have been quite successful." She added that when the Ca- nadian government held consul- tations on flexible work arrange- ments in 2016, business groups highlighted the importance of employers having the right to re- ject some flex work requests. "We regularly heard concern from employers — small and medium-sized businesses, for instance — about what these criteria should be. There was an agreement amongst almost all stakeholders that there needed to be a formality around the pro- cess. There needed to be a way for employers to reject a request for flexible work arrangements," said Hill. It is likely that both employ- ees and employers will need to adjust to the changes that a right to request flexible work arrange- ments may bring. Studies on flex work state that while it offers many benefits for workers and employers (in terms of happier, more productive employees), it also poses challenges. These can range from commu- nication issues that could arise when employees are not at the workplace as frequently to per- ceptions of co-workers who feel negatively affected by an employ- ee's move to a flex work schedule. Other challenges include the need to change a culture that frowns on working in different ways in some workplaces and to rethink how employees do their work and how they are assessed. A report on the federal con- sultations stated that scheduling issues might also be challenging for some employers. "(T)here was a strong consen- sus that not all types of flex work are appropriate for every job. Stakeholders noted that flex- ible work arrangements may be especially challenging to imple- ment in sectors with 24/7 or continuous operations, such as aviation, rail and trucking, and in small and medium-sized en- terprises, where resources to ac- commodate flexibility are often very limited," it said. The report also highlighted possible financial challenges for both employees and employers. "Advocacy groups noted that changes in work schedules, hours and location, including moving to part-time work, can have neg- ative impacts on employees' pay and/or benefits (e.g. health, pen- sions) and that this can result in employees not taking advantage of opportunities for more flex- ibility, even if they or their family would benefit," it said. While the new requirements not yet in place, payroll profes- sionals in Ontario and those working for federally regulated employers should ensure that they are ready for any changes they may have to make. These could include adjust- ments to policies and procedures to properly track employees' dai- ly or weekly hours. An employ- ee's net pay, source deductions, and benefit and/or pension plan contributions could also change, depending on the type of flex work arrangement. Payroll professionals should ensure that their systems can quickly accommodate changes brought on by the new right to request rules, including keeping records of employee requests and employer responses. They should also remind managers of the importance of notifying payroll well in advance if employees are making changes to their work schedule that will affect payroll data. from FLEX on page 3 "There was a strong consensus that not all types of fl ex work are appropriate for every job." News March 2018 | CPR Published 12 times a year by Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd. Subscription rate: $185 per year Customer Service Tel: (416) 609-3800 (Toronto) (800) 387-5164 (outside Toronto) Fax: (416) 298-5106 E-mail: customersupport.legaltaxcanada@tr.com Website: www.thomsonreuters.ca One Corporate Plaza 2075 Kennedy Road Toronto, Ontario, Canada M1T 3V4 Director, Media Solutions, Canada Karen Lorimer Publisher/Editor-in-Chief Todd Humber Editor Sheila Brawn sbrawn@rogers.com Editor/Supervisor Sarah Dobson News Editor Marcel Vander Wier Sales Manager Paul Burton paul.burton@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9928 Marketing Manager Robert Symes rob.symes@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9551 Circulation Co-ordinator Keith Fulford keith.fulford@thomsonreuters.com (416) 649-9585 Payroll Reporter Can R Can R adian adian a www.payroll-reporter.com ©2018 Thomson Reuters Canada Ltd ISBN/ISSN: 978-0-7798-2810-4 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the written permission of the publisher (Thomson Reuters, Media Solutions, Canada). Return Mail Registration # 1522825 | Return Postage Guaranteed Paid News Revenue Toronto Canadian Payroll Reporter is part of the Canadian HR Reporter group of publications: • Canadian HR Reporter — www.hrreporter.com • Canadian Occupational Safety magazine — www.cos-mag.com • Canadian Payroll Reporter — www.payroll-reporter.com • Canadian Employment Law Today — www.employmentlawtoday.com • Canadian Labour Reporter — www.labour-reporter.com See carswell.com for information

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Payroll Reporter - sample - March 2018