Canadian Employment Law Today

May 5, 2021

Focuses on human resources law from a business perspective, featuring news and cases from the courts, in-depth articles on legal trends and insights from top employment lawyers across Canada.

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 1 of 7

Returning employees from layoff with reduced pay Question: If employees were temporarily laid off during the pandemic, can the employer bring them back at reduced pay until revenues reach pre-pandemic levels? Ask an Expert Have a question for our experts? Email RUDNER LAW, TORONTO with Stuart Rudner Answer: It depends. Contrary to popular be- lief, employers do not automatically have the right to lay off employees temporarily, even due to an unexpected downturn in business. Doing so can constitute a constructive dis - missal. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, several provincial governments amended their employment standards legislation such that temporary layoffs would be deemed to be an Infectious Disease Emergency Leave (IDEL) for the purpose of the legislation until at least July 3, 2021. However, temporary lay - offs can still constitute constructive dismissal under the common law. A constructive dismissal is a unilateral and substantial change to a fundamental term of the employment relationship, whereas a tem - porary layoff is clearly a substantial change and any reduction in hours or wages will have to be assessed to determine whether it meets that threshold. There are many myths out there, but, in reality, there are no absolute rules. Every case will have to be assessed based on its own particular circumstances. Nomi - nal changes will not constitute a constructive dismissal, and, given that there is an inherent discretion in this analysis, some courts will undoubtedly be reluctant to penalize em- ployers for relatively small pay cuts when the business itself was in dire financial straits. If the employer is looking to make a change that may be substantial, even if temporarily, it would be smart to seek the employee's con - sent before implementing the change in order to reduce the risk of a constructive dismissal claim. Employees will be allowed a reasonable period of time to assess the suitability of any changes. After that, they will be deemed to have accepted the changes and lose their right to claim constructive dismissal. A pru - dent employee will explicitly advise the em- ployer that they are assessing the changes in good faith and should not be deemed to have accepted them while they do so. Of course, they cannot assess the changes indefinitely, although there is no absolute rule as to how long they have to do so. If the employee either accepts the changes or waits too long to object, then there may be no issue and their employment will simply continue under the new terms. However, if the employee objects, then a decision must be made: The employer can either proceed with the changes or return to the previous terms of employment. If they choose the latter, then the issue is at an end. If the employer decides to proceed with the changes, in some cases, it will be strate - gic to give advance notice of the proposed changes. Doing so can reduce the employer's potential liability, since this notice can effec- tively count as notice of termination. To do so, the notice should clearly state that if the employee rejects the new terms, their employ- ment will terminate at the end of the notice period. In the meantime, the employment re- lationship will continue with the status quo. The employer should then provide a clear offer of re-employment on the new terms to commence after the end of the notice period. Since employees have a duty to mitigate their damages, any potential recovery with respect to a constructive dismissal claim will likely be reduced if they reject the offer, unless they can show it would be degrading or humiliating. The bottom line is that employers do not have carte blanche to change the employment relationship. However, by understanding the law of constructive dismissal, it is possible to minimize liability when implementing changes. Answer: Generally, yes. As an employer, you can protect the organization by ensuring that priva - cy and security concerns have been addressed, including specifying the remote access proce- dures requiring a certain level of internet service and security, and clearly setting out confidenti- ality obligations. You should also have policies to address confidentiality of electronic informa- tion, including basic issues such as who else will have access to equipment and accounts. Employers should be careful not to infringe upon employees' privacy rights in a manner that is more intrusive than needed to protect its busi - ness interests. For example, using surveillance applications to monitor employees, even if it is simply to ensure the security requirements are met, is likely to raise privacy concerns. Requiring remote employees to have a cer - tain level of internet service and security might lead to unexpected expenses for such employees and, accordingly, you may choose to compen- sate them. If you do so, you should clearly es- tablish what will be covered and the procedure to be followed. Importantly, it is not enough to simply have the policy in place. You should specify the po- tential consequences of violating such policy while retaining the discretion to implement various forms of discipline, as appropriate. You should also communicate and train employees on the policy in order to ensure that it is success - fully implemented. Stuart Rudner is the founder of Rudner Law, an employment law firm in Markham, Ont. He can be reached at or (416) 864-8500. This article was co-authored by Nadia Zaman, an associate at Rudner Law. She can be reached at (416) 864-8503 or nadia@rudner- Canadian HR Reporter, 2021 2 | | May 5, 2021 May 5, 2021 Internet requirements for remote employees Question: Can an employer require remote employees to have a certain level of internet service and security? Employees have a reasonable period of time to assess any changes and accept or reject them. Requiring a certain level of internet service and security might lead to unexpected expenses. CELT_Issue_30 MAY 5 FINAL.indd 2 CELT_Issue_30 MAY 5 FINAL.indd 2 4/21/2021 4:04:02 AM 4/21/2021 4:04:02 AM

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Canadian Employment Law Today - May 5, 2021