Paper light employment files
Grant Machum and Guy-Etienne Richard
Maintaining employment files requires physical space and can be costly. Nowadays many employers are moving away from keeping paper files to electronic storage. This brings up two issues:
- Are employers required to keep a paper file if it is in electronic format?
- How long do employers need to retain employment files?
Are employers required to keep a paper files?
If employers decide to keep the records electronically, they must ensure they have a process that protects the integrity and the security of the information, and a written procedure outlining that process. For example, digital copies should be exact copies of the original and kept in a non-changeable form. This will help ensure the electronic copies are admissible in court.
Alberta is the only Canadian province which does not allow employment files to be stored solely in electronic format. The Electronic Transactions Act General Regulation specifically excludes employment records, suggesting that a paper copy should be kept on site.
All other provinces allow electronic files to be kept without the need for a paper copy. Legislation applicable in the various provinces varies slightly and employers are advised to consult the specific legislation in their province to ensure compliance.
How long do employers need to retain employment files?
The minimum period that employee records must be kept for varies across the provinces, as well as the various legislation. For example, provincial employers in Nova Scotia should keep the following legislation in mind:
- The Nova Scotia Labour Standards Code requires that records be maintained for three years.
- The Limitation of Actions Act generally requires that a claim be brought within two years of the date the claim is “discovered”.
- The Occupational Health and Safety Act and the First Aid Regulations both require that documents relating to incidents or orders be kept for five years.
- The Workers’ Compensation Act does not specify a retention period, but allows claims for injury or disease up to five years after a workplace accident.
- The Income Tax Act allows Revenue Canada to perform an audit within six years from the end of the tax year.
Accordingly, retention period can vary greatly depending on the nature of the document and province. The table below provides a general overview of the relevant periods (in years) for various employment matters for each province.
Legislation |
NL |
NS |
PEI |
NB |
QC |
ON |
MB |
SK |
AB |
BC |
Employment Standards |
4 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
2 |
Workers Compensation |
6 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
— |
2 |
4 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
Occupational Health & Safety |
2 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
1 |
5 |
5 |
2 |
3 |
Limitation of Actions |
6 |
2 |
6 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
7 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
Human Rights |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
Income Tax |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
— |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
Revenue Administration |
7 |
— |
— |
— |
6 |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Depending on the nature of the documents (e.g. records of accidents, payroll, personal information, criminal records, etc) the retention period may vary.
Limitation legislation generally allows claims to be brought up to an absolute maximum of 15 to 30 years from the date of incident. However, there are some exceptions: where a physical altercation has occurred at work, such as assault, battery, or sexual abuse (or you suspect such an altercation may have occurred), records should be kept indefinitely. Such a claim, in particular the injury it causes, may not be “discovered” by the employee until years after the fact.
As retention periods can vary greatly, we would be pleased to advise on the specific legislative requirements for your documents.
This update is intended for general information only. If you have questions about the above information, and how it applies to your specific situation, please contact a member of our Labour & Employment group.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
Archive
Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…
Read MoreJonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…
Read MorePeter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…
Read MoreRick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…
Read MoreBrian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…
Read MoreJonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…
Read MoreJennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…
Read MoreJennifer Taylor Introduction Appeal courts in Ontario1 and Nova Scotia2 have now issued decisions about Trinity Western University’s proposed law school (“TWU”) in British Columbia, and at first glance they couldn’t be more different. The Court of Appeal for…
Read MoreJoe Thorne1 and Giles Ayers2 Limitation periods serve a critical function in the civil justice system. They promote the timely resolution of litigation on the basis of reliable evidence, and permit litigants to assess their legal exposure…
Read MoreOn July 14, 2016 the Supreme Court of Canada issued a significant decision affecting federally regulated employers across Canada. In Wilson v. Atomic Energy of Canada Limited the Court held that the purpose of the unjust dismissal…
Read More