Employer obligations for the October 21 federal election
With the federal election coming up next week on October 21, 2019, it is a good time for a reminder of the employer obligations under the Canada Elections Act.
Employees who are eligible to vote (Canadian citizens who are 18 years of age or older) are entitled to have three consecutive hours while the polls are open in order to do so. Whether an employer is required to allow an employee time off from work to vote depends on the employee’s scheduled working hours and the available polling hours (which vary by region). Where an employer is required to allow such time off from work, it gets to choose the hours.
For example, let’s assume the available polling hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. If the employee is scheduled to work from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., then the employer is not required to provide time off. The employee has (more than) three consecutive hours to vote after work. However, if the employee is scheduled to work from 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., then the employer is required to allow the employee additional time off such that the employee has three consecutive hours to vote. In that example, the employer could allow the employee to leave early at 5:30 p.m.
Where an employee is entitled to time off to vote in the federal election, the employer is not permitted to make a deduction from their pay or impose a penalty for that time. This means that the time off to vote must be paid as if the employee worked their full scheduled hours that day.
Finally, please note that there is an exception for employees of certain transportation companies who are employed outside of their polling division in the operation of a means of transportation, if the additional time off cannot be allowed without interfering with the transportation service.
This update is intended for general information only. Should you have questions on the above, please contact a member of our Labour & Employment group.
Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.
Archive
Rick Dunlop In my December 15, 2016 article, Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?, I noted the Report’s1 suggestion that there was a lack of research to reliably determine when individuals are impaired…
Read MoreRick Dunlop and Michelle Black On March 14, 2014, CanMar Contracting Limited (“CanMar”) granted a day off to two of its hard working and longer serving employees so they could spend time with their respective families. That…
Read MoreJoe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The doctrine of unconscionability is an equitable remedy available in exceptional circumstances where a bargain between parties, be it a settlement or a release, may be set aside on the basis that…
Read MoreJonathan Coady After more than five years, the Prince Edward Island Information and Privacy Commissioner (the “Privacy Commissioner”) has completed her review into more than sixty records withheld by a local school board on the…
Read MorePeter McLellan, QC & Richard Jordan Introduction On February 21, 2017 the Nova Scotia Government passed Bill 75 – the Teachers’ Professional Agreement and Classroom Improvement (2017) Act. This Bulletin will provide some background to what is, today,…
Read MoreBruce Grant, QC and Justin Hewitt In the recent decision of Scotia Mortgage Corporation v Furlong1 the Supreme Court of Newfoundland and Labrador confirmed that where a law firm acts jointly for the borrower and lender in the placement…
Read MoreThe Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Sabean v Portage La Prairie Mutual Insurance Co, 2017 SCC 7 at the end of January, finally answering an insurance policy question that had divided the lower…
Read MoreIn preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…
Read MorePerlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…
Read MoreJoe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3 the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…
Read More