Skip to content

Work life balance and ban on non-competes – changes to laws in Ontario

*Last updated: December 17, 2021 (originally published December 1, 2021)

Mark Tector and Will Wojcik

Bill 27Working for Workers Act (“Act”), 2021, received Royal Assent on December 2, 2021, and is now in force in Ontario. The Act amends Ontario’s Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”) and other statutes in the province.

The most significant changes for Ontario employers include the requirement for a “disconnecting from work” policy and a prohibition on non-compete agreements.

Disconnecting from work policy

Employers with 25 or more employees as of January 1, 2022, are required to implement a written policy with respect to disconnecting from work by June 2, 2022.

  • “Disconnecting from work” means not engaging in work-related communications, including emails, telephone calls, video calls or the sending or reviewing of other messages, so as to be free from the performance of work.
  • Employers must provide a copy of the written policy to employees within 30 days of preparing the policy or if an existing policy is changed, within 30 days of the changes being made.
  • A copy of the policy must also be provided to a new employee within 30 days of their hire date.
  • Going forward, employers with 25 or more employees as of January 1 of any year, are required, before March 1 of that year, to implement a “disconnecting from work” policy.

At this time, there remains several outstanding questions regarding the “right to disconnect” provisions, including what will be required to be included in the policy, or whether certain employees may be exempt from the requirements. It is expected that these details will be addressed at a later date through regulations. Our team continues to monitor these changes and will provide updates as they become available.

Prohibition on non-compete agreements

The Act also amends the ESA to prohibit the use of non-compete agreements and clauses, which are defined as “an agreement, or any part of an agreement, between an employer and an employee that prohibits the employee from engaging in any business, work, occupation, profession, project or other activity that is in competition with the employer’s business after the employment relationship between the employee and the employer ends”. The Act carves out two exceptions to the prohibition:

  • Exception for an employee who is an executive, defined as “any person who holds the office of chief executive officer, president, chief administrative officer, chief operating officer, chief financial officer, chief information officer, chief legal officer, chief human resources officer or chief corporate development officer, or holds any other chief executive position”.
  • Exception in the context of a sale (including a lease) of a business or a part of a business and, as a part of the sale, the purchaser and seller enter into an agreement that prohibits the seller from engaging in any business, work, occupation, profession, project or other activity that is in competition with the purchaser’s business after the sale and, immediately following the sale, the seller becomes an employee of the purchaser.

Subject to the exceptions noted above, any non-compete agreement in violation of the Act entered into after October 25, 2021, will be rendered void. According to a statement from the Ministry of Labour, the prohibition will not apply retroactively to agreements formed prior to October 25, 2021. Please contact our team regarding how the Act may affect your agreements.

Other noteworthy changes under the Act

The Act further amends the ESA and other statutes in Ontario, including:

  • Amending the ESA to establish a detailed licensing framework for recruiters and temporary help agencies.
  • Amending the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act, 2006 to make it easier for internationally-trained immigrants to get licensed to practice in specific regulated professions, as well as trades, by prohibiting strict Canadian experience requirements as qualifications for registration.
  • Amending the Occupational Health and Safety Act to require the owner of a workplace to provide access to a washroom to persons making deliveries to or from the workplace with some minor exceptions.
  • Amending the insurance fund under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997 in response to the pandemic to provide certain circumstances where the board can distribute the insurance fund in excess of specified amounts to Schedule 1 employers.

Implication for employers

Ontario employers should familiarize themselves with the new amendments under the Act and await regulatory guidance in respect to the requirements for the “disconnecting from work” policy. Further, employers should stay informed regarding how the non-compete prohibition will be interpreted and enforced. Employers in other provinces should be mindful of the developments in Ontario as these may prompt other jurisdictions to adopt similar changes.

As always, employers are encouraged to seek legal advice from our team if they have any specific questions or concerns regarding the impact of the Act on their operations.


This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour and Employment group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: “Lien”-ing Towards Efficiency: Upcoming Amendments to the Builders’ Lien Act

June 29, 2017

By Brian Tabor, QC and Colin Piercey Bill 81 and Bill 15, receiving Royal Assent in 2013 and 2014 respectively, are due to take effect this month. On June 30, 2017, amendments to the Builders’…

Read More

Weeding Through New Brunswick’s Latest Cannabis Recommendations

June 26, 2017

New Brunswick continues to be a thought leader in the field of regulation of recreational cannabis and provides us with a first look at what the provincial regulation of recreational cannabis might look like. New…

Read More

Client Update: Elk Valley Decision – SCC Finds that Enforcement of “No Free Accident” Rule in Workplace Drug and Alcohol Policy Does Not Violate Human Rights Legislation

June 23, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Richard Jordan In Stewart v. Elk Valley Coal Corporation, 2017 SCC 30, a six-judge majority of the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) confirmed a Tribunal decision which concluded that the dismissal of an…

Read More

Client Update: The Grass is Always Greener in the Other Jurisdiction – Provincial Acts and Regulations under the Cannabis Act

June 22, 2017

By Kevin Landry New Brunswick’s Working Group on the Legalization of Cannabis released an interim report on June 20, 2017. It is a huge step forward in the legalization process and the first official look at how legalization…

Read More

Client Update: Cannabis Act regulations – now we are really getting into the weeds!

June 15, 2017

Rick Dunlop and Kevin Landry As we explained in The Cannabis Act- Getting into the Weeds, the Cannabis Act introduces a regulatory regime for recreational marijuana in Canada. The regime promises to be complex. The details of legalization will be…

Read More

Client Update: Requirement to register as a lobbyist in New Brunswick

June 15, 2017

On April 1, 2017, the New Brunswick Lobbyists’ Registration Act was proclaimed into force (the “Act”), requiring active professional consultant or in-house lobbyists to register and file returns with the Office of the Integrity Commissioner of New…

Read More

How much is too much?: Disclosure in multiple accident litigation in English v House, 2017 NLTD(G) 93

June 14, 2017

Joe Thorne and Jessica Habet How far can an insurer dig into the Plaintiff’s history to defend a claim? And how much information is an insurer entitled to have in order to do so? In English v.…

Read More

Client Update: Court of Appeal confirms accounting firms may take on multiple mandates for the same company

June 14, 2017

Neil Jacobs, QC, Joe Thorne and Meaghan McCaw The Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal recently confirmed that accounting/auditing firms may take on several mandates in respect of companies that may or do become insolvent in Wabush Hotel Limited…

Read More

Negligence claims in paper-only independent medical examinations: Rubens v Sansome, 2017 NLCA 32

June 13, 2017

Joe Thorne and Brandon Gillespie An independent medical examination (“IME”) is a useful tool for insurers. An IME is an objective assessment of the claimant’s condition for the purpose of evaluating coverage and compensation. Where a…

Read More

Client Update: Mental injury? Expert diagnosis not required

June 12, 2017

On June 2, 2017 the Supreme Court of Canada released its decision in Saadati v. Moorhead, 2017 SCC 28, clarifying the evidence needed to establish mental injury. Neither expert evidence nor a diagnosed psychiatric illness…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top