Join us for our 2026 Labour & Employment Webinar on February 4, where we’ll unpack the most significant developments shaping workplace law in Canada. This year brings critical updates that every employer needs to understand, from evolving termination clauses and new protections for gig workers to navigating new employment standards laws and creative immigration strategies
As we wrap up 2025 and look forward to 2026, here are 10 key developments Canadian employers should track:
In Ontario, there continues to be judicial scrutiny of employment contract termination clauses, particularly the use of the phrase “at any time”.
The Dufault case maintains precedential value. Please see our post here for more discussion on the case here and for more discussion on the issues with the use of the phrase “at any time”.
However, the recently decided Ontario Superior Court decision, Li v. Wayfair Canada Inc., upheld a termination clause that limited the employee’s entitlements to Employment Standards Act, 2000 minimums. The termination provision in question included “at any time” language which the court determined does not automatically render a termination provision non-compliant with the ESA as long as the provision is compliant when read as a whole.
In Bertsch v. Datastealth Inc. the Court of Appeal provided support for employers when it upheld a trial level decision which indicates that termination provisions can be enforced if they are clear and unambiguous, compliant with employment standards law and exclude common law entitlements.
With the introduction of the Digital Platform Workers’ Rights Act, Ontario joined British Columbia by introducing legislation regulating the gig economy. The Act provides several entitlements to employees in the gig economy including a right to minimum wage, amounts earned, and a recurring pay period and pay day. Beyond those entitlements, the Act also provides a right to information.
For more information about the requirements, please see our post here.Continue Reading Top 10 Canadian Labour & Employment Law Developments of 2025
In 2025, multinational giants across industries are redefining the scale and scope of global workforce reductions—with some cutting tens of thousands of jobs at a time in particular divisions, shuttering certain factories worldwide, moving to different countries, or otherwise undertaking large-scale restructuring—and this trend is likely to press on. Indeed, the World Economic Forum’s Chief
As part of our newly launched Doing Business in Canada Guide 2025, Chapter 13 on Labour and Employment offers a comprehensive overview of the legal landscape that governs the Canadian workplace. Whether your organization operates under federal jurisdiction or within one of Canada’s provinces or territories, understanding the dual framework of employment regulation is
Special thanks to our articling student Keyonna Trojcak for contributing to this update.
Baker v. Van Dolder’s Home Team Inc., 2025 ONSC 952, following a novel finding in the recent case of Dufault v. The Corporation of the Township of Ignace[1], held, among other findings, that a “without cause” termination provision
In the recent case of Preston v. Cervus Equipment Corporation, Ontario’s Court of Appeal offered employers a friendly reminder that well-drafted settlement documents will survive judicial scrutiny.
Preston underscores the necessity of clear and precise language in settlement agreements. Employers should use broad and inclusive release language that can encompass a wide range of claims, even those not explicitly mentioned. By carefully drafting settlement agreements, employers can ensure that the settlement documents have the intended effect of concluding the employment relationship without courts stepping in to frustrate the finality of the settlement documents.
The case revolves around the interpretation of a release and indemnity clause in the settlement documents signed by Mr. Preston after his termination from Cervus Equipment Corporation. Mr. Preston was employed by Cervus from 2014 to 2018 and participated in the company’s Deferred Share Plan.
Upon his termination without cause in January 2018, Mr. Preston had 4,964.04 vested stock units valued at $75,949.81 and 4,499 unvested stock units. Cervus informed him that his vested stock units could be exercised according to the Plan and offered him a severance package of 15 weeks’ pay in lieu of notice. The parties then discussed and settled the matter. The settlement documents included a broad release of claims, which Mr. Preston signed after receiving independent legal advice.
Notably, the release language in the settlement documents did not specifically refer to the stock plan and vested stock units in question, but did reference that Mr. Preston was releasing all claims connected to his employment, and that he had no entitlement or claim with respect to any bonus, share award, stock option, or similar plan that his employer had offered to him.Continue Reading Ontario’s Court of Appeal Highlights the Importance of Respecting Broad Release Language in Employment Settlement Agreements
Special thanks to our articling student Andie Hoang for contributing to this update.
As we wrap up 2024 and look forward to 2025, here are 10 key developments Canadian employers should track:
In February 2024, amendments to section 230 of the Canada Labour Code came into effect requiring federal employers to provide their employees with a graduated notice of termination based on the length of an employee’s continuous employment. Prior to this, employers had to provide a minimum of two weeks’ notice of termination or pay in lieu of notice to an employee who had completed at least three months of continuous employment with said employer.
The amendments also require employers to provide a written statement of benefits to employees who have been terminated. Prior to these amendments, this was only required for group terminations, but now will also apply to individual terminations. These statements must outline an employee’s right to vacation benefits, wages, severance pay and any other benefits and pay arising. A federal employer’s obligation to pay severance pay under section 235 of the Code, however, remains unchanged.
Please see our full blog on the updated amendments and notice lengths, “Reminder for Federal Employers: Changes to Termination Notice Period in Effect NOW.”
On March 21, 2024, Bill 149 – Working for Workers Four Act received Royal Assent as part of a series of legislative initiatives that have been introduced under the “Working for Workers” banner since 2021. Each piece of legislation in this series seeks to address various contemporary issues within Ontario workplaces. Bill 149 introduces significant changes to Ontario’s employment law, including:
The Act brings about a number of additional changes that will be relevant for employers, which are summarized in our blog post, “* UPDATE * Ontario Passes Bill 149, Working for Workers Four Act, 2024, Imposing Pay Transparency Requirements Among Other Things.”
The Ontario Superior Court of Justice in Dufault v. The Corporation of the Township of Ignace, 2024 ONSC 1029, delivered a decision that will impact the way employment agreements are drafted going forward. The Plaintiff was employed by the Defendant Township on a fixed-term contract. However, with 101 weeks remaining in her contract term, the Township terminated her employment without cause. Following this, the Plaintiff sued the Township for wrongful dismissal, arguing that the termination clause in their contract was unenforceable and that they were therefore entitled to reasonable notice of termination. Ultimately, the Court found the termination provisions unenforceable as the contract did not comply with the Employment Standards Act, 2000, for three reasons.Continue Reading Top 10 Canadian Labour & Employment Law Developments of 2024
In the recent case of Bertsch v. Datastealth Inc., 2024 ONSC 5593 (Bertsch), an Ontario court upheld a termination provision that did not specify every detail. While recent decisions suggest that such provisions may have to be flawless to be enforceable, Bertsch is a welcome decision showing that employers do not necessarily have to meet that high bar to protect themselves.
Bertsch reminds employers of the importance of including clear and compliant termination provisions in employment agreements. Ontario employers should review their agreements to ensure they meet the requirements of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 to avoid potential legal challenges. Employers should continue to confirm their termination provisions are:
Bertsch demonstrates that while courts will continue to closely scrutinize termination provisions in employment agreements, employers must only ensure that the provisions are legal and unambiguous. This provides some relief for Ontario’s employers by indicating that they do not necessarily have to rely on “perfect” termination clauses that reference all scenarios and laws in their employment agreements to enforce them.
Even with this positive decision for employers, we continue to encourage all Canadian employers to assess the enforceability of termination provisions in existing employment agreements.Continue Reading Don’t Let Perfect Be the Enemy of Excellent: Ontario Court Validates Termination Clause that is Unambiguous and Legal
What Canadian Employers Need to Know to Ring in 2024
In 2023, we helped Canadian employers overcome a host of new challenges across the employment law landscape. Many companies started the year with difficult cost-cutting decisions and hybrid work challenges. We’ve worked hard to keep our clients ahead of the curve on these issues, as well
Special thanks to our former summer associate Thanusa Sounthararajah for contributing to this update.
On July 1, 2023, the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA“), was amended to require temporary help agencies (“THAs“) and recruiters to obtain a license to operate in Ontario as of January 1, 2024. In addition, the Ontario
