Many employers in Ontario were supposed to have a disconnect policy by the beginning of this month, but experts say unclear legislation may not stop emails and after-hours calls as easily as some employees might hope.
The plan was conceived in the depths of the pandemic, when many Ontario residents began working remotely. Defenders hoped that the provincial government’s policy on the right to a break, which is part of the Workers’ Labor Act, would strike a balance between work and private life.
Employment lawyers and human resources experts say this is a positive first step and could contribute to change in some work cultures, but many say it relies too much on a good employer to do it right.
“The law is pretty toothless,” said Matthew Fisher, a partner at Lecker & Associates Law who specializes in labor law. “What it really does is it requires employers of a certain size to make policies in certain circumstances,” he added.
“The problem is that they rely on the good faith of employers … There is nothing in the legislation that requires a policy to be sensible.”
Employers in Ontario with more than 25 employees had to have written policies by June 2 to specify how employees can separate themselves from work-related communications. (Shutterstock / Prostock Studio)
June 2, 2022 was the deadline for Ontario employers with more than 25 workers to have written policies. They should describe in detail how employees can detach themselves from work-related communications, including emails, audio and video calls, and send or receive messages when they are destined not to work. The policy may or may not include details of the time of day, the types of communication that are acceptable, and who can contact an employee outside of business hours.
Fisher says a hypothetical cynical employer could hypothesize that employees “have the right to disconnect between four and 4:15 a.m. Tuesday.”
Victory for good employers?
Erin Bury is the CEO of Willful, an Ontario startup that helps people plan property online.
Bury says she developed a proactive break-up policy just before Ontario law was passed. Her company is just under 25 employees, but it is growing, which means it may be needed soon.
“Before the pandemic, we had an office in downtown Toronto and we were pretty much an office culture … It was pretty easy to break up because you were just going to physically leave the office,” she said.
But the company is already working remotely with some employees in other time zones, which means someone in British Columbia can send an email to someone in Toronto after normal business hours, she said.
The company’s disconnection policy encourages employees to schedule emails, turn off their chat notifications on their phones after business hours, and consider sending a video message instead of having a late meeting, she said.
The policy also states that although there may be times when tasks are required after hours, if this becomes a model, the employee has the right to a defense, whether management is involved in the cause or offers free time.
Bury says Willful’s policy has been welcomed. She would like to see government policy as mandatory for smaller companies, noting that a start-up culture can lead to overworked employees.
Steph Little, a senior human resources consultant at Bright + Early, says all the talk about legislation comes down to better policies, even if the legislation itself is weak. (Submitted by: Steph Little)
Confusion over legislation has generally led to positive action by good actors, said Steph Little, a senior human resources consultant at Bright + Early, a Toronto-based human resources consulting firm.
Good employers, including some with fewer than 25 employees and not legally in need of policy, have been encouraged by discussions on the issue, she said. Employers wanted to “be more active, get ahead of politics and put things in place to ensure that people can break up.”
Her clients report better productivity and organization from both managers and employees when people realize they need to do everything within working hours.
Writing work standards that seem healthy and desirable is “really attractive to candidates and appreciated by existing employees,” she said.
Too much at the discretion of the employer
The problem is that not all companies will want to go beyond what the law requires, which is not much, says Daniel Lublin, an employment lawyer and founding partner at Whitten & Lublin, based in downtown Toronto.
“Few companies will be shackled by the inability to call emergency workers after hours,” he said.
“It is false to call it the right to end a relationship,” he said, because it comes down to the employer’s assessment of whether they want it to be so.
“It really comes down to whether the employer has made a choice to create a real substantive right or not,” he said.
But for companies that incorporate the right to effectively sever their ties into their policy, this means that employees can go to the Ministry of Labor if they are warned, suspended or fired because they have not responded to something outside the deadline. in politics.
Nita Chinzer, a professor of human resources and business consulting at the University of Guelph, says that, unfortunately, bad employers are likely to continue to be a problem despite the new policy. (Submitted by: Nita Chhinzer)
Nita Chinzer, a professor of human resources and business consulting at Guelph University, says companies that traditionally violate labor law “will not suddenly start complying with this one law when they have not complied with others.”
Predatory employers will continue to do what they love and be “driven by a culture of fear,” Chinzer said.
However, “this will positively provide employees with a path to correction,” and the intention to reduce the burnout that comes from prolonged stress is a very good thing, she said.
Add Comment