Litigation Law Newsletter, Volume 1, Number 3: COVID-19
Click “Subscribe Now” to get attorney insights on the latest developments in a range of services and industries.
March Focus
COVID-19
With all that is going on in the world, I wanted to provide you with a few key things to keep in mind regarding employers and employees.
As an employer, it is your duty to ensure that the workplace is safe. Although most businesses have been shutting down, the law as it currently stands does not prevent all businesses in Ontario from continuing to operate. Therefore, if you are continuing to operate, please keep the following in mind as an employer:
- Require employees returning from a high-risk area to immediately report such travel as well as any symptoms. Require such employees to work remotely for 14 days and only return once cleared by a medical professional.
- While layoffs are unfortunate and sad, be careful not to trigger constructive dismissals (i.e., making a substantial change to the terms of the employee’s contract without the employee’s consent, the employee has the option of treating his employment as having been terminated).
- Take the appropriate steps to ensure privacy of medical and health information.
- Consider that employees with a legitimate health and safety work refusal cannot be disciplined or dismissed.
Of late, the question that keeps arising is what happens if an employee refuses to attend the workplace because he fears that it poses a danger to his health and safety, even though the employee is not sick?
For starters, this situation is unprecedented. The legislation with the most applicability to the current situation is the Occupational Health and Safety Act (“the Act”). Under the Act, an employee can refuse to work if he believes the workplace poses a danger to his health or safety. Occupational illness is defined as a condition that results from exposure in a workplace to a physical, chemical, or biological agent to the extent that the normal physiological mechanisms are affected and the health of the worker is impaired. Occupational illness might include exposure to disease-causing bacteria and viruses, for example, or to chemicals or dust.
Until now, we are unaware of any worker who has attempted to rely on the Act as a basis for refusing to attend work because of COVID-19. However, with the current predicament changing rapidly, it won’t be long before this argument is made to the Courts on an urgent basis.
Recent Insights
- May 29, 2025 Industry Alerts FCC Expands National Security Measures for Telecom Industry
- May 22, 2025 Industry Alerts Cyber Risk, Real Consequences: DOJ Steps Up Enforcement
- May 21, 2025 In the News Reuters recently published Sara Jodka’s article, “Plastic, fantastic ... and potentially litigious: AI Barbie goes from dollhouse to courtroom.”
- May 21, 2025 In the News Precedent published Daniel Waldman’s article, “The complete guide to life after hireback.”
- May 20, 2025 Industry Alerts Washington State Joins Right-to Repair-Movement
- May 20, 2025 Recognition Kevin Doherty has been named as one of the new members of the Captive Review Hall of Fame
- May 19, 2025 Industry Alerts Plugged In: An EV Newsletter Vol. 3, No. 5
- May 19, 2025 Industry Alerts Suzanne Sukkar delivered the keynote address at the 3rd Annual National Arab American Bar Association – Michigan Chapter (NAABA-MI) Gala 2025. Suzanne was also presented with a State of Michigan Special Tribute award.
- May 19, 2025 Media Mentions Daniel Cotter was recently mentioned in a Bloomberg Law article, “Seventh Circuit Fuels Confusion Around Privacy Insurance Coverage.”