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
IN THIS ISSUE: Putting Trust in your Estate Planning, by Paul Coxworthy and Michael McGonnell The Risks, for Insurers in Entering Administration Services Only (ASO) Contracts, by Tyana Caplan Angels in Atlantic Canada, by Allison McCarthy, Gavin Stuttard and Adam Bata…
Read MoreBill 31, An Act Respecting Human Rights, came into force on June 24, 2010 replacing the Human Rights Code (the “Code”). For more information, please download a copy of this client update.
Read MoreIN THIS ISSUE Expanded Fines and Penalties for Environmental Offences: The New Federal Environmental Enforcement Act Spam about to be Canned? Preparing a Business for Sale Business Disputes Corner – Place of Arbitration and Selected…
Read MoreThe Nova Scotia Court of Appeal has unanimously upheld the province’s legislative limits on general damage recovery for “minor injuries”. Today’s decision, authored by Chief Justice Michael MacDonald, completely affirms the January 2009 decision of…
Read MoreThe Canada Revenue Agency (“CRA”) announced helpful administrative positions concerning the new rules under the Fifth Protocol to the Canada-US Income Tax Convention, 1980 which will come into effect on January 1, 2010. The CRA…
Read MoreIN THIS ISSUE Contractor Held Liable for Business Interruption: Heyes v. City of Vancouver, 2009 BCSC 651 When Can a Tendering Authority Walk Away if Bids are Too High? Crown Paving Ltd. v. Newfoundland &…
Read MoreWithholding tax and other issues under the Fifth Protocol The Fifth Protocol to the Canada-US Tax Convention, 1980 introduced significant changes which may affect the use of most unlimited companies and other so-called ULCs. These…
Read MoreIN THIS ISSUE An Eye for an Eye: Alberta Court of Appeal Upholds Finding of Retaliation Liability as a Result of Generosity in Quebec Undue Hardship Established in Scent Case Parents of Twins Get Double…
Read More- « Previous
- 1
- …
- 62
- 63
- 64