@import url(‘https://fonts.googleapis.com/css2?family=Montserrat:wght@400;500;600;700&display=swap’);
body { : ‘Montserrat’, Arial, sans-serif; 36454f; : 16px; : 1.75; }
h2 { : clamp(1.15rem, 3vw, 1.45rem); 023054; font-weight: 700; margin: 2rem 0 0.7rem; : 1.3; }
h3 { : clamp(0.98rem, 2.5vw, 1.1rem); 023054; font-weight: 600; margin: 1.4rem 0 0.4rem; }
p { margin-bottom: 1.1rem; }
a { 023054; text-decoration: underline; }
ul { margin: 0 0 1.1rem 1.2rem; }
ul li { margin-bottom: 0.4rem; : 0.97rem; }
.updated { : 0.82rem; 5a6b78; font-weight: 600; text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: 0.05em; margin-bottom: 1.1rem; }
.accent { background: #b0c4de; border-left: 4px solid #023054; border-radius: 0 6px 6px 0; padding: 16px 18px; margin: 1.8rem 0; : 0.95rem; 023054; font-weight: 600; : 1.6; }
.answer-box { background: #023054; border-radius: 8px; padding: 20px 22px; margin: 1.8rem 0; }
.answer-box .ans-label { : 0.75rem; font-weight: 700; d9e6f5; text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: 0.08em; margin-bottom: 8px; }
.answer-box .ans-text { : clamp(0.95rem, 2.5vw, 1.1rem); fff; font-weight: 700; : 1.5; margin-bottom: 10px; }
.answer-box p { : 0.9rem; d9e6f5; margin: 0 0 0.6rem; : 1.65; }
.answer-box p:last-child { margin-bottom: 0; }
.routes { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, minmax(200px, 1fr)); gap: 14px; margin: 1.4rem 0 2rem; }
.route { background: #023054; border-radius: 8px; padding: 16px 14px; }
.route .r-label { : 0.72rem; font-weight: 700; d9e6f5; text-transform: uppercase; letter-spacing: 0.06em; margin-bottom: 6px; }
.route h3 { : 0.9rem; fff; margin: 0 0 6px; }
.route p { : 0.85rem; d9e6f5; margin: 0; : 1.55; }
.route p a { fff; }
.options { margin: 1.4rem 0 2rem; }
.option { display: flex; gap: 14px; margin-bottom: 16px; align-items: flex-start; }
.opt-num { background: #023054; fff; : 0.8rem; font-weight: 700; min-width: 28px; height: 28px; border-radius: 50%; display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; flex-shrink: 0; margin-top: 3px; }
.opt-body h3 { margin: 0 0 5px; : 0.95rem; 023054; }
.opt-body p { margin: 0; : 0.9rem; : 1.6; }
.grid { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, minmax(200px, 1fr)); gap: 14px; margin: 1.4rem 0 2rem; }
.card { background: #f5f8fb; border-top: 3px solid #023054; border-radius: 6px; padding: 16px 14px; }
.card h3 { : 0.9rem; margin: 0 0 7px; 023054; }
.card p { : 0.87rem; margin: 0; : 1.6; }
.takeaways { display: grid; grid-template-columns: repeat(auto-fit, minmax(200px, 1fr)); gap: 12px; margin: 1.2rem 0 1.8rem; }
.takeaway { background: #f5f8fb; border-left: 4px solid #b0c4de; border-radius: 0 6px 6px 0; padding: 12px 14px; : 0.9rem; 36454f; : 1.55; }
.takeaway strong { display: block; 023054; margin-bottom: 3px; }
.faq { margin: 1.5rem 0 2rem; }
.faq-item { border-bottom: 1px solid #d0dce6; padding: 14px 0; }
.faq-item:first-child { border-top: 1px solid #d0dce6; }
.faq-q { : 0.95rem; font-weight: 600; 023054; margin: 0; }
.faq-a { : 0.9rem; 36454f; margin-top: 8px; : 1.65; }
.related { background: #f5f8fb; border-left: 4px solid #b0c4de; border-radius: 0 6px 6px 0; padding: 18px 20px; margin: 1.8rem 0; }
.related h3 { 023054; : 0.95rem; margin: 0 0 8px; }
.related ul { margin: 0 0 0 1.1rem; }
.related li { margin-bottom: 0.4rem; : 0.9rem; }
.disclaimer { : 0.85rem; 5a6b78; font-style: italic; margin-top: 1.6rem; }
@media (max-width: 600px) {
body { : 15px; }
.routes, .grid, .takeaways { grid-template-columns: 1fr; }
.accent { padding: 14px; }
.answer-box { padding: 16px; }
}
Employers withdraw and rewrite workplace policies constantly: a remote work arrangement ends, a bonus scheme changes, a benefit is cut, a diversity programme is wound down, an office attendance requirement returns. Most of these decisions are treated as operational. Some of them are unilateral changes to the terms of employment, and the difference decides whether the organisation has made a business decision or handed a group of employees a constructive dismissal claim.
Updated September 2026
This article sets out when a policy is a term of employment, the three ways an employee can respond to a unilateral change, the notice route that makes a change lawful, and the obligations that survive a policy being withdrawn.
Where a change is significant and imposed without that notice or without agreement, an employee can treat it as a constructive dismissal and claim as though terminated.
Separately, some obligations do not depend on the policy at all. An accommodation granted under the Human Rights Code is a statutory duty, not a discretionary benefit, and withdrawing the policy does not withdraw the duty.
First question: is the policy a term of employment?
Not every policy is contractual. A handbook that reserves the right to amend, a practice that was never promised, or a discretionary benefit described as discretionary can usually be changed without the same exposure. A policy that was offered as part of the compensation package, relied on at hiring, incorporated into the employment agreement, or applied consistently enough to become an implied term is a different matter.
More likely contractual
Promised in the offer or the agreement, relied on when the person took the role, consistently applied over years, tied to compensation, or described in terms that create an entitlement rather than a discretion.
Less likely contractual
Set out in a handbook that expressly reserves the right to amend, framed as discretionary and administered that way, applied inconsistently, or operational in nature rather than touching pay, hours, duties or location.
The change that is almost always material
Anything affecting compensation, hours, reporting line, duties or work location. These are the terms courts treat as fundamental, which is why remote work withdrawal and bonus plan changes generate most of these disputes.
The change that rarely is
Process, tooling, internal reporting formats, and administrative requirements. Employees may dislike them, but they do not go to the substance of the bargain.
The three responses to a unilateral change
Where an employer imposes a change the employee has not agreed to, the Court of Appeal set out the available responses in Wronko v. Western Inventory Service Ltd., 2008 ONCA 327. Understanding all three matters, because the third is the one employers do not plan for.
Obligations that survive the policy
Accommodation under the Code
Where an arrangement was granted because of a disability, family status or another protected ground, it is a statutory duty rather than a policy benefit. Withdrawing the policy does not withdraw the duty, and the accommodation has to be assessed on its own terms to the point of undue hardship. See undue hardship and the duty to accommodate.
Statutory minimum standards
No policy change reduces an entitlement under the Employment Standards Act, 2000. Leaves, overtime, public holidays and notice are floors that a policy cannot contract below, and an attempt to do so is void rather than merely unenforceable.
Health and safety duties
Harassment and violence policies are required under the Occupational Health and Safety Act. They can be rewritten but not removed, and the underlying duties to investigate and to maintain a safe workplace do not move with the document.
Reprisal exposure
Where employees object to a change and are then treated adversely, the objection may itself be protected if it engaged a statutory right. Selective application of a new policy to those who complained is the most common version of this. See reprisal and retaliation at work.
Worked example: winding down a diversity programme
This is the change that generated the most legal questions over the past two years, and it illustrates the analysis well because the risk genuinely runs in both directions.
Putting one in place. Section 14 of the Human Rights Code permits special programmes designed to relieve hardship or economic disadvantage, or to assist disadvantaged groups to achieve equal opportunity. A programme that expands access, removes barriers and addresses documented disadvantage generally sits inside that exception. A programme that guarantees outcomes, applies different selection standards between candidates, or operates as a per-decision quota generally does not, and the Tribunal assesses the effect rather than the intention behind it. See hiring discrimination in Ontario.
Taking one away. The exposure shifts rather than disappearing. Where the programme was delivering accommodations, those obligations survive it. Where it formed part of what someone was promised on joining, the contractual analysis above applies. Where it was addressing documented systemic disadvantage, removal without replacement can support an adverse effect argument. And where the wind-down is applied selectively to people who objected, that is a reprisal question.
The durable lesson is not about diversity programmes specifically. It is that the legal question on withdrawal is the same for any programme: what was promised, what was relied on, what is statutorily required regardless, and how the change is being communicated.
How to make a policy change defensible
Frequently asked questions
Can an employer change or withdraw a workplace policy in Ontario?
Yes, but how depends on whether the policy is a term of employment. A genuinely discretionary policy, or one in a handbook reserving the right to amend, can usually be changed. A policy that formed part of the bargain is a contractual term, and changing it unilaterally without reasonable notice or agreement can be a constructive dismissal.
Is withdrawing a policy a constructive dismissal?
It can be, where the policy was a term of employment and the change is fundamental. Changes touching compensation, hours, duties, reporting line or work location are the ones courts most often treat that way. The employee has to object rather than continue working under the new terms indefinitely, because prolonged acquiescence can be read as acceptance.
How much notice is required to change a term of employment?
Generally the same length of notice that would be required to terminate the employee, assessed on age, service, position and the availability of comparable work. For a long-service employee that can be many months. Giving that notice is what allows a significant change to be imposed lawfully without the employee’s agreement.
What if an employee rejects the change but keeps working?
This is the response set out in Wronko v. Western Inventory Service Ltd., 2008 ONCA 327, and it is the one employers least often plan for. Where the employee makes clear they do not accept the change and continues working, the employer must either let them continue on the original terms or give reasonable notice that the old contract is ending. Dismissing them in the meantime is a termination without notice.
Do accommodations end when the policy providing them ends?
No. An accommodation granted because of a disability, family status or another protected ground exists under the Human Rights Code, not under the policy. Withdrawing the programme does not withdraw the duty. Each arrangement has to be assessed individually and can only be ended where continuing it would cause undue hardship.
Are diversity programmes lawful in Ontario?
Within limits. Section 14 of the Human Rights Code permits special programmes designed to relieve disadvantage or assist disadvantaged groups toward equal opportunity. A programme that expands access and removes barriers generally falls inside that exception. One that guarantees outcomes, applies different selection standards, or operates as a per-decision quota is more likely to be characterised as discriminatory, and the Tribunal assesses effect rather than intent.
Is removing a programme legally safer than keeping it?
Not necessarily. The risk shifts rather than disappearing. Accommodations delivered through the programme survive it, contractual commitments made at hiring still bind, removal where documented systemic disadvantage existed can support an adverse effect argument, and selective application to those who objected raises reprisal. The safest position is a documented, consistently applied decision, in either direction.
How Achkar Law helps employers
Achkar Law advises employers across Ontario on policy design, workforce changes, and the constructive dismissal exposure that comes with them. The useful work happens before the announcement, because once a change has been communicated as effective immediately the options narrow considerably.
See our workplace policies service, our labour and employment compliance practice, and our workplace disputes and litigation team where a claim has been made.
This article is general information about Ontario employment law and is not legal advice. Whether a policy is a term of employment, and what notice a particular change requires, depend on the documents and the circumstances. Information is current as of September 2026. An employment lawyer can advise on your specific situation.
{
“@context”: “https://schema.org”,
“@type”: “FAQPage”,
“mainEntity”: [
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Can an employer change or withdraw a workplace policy in Ontario?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “Yes, but how depends on whether the policy is a term of employment. A genuinely discretionary policy, or one in a handbook reserving the right to amend, can usually be changed. A policy that formed part of the bargain is a contractual term, and changing it unilaterally without reasonable notice or agreement can be a constructive dismissal.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Is withdrawing a policy a constructive dismissal?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “It can be, where the policy was a term of employment and the change is fundamental. Changes touching compensation, hours, duties, reporting line or work location are the ones courts most often treat that way. The employee has to object rather than continue working under the new terms indefinitely, because prolonged acquiescence can be read as acceptance.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “How much notice is required to change a term of employment?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “Generally the same length of notice that would be required to terminate the employee, assessed on age, service, position and the availability of comparable work. For a long-service employee that can be many months. Giving that notice is what allows a significant change to be imposed lawfully without the employee’s agreement.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “What if an employee rejects the change but keeps working?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “This is the response set out in Wronko v. Western Inventory Service Ltd., 2008 ONCA 327. Where the employee makes clear they do not accept the change and continues working, the employer must either let them continue on the original terms or give reasonable notice that the old contract is ending. Dismissing them in the meantime is a termination without notice.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Do accommodations end when the policy providing them ends?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “No. An accommodation granted because of a disability, family status or another protected ground exists under the Human Rights Code, not under the policy. Withdrawing the programme does not withdraw the duty. Each arrangement has to be assessed individually and can only be ended where continuing it would cause undue hardship.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Are diversity programmes lawful in Ontario?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “Within limits. Section 14 of the Human Rights Code permits special programmes designed to relieve disadvantage or assist disadvantaged groups toward equal opportunity. A programme that expands access and removes barriers generally falls inside that exception. One that guarantees outcomes, applies different selection standards, or operates as a per-decision quota is more likely to be characterised as discriminatory.”
}
},
{
“@type”: “Question”,
“name”: “Is removing a programme legally safer than keeping it?”,
“acceptedAnswer”: {
“@type”: “Answer”,
“text”: “Not necessarily. The risk shifts rather than disappearing. Accommodations delivered through the programme survive it, contractual commitments made at hiring still bind, removal where documented systemic disadvantage existed can support an adverse effect argument, and selective application to those who objected raises reprisal.”
}
}
]
}
The post Changing or Withdrawing a Workplace Policy in Ontario appeared first on Achkar Law.