Recording Conversations in the Workplace

A common question that employees have is if they can record their conversations in the workplace. There are several reasons why one may want to create a recording. One obvious reason is trying to prove wrongdoing by a co-worker, superior or subordinate.

Firstly, you can record conversations with other members of your workplace. The Criminal Code outlines that individuals can record private conversations with other parties as long as one of the parties in the conversation consents to the recording. Therefore, if you are recording a conversation with yourself and a co-worker, your consent alone is sufficient. This is the case regardless of the conversation being in-person, over the phone, or via another medium.

According to our wrongful dismissal lawyer in Toronto, the recording party must also be present in the conversation. You cannot leave a recording device in your boss’s office to attempt to catch him or her “in the act”. Even if you are the topic of discussion between others in a separate room, you cannot record their private conversation.

Some Limitations to Recording Conversations in the Workplace

It is a non-starter to record conversations where confidential information or trade secrets are being shared. The consequences for recording such things can range from reputational damage, work relationships, and trust destroyed to termination with cause. At the very least, recording a conversation which reveals trade secrets or confidential information can lead to disciplinary measures.

Another aspect of recordings in the workplace for people to understand is whether there may be any breach of privacy issues. Capturing videos of others in a more vulnerable state (intimate, without clothing, etc.) can be considered a breach of privacy. The person in the vulnerable position does not need to be one of the parties involved in the conversation. For example, if the video recording between two doctors captures a patient changing, this is also potentially a breach of privacy.

Should you Record your Conversations?

Just because it is legal to record conversations does not mean it is always a good idea. Trust and honesty are key components of an employer–employee relationship. Recording someone without their consent or knowledge can damage that relationship, which may impact your career. It can also affect your reputation inside and outside of your workplace. It is important to be mindful of these considerations.

When Should You Record Conversations at Work?

The reason for creating a recording at work may very well be legitimate. There are several good reasons to record a conversation in the workplace. For example, one may choose to record their conversation upon termination to have a record of what entitlements the employer might have offered. Another reason to record a conversation is if someone in the workplace is spreading inaccurate information about you. A recording of the conversation with that person may prove the inaccurate information wrong. It is helpful in scenarios such as these to preserve a record of mistreatment or abuse in the workplace when there is no other way of showing such evidence.

Other Considerations

You should not edit the recording. Doing so can make it difficult to prove the authenticity of everything said or done in the recording. Individuals should also refrain from recording things that do not apply to them.

Lastly, whether the court will consider your recording to be reasonable also depends on the context of the situation. Questions such as why you made the recording: did you believe it was necessary, and what are your intentions with the recording may all be asked. This will help the court determine if the recording is justified and if your employer may be able to terminate you with cause.

Break In Service Time

A common issue terminated employees have is that they may have left their employer for a period of time and then rejoined at a later date. It is very important to determine if there has been a break in service as this could drastically change termination entitlements at common law. The Ontario Court of Appeal recently dealt with this issue in the Currie v. Nylene Canada decision.

The Facts and Discussion:

The Plaintiff, Ms. Currie, originally began working with her employer back in 1979. In June 2017, she was advised that she had satisfied the criteria to receive her accumulated pension plan. In order to access those funds, she was required to retire. The employer, Nylene, told her she could retire (to get access to the pension plan), but would then offer her employment following the retirement. Ms. Currie ultimately decided to access her pension plan.

Less than two weeks later, Ms. Currie accepted Nylene’s offer of employment. The offer stated:

  • Your current job responsibilities and reporting relationships will remain the same
  • You will be compensated at your current salary level or rate of pay
  • Your accrued and unused vacation balances, if any, will be recognized
  • You will be eligible to participate in Nylene Canada’s employee benefits plan
  • Your service will be recognized for purposes of determining vesting and benefits eligibility under the Nylene Canada benefit plan.
  • You agree to carry out your work in accordance with the policies and procedures of Nylene Canada. The policies and procedures are available to all employees through the shared file management system.
  • You agree that the wearing of required protective safety equipment and complying with safety rules when called for are conditions of your employment.

In December of 2018, Nylene terminated Ms. Currie’s employment. She was 58 years old at the time of her dismissal.

The trial judge awarded Ms. Currie damages based on a period of reasonable notice of 26 months. Nylene then appealed the decision to the Ontario Court of Appeal. Nylene argued that the trial judge erred in using the period of time from 1979 until 2018 as her total service time. They submitted that her June 2017 retirement constituted a break in service of her employment. The rehiring through the June 2017 employment letter reset her years of service clock back to zero.

The trial judge did not agree with Nylene’s argument that there was a break in service with the retirement and subsequent rehiring. He stated reasons such as:

  • Currie’s employment record did not acknowledge an alleged retirement;
  • Currie did not provide any notice of resignation or retirement;
  • Currie relied upon the company’s representation that everything would remain the same when she signed the June employment letter;
  • Currie was told if she accessed her pension, nothing in her employment would change, and
  • Currie was not prepared to stop working but opted to sign the documents prepared by Nylene only after her employer approached her and informed her of the pension entitlements.

The Court of Appeal agreed that, given the findings of fact, it was acceptable for the trial judge to conclude that the retirement/rehiring process proposed by Nylene for the limited purpose of accessing her pension plan did not affect her years of service. As a result, the Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge that a 26-month reasonable notice period was warranted. She worked for the employer for 40 years, from the age of 18 until 58. She had limited education and specialized skills that made it very difficult to find comparable employment. Thus, a 26-month reasonable notice period was justified.

Main Takeaway

Even accounting for the other factors, Ms. Currie would not have received 26 months but for the trial judge concluding there was no break in service time due to the retirement/rehiring process that took place in June 2017. Had there been deemed a break in service, the notice period awarded would have been substantially less.

New Minimum Wage Law in Ontario

The minimum wage is one of the most talked about employment laws, as it is something that overtly affects so many people in Canada. Depending on what province you are in and on your employment contracts, you may have a different minimum wage compared to Ontario (which is the focus of this post).

As of October 1st, 2022, a new law took effect in which increased the Ontario general minimum wage from $15 per hour to $15.50 per hour. It is an increase of 3.33%, which is to help mitigate the impact of rising costs of living and inflation. Some of these costs include the fundamentals such as housing, food, clothing, transportation, and childcare.

This minimum standard (along with all other minimum employment standards) is set out in the Employment Standards Act (ESA), and its corresponding regulations. However, it is important for both employers and employees to understand that the general minimum wage does not apply to all ‘minimum wage workers’. There are other special categories of employees who have different minimum wage rates. Section 23.1(1) of the ESA states the special category employees and their corresponding minimum wage rate:

  • Students under the age of 18 years old who work less than 28 hours per week during the school year, or work during the summer break
    • $14.60 per hour (previously $14.10 per hour)
  • Hunting and fishing guides who work less than 5 consecutive hours per day
    • $77.60 per hour (previously $75 per hour)
  • Hunting and fishing guides who work 5 or more hours per day (consecutive or not)
    • $155.25 per hour (previously $150.05 per hour).
  • For employees who are homeworkers (note: homeworkers who are under the age of 18 must be paid the homeworker minimum wage, not the student minimum wage)
    • $17.05 per hour (previously $16.50)

Also notable (although it is not new law) is that there are a number of exceptions to minimum wage laws. The following is a list of practitioners who are exempt from minimum age (among other employment standards):

  • Architects and architecture students
  • Lawyers and law students
  • Professional engineers and engineering students
  • Accountants and accounting students
  • Surveying and surveying students
  • Veterinarians and veterinarian students
  • Chiropodists and chiropodist students
  • Chiropractors and chiropractor students
  • Dentists and dental students
  • Massage therapists and massage therapist students
  • Physiotherapists and physiotherapist students
  • Doctors and medical students
  • Optometrists and optometry students
  • Pharmacists and pharmacy students
  • Psychologists and psychologist students
  • Naturopaths and naturopathy students
  • Teachers and teachers in training
  • Commercial fishers
  • Real estate salespeople and brokers
  • Farmers whose employment is directly related to the primary production of
    • Eggs, milk, grain, seeds, fruit, vegetables, maple products, honey, tobacco, herbs, pigs, cattle, sheep, goats, poultry, deer, elk, ratites, bison, game birds, wild boar, cultured fish

Whether you are an employer or employee, if you are working in one of these positions, it is important to understand the general $15.50 minimum wage does not apply to you or your employees.