Canada’s hybrid workers are set to experience an increase in in-office days, leading to tension between employees and employers. The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted remote and hybrid work arrangements to shift towards more traditional office norms, with some of the largest financial services firms, including several major banks, shifting to four in-office days a week starting in the fall. Employment lawyers argue that companies are taking a harder line compared to a few years ago when the market favoured job-seekers rather than their bosses.

Return-to-office trends are more common with enterprise-level companies like banks and accounting firms compared to small businesses or those in industries more concerned about retaining talent. BMO, RBC, and Scotiabank have all stated that more workers will be required to be in the office four days a week beginning in the fall, citing operational improvements and opportunities for collaboration.

If an employee doesn’t wish to leave their current position and doesn’t require accommodation based on their family status or medical needs, they may need to comply with return-to-office mandates set by their employer. Family status may require accommodation, as many employees with young children have framed their days around childcare responsibilities. Medical accommodations may also be necessary if a person’s medical needs have changed since they were in the office on a more full-time basis before 2020.

Legal action may be necessary if an employee started working from home full time during the COVID-19 pandemic and their employer didn’t communicate whether the arrangement was temporary or permanent, but is now trying to get them back into the office four days a week. However, if there was clear communication by the employer that remote working wouldn’t last forever, it would be more difficult for an employee to launch any legal action.

Employees considering refusing to return to the office should be “very careful” because if their employer did have the right to compel a return to the office, it could be considered abandonment of employment, meaning the worker is not entitled to severance pay. If they are wrong about it, the consequences are quite serious.

Under certain circumstances, constructive dismissal may factor in, as an employer changes the fundamental term of their employment without sufficient notice and without the employee’s consent. If an employer has stuck with a remote or hybrid working arrangement for a long time, some employees might say “this is my new normal,” and the return to office constitutes a “meaningful change to my employment.” In some cases, employees may allege that their contract of employment has been breached and seek wrongful dismissal damages.

Companies have been systematic about slowly increasing in office days over time to avoid the likelihood of success of a constructive dismissal claim. It is up to the employee to prove they have been constructively dismissed, which can be difficult.

Source: Global News