In Jiri Pik v. Cure Data Inc., 2025 CanLII 38289 (ON LRB), the Ontario Labour Relations Board addressed a practical question that is increasingly pressing as remote work becomes more common: what employment law applies when an employee works remotely from outside Ontario?
The decision is notable for its emphasis on the employee’s actual, physical location when considering whether Ontario’s Employment Standards Act, 2000 (the “ESA”).
Background
The applicant, Jiri Pik, made a claim for relief under a number of provisions of the ESA, including unpaid wages, overtime pay, holiday premium pay, vacation pay. The applicant was located in Singapore, where he worked remotely, and appears to have been employed with Cure Data Inc. from March 2023 to August 2023 as Global Chief Technology Officer.
An Employment Standards Officer found that the ESA did not apply, given his remote work.
A key fact was not in dispute: the applicant admitted he was never physically present in Ontario during the alleged employment period, given that he worked remotely from Singapore.
Legal Issue
The central issue was whether Ontario employment standards legislation applied to an employee who worked remotely from outside Ontario and was never physically present in the province during the relevant period, and if the Employment Standards Officer’s decision should be upheld.
More specifically, the Board considered how section 3(1) of the ESA should be applied in a remote-work context, and what it means for work to be “performed” in Ontario.
Analysis
Section 3(1) of the ESA states:
-
3 (1) Subject to subsections (2) to (5), the employment standards set out in this Act apply with respect to an employee and his or her employer if,
-
(a) the employee’s work is to be performed in Ontario; or
-
(b) the employee’s work is to be performed in Ontario and outside Ontario but the work performed outside Ontario is a continuation of work performed in Ontario.
-
When assessing whether the ESA applies under section 3(1), the Board held that the focus is on the employee’s actual, physical location, when working remotely. There is no separate jurisdictional rule simply because the work was done remotely or online.
The decision therefore reinforces a territorial approach to ESA applicability in remote-work cases. While the modern workplace may allow employees to perform services from anywhere, and even where an individual is virtually joining meetings otherwise held in person in Ontario and entirely servicing Ontario-based clients, the Board’s analysis confirms that remote access alone does not create Ontario jurisdiction. Presence matters.
The Board concluded (emphasis added):
-
52. The Act, as currently written, requires an employee to have had some degree of physical presence in Ontario to access statutory minimum employment standards. As noted above, the modern rule for the interpretation of statutes in Canada is to read the words in their grammatical and ordinary sense, having regard to the scheme and object of the act and the intention of Parliament. Both branches of subsection 3(1) of the Act require the employee to have been “in” Ontario. The ordinary (and perhaps sole) sense of the word “in” is “physically present”. That simple English word does not take on any shades of meaning based on the employer’s head office location, jurisdiction of incorporation of the employer or the degree of parity between the employment standards in Ontario and any other jurisdiction in which the work is performed.
-
53. The Board finds that, given his admission that he was never physically present in Ontario during the period of his alleged employment, Mr. Pik’s work was neither work performed in Ontario nor a continuation of work performed in Ontario.
Key Takeaway
For employers, it is important to consider where employees are physically located in order to ensure that practices, employment agreements and policies comply with the relevant laws of that jurisdiction. If the employee is physically located in another province, it would be ideal to have counsel from that province review agreements and consult with local counsel, to ensure that differing employment standards do not result in any important omissions or liabilities.
For employees, you will want to be mindful of which jurisdiction’s laws govern in order to know which employment standards apply and whether you have a right to claims for overtime, holiday pay, vacation pay, etc. If you work remotely, spending most of your time in Ontario and only occasionally work from a home office in Michigan, for instance, Ontario’s ESA may apply and you could be entitled to substantial employee rights and entitlements that you may not have been aware of.
These concerns with remote work are especially pressing for employers and workers in a border city like Windsor, Ontario, and our team is well equipped to consult if you are having trouble navigating this complex area of law.