Bill 30 — the Working for Workers Seven Act, 2025 — amends multiple Ontario statutes to: require job‑posting platforms to host and publish a fraud‑reporting mechanism and written policy; add a three‑day unpaid job‑seeking leave during a notice period; create a process for employer‑employee agreements and Director approvals for extended lay‑offs of 35+ weeks in a 52‑week period; authorize provincial regulation to limit municipal and City of Toronto powers over provincially funded training or skills‑development undertakings; and introduce administrative penalties under the Occupational Health and Safety Act and new and increased penalties and offences under the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act.
The Act couples regulatory facilitation for provincially funded training projects with stronger enforcement tools and compliance obligations across employment and safety regimes. For compliance officers and HR leaders the bill imposes new platform governance and records‑retention duties, creates a distinct leave right during termination notice periods, changes lay‑off mechanics and approval requirements, and expands inspectors’ and tribunals’ enforcement options — while raising procedural and municipal autonomy questions that will be resolved through forthcoming regulations.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act requires operators of job‑posting platforms to provide and publicly display a mechanism for users to report fraudulent public job postings and to keep a written policy on how they will handle such fraud; it adds a three‑day unpaid job‑seeking leave during a statutory notice period and authorizes extended lay‑off agreements (35+ weeks in 52) subject to Director approval. The Act creates an OHSA administrative penalty regime and prescribes WSIB‑related offences and administrative penalties, and permits provincial regulations to exempt provincially funded training facilities from municipal and planning controls.
Who It Affects
Online job‑posting platforms that publicly list jobs, employers and HR teams managing terminations and lay‑offs (non‑unionized employees primarily), construction/project sponsors and municipalities where provincially funded training facilities are proposed, workplace health and safety enforcement officers and employers subject to OHSA and WSIA obligations, and the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (Board) through reimbursement and enforcement duties.
Why It Matters
It shifts compliance risk onto platforms and employers (new reporting, retention and approval duties), centralizes provincial control over certain training developments, and gives inspectors a faster, administrative enforcement tool under OHSA while expanding WSIB’s monetary remedies — all of which will largely be detailed in regulations that can be made retroactive in specific parts of the Employment Standards Act.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The Act is a multi‑part package tying workforce development priorities to changes in employment, safety and municipal law. For online labour marketplaces, the Employment Standards Act additions force platform operators to install conspicuous reporting mechanisms for fraudulent publicly advertised job postings and to maintain a written policy explaining how such reports will be handled.
Platforms must keep copies of those policies for three years after they cease. Notably, the Act limits use of the ESA’s ordinary complaint process in respect of complaints alleging contraventions of that platform‑reporting section, channeling compliance away from that route.
On termination and lay‑off rules, the Act creates a short, unpaid job‑seeking leave: employees who receive notice under the ESA (part of a termination) get up to three days during their notice period to look for work, subject to a three‑day notice to the employer where possible and to employer requests for reasonable evidence. Separately, the Act revamps temporary lay‑off mechanics by permitting extended lay‑offs of 35 or more weeks in a 52‑week period — but not reaching 52 weeks in a 78‑week window — if the employee agrees, the agreement meets written disclosure requirements and the Director approves the extended lay‑off.
Unionized employees are excluded from the extended lay‑off regime.The OHSA changes include (1) treating accredited health and safety management systems as equivalents where regulations permit, (2) a new defined defibrillator reimbursement program administered by the Workplace Safety and Insurance Board with regulatory eligibility and operational rules and limited appeal rights, and (3) a new administrative penalty regime that lets inspectors issue monetary penalties for contraventions and that provides a regulatory framework for amounts, service, review and recovery. Under this regime, paying an administrative penalty bars subsequent criminal charges for the same contravention.Under the Planning Act, City of Toronto Act and Municipal Act amendments, the province may make regulations that limit or remove municipal or City powers over specific classes of undertakings that involve buildings funded in part by provincial training‑related funding agreements; the Planning Act carve‑out expressly excludes lands in the Greenbelt Area.
Finally, the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act amendments prohibit employers from making false or misleading statements to the Board, add administrative penalties for premium non‑payment and other failures, create a new offence for failing to comply with premium payment obligations, raise possible fines when multiple counts are convicted in the same proceeding (up to $750,000 per conviction), and add statutory aggravating factors for sentencing.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Job‑posting platforms must display a conspicuous mechanism to report fraudulent publicly advertised job postings, post a written fraud policy on the platform and retain copies of each such policy for three years after it ceases to be in effect.
Employees who receive statutory termination notice under the ESA are entitled to up to three days unpaid job‑seeking leave during the notice period (employer may require reasonable evidence; employees should, if possible, give three days’ notice before taking the leave).
Employers and non‑union employees may agree to an extended lay‑off of 35 or more weeks in any 52‑week period (but not 52+ weeks in any 78‑week period); such agreements must disclose the employer’s intended recall date, cannot be withdrawn by the employee, and require Director approval for the extended lay‑off to be effective.
Inspectors under the OHSA can now issue administrative penalty notices and set penalties in accordance with regulations; paying a penalty prevents subsequent prosecution for the same contravention and the statute contemplates regulatory detail on amounts, review procedures and enforcement.
The WSIA makes it an offence to fail to comply with premium obligations and prohibits false or misleading statements to the Board; the Act adds administrative penalties and allows courts to impose fines up to $750,000 per conviction where multiple counts are convicted in the same proceeding, with prescribed aggravating factors to guide sentencing.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Fraud reporting for job‑posting platforms, job‑seeking leave and extended lay‑offs
This schedule creates the statutory definition of “job posting platform”, requires such platforms to host a conspicuous reporting mechanism and to publish and retain a written policy on fraudulent publicly advertised job postings for three years after it ceases. It also creates a new Job Seeking Leave (three unpaid days during a notice period, subject to procedural notice and evidence rules) and extensively retools lay‑off and termination rules to permit employer‑employee agreements for extended lay‑offs (35+ weeks in 52) conditioned on Director approval. Practically, employers, HR teams and platform operators must update policies, retention schedules and termination checklists; the Director’s approval step will generate an administrative process and forms set out by regulation.
Accredited safety system equivalency, defibrillator reimbursements, and administrative penalties
This schedule treats accredited health and safety management systems as equivalents where regulations allow; creates a Board‑administered defibrillator reimbursement program (eligibility, amounts, application timing and limits to be set by regulation) and explicitly removes the right to appeal Board reimbursement determinations to WSIB appeal mechanisms; and establishes Part IX.1, giving inspectors the authority to issue administrative penalty notices, prescribe amounts via regulation, require payment to the Minister of Finance, provide for review by a prescribed reviewer, and enable collection of unpaid penalties as Crown debts. These measures shift some enforcement from criminal prosecution to an administrative monetary regime and vest considerable discretion in inspectors and the Minister for publication and recovery.
Provincial carve‑out for provincially funded training and skills undertakings
The Planning Act addition provides that undertakings partly funded by the Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development, whose buildings are to be used for training or skills development, are generally not subject to the Planning Act or to sections 113 or 114 of the City of Toronto Act, subject to prescribed exceptions; the Schedule also adds regulatory authority to apply or limit the Acts’ application to those undertakings. The Schedule explicitly excludes the Greenbelt Area from the exemption. This creates a pathway for provincially backed training projects to bypass municipal planning controls if regulations say so.
Regulatory power to limit municipal authority over training projects
Both Acts gain mirror provisions authorizing the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make regulations that impose limits or conditions on municipal and City of Toronto powers in respect of classes of training or skills development undertakings or to prohibit municipal exercise of specific powers in prescribed circumstances. The consequence is that provincial regulations can render municipal by‑laws inoperative to the extent of the limits, creating legal gaps between local planning objectives and provincially financed training initiatives.
Inspector authority to require separate in‑person interviews
This schedule amends inspection powers to permit an inspector conducting an inspection to require a person to attend an in‑person interview separate and apart from other persons. The change increases the inspector’s discretionary investigatory toolkit and may affect employers, migrant workers and representatives questioned during compliance audits or immigration‑related investigations.
False statements prohibition, administrative penalties and upgraded offences
The WSIA changes make it an offence for employers to make false or misleading statements to the Board regarding claims; they add administrative penalties for non‑compliance (including premium non‑payment), create a new offence tied to failure to comply with premium obligations, provide for court‑ordered restitution, and authorize fines up to $750,000 per conviction where multiple counts are convicted in the same proceeding. The schedule also lists aggravating factors the court must consider for employer defendants, increasing sentencing exposure for serial non‑compliance.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on this topic across all five countries.
Explore this topic in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Job seekers receiving termination notice — they gain up to three unpaid days during the notice period to search for work, attend interviews or training and may use that time without exhausting other statutory leaves.
- Provincial training program sponsors and funders — the Planning, City of Toronto and Municipal Act carve‑outs reduce municipal planning barriers for provincially funded training and skills‑development projects, potentially accelerating capital build‑outs.
- Workers at workplaces covered by accredited health and safety management systems — equivalency provisions can streamline compliance where accredited systems meet project requirements, reducing duplicative certification burdens.
- Victims of fraudulent online job postings and platform users — mandatory reporting mechanisms and published platform policies should improve detection and removal of fraudulent postings and raise public visibility of platform safeguards.
- Claimants under the WSIA system — the prohibition on false statements and the increased enforcement tools aim to protect the integrity and sustainability of the insurance plan by deterring employer fraud and improving premium compliance.
Who Bears the Cost
- Job‑posting platform operators — must implement conspicuous reporting mechanisms, write and post fraud policies, and retain policy records for three years, imposing operational and record‑keeping costs and likely compliance overhead for smaller platforms.
- Employers using extended lay‑offs — must obtain written agreements, disclose intended recall dates, apply for Director approval, retain extended‑lay‑off agreements for three years, and face added administrative burdens and potential publicity and legal scrutiny.
- Municipalities and the City of Toronto — may lose planning authority over certain provincially funded training projects where provincial regulations limit local powers, constraining local land‑use control and revenue/leverage tied to development approvals.
- Employers subject to OHSA and WSIA enforcement — face new administrative penalties from inspectors, increased criminal and financial exposure under WSIA (including potential fines up to $750,000 per conviction in some contexts), and new obligations tied to defibrillator equipment and reimbursement processes.
- Workplace Safety and Insurance Board — will administer defibrillator reimbursements, collect and manage new administrative penalty revenues, and implement regulatory frameworks and reporting requirements, creating operational and fiscal implementation costs.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma of the Act is balancing provincial priorities to accelerate skills infrastructure, streamline enforcement and deter fraud against procedural fairness, local planning autonomy and predictable compliance burdens: it simplifies and centralizes power (regulatory carve‑outs, Director approvals, inspector‑issued penalties) to achieve policy goals, but doing so concentrates discretion, reduces traditional avenues for appeal and local input, and shifts burdens onto platforms, employers and municipalities without yet spelling out the regulatory guardrails.
The Act delegates substantial detail to regulation across multiple schedules, which means the real operational and compliance effects will depend on forthcoming regulatory design. For example, the effectiveness and burden of the job‑posting platform rules will hinge on prescribed criteria that may exempt certain platforms, the definition of “fraudulent” postings, and whether there is a meaningful enforcement route given the statutory bar on filing an ESA complaint under subsection 8.7(4).
Similarly, the extended lay‑off regime depends on the Director’s approval processes, application form requirements and any retroactive rules set under the ESA’s new regulatory paragraphs. Those regulatory choices will determine whether Director approval is a paper exercise or a substantive gatekeeper.
The administrative penalty approach under the OHSA trades criminal prosecutions for faster monetary enforcement, but it raises procedural questions: inspectors set penalty amounts within regulatory ranges, review is by a prescribed reviewer (not a court), and payment precludes later prosecution for the same act — raising concerns about proportionality, transparency and access to judicial review. The defibrillator reimbursement scheme removes appeal rights to WSIB appeal tribunals for Board determinations about eligibility, concentrating finality in administrative discretion and limiting recourse for applicants.
Provincial carve‑outs for training undertakings create a predictable avenue for funding‑linked projects but also risk clashes with local land‑use priorities and community process; excluding Greenbelt lands signals political and environmental trade‑offs but leaves open grey areas for other sensitive lands. Finally, WSIA’s new high‑end fines and aggravating factors increase employer exposure but also leave open how courts will apply those factors and whether penalties will be meted out in a way that ties culpability to employer size and fault.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.