This bill amends the Employment Standards Act, 2000 to replace the current statutory sick leave, family responsibility leave and bereavement leave framework with a single personal emergency leave regime and to establish a minister-run employer support program to help employers implement the new leave. It also changes the separate infectious disease emergency leave rules.
The change alters employer obligations on notice, evidence and wage calculation and creates a vehicle for the government to provide resources and, if funds are appropriated, direct financial support to employers. The amendments are presented as labour-market and public-health measures intended to reduce presenteeism and standardize leave across a range of personal and family emergencies.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill entitles qualifying employees to up to 10 paid personal emergency leave days per calendar year and raises paid infectious disease emergency leave to 10 days. It sets wage-calculation rules for paid days, limits entitlement to employees after one week of employment (with unpaid protection for those employed under one week), lets employers deem partial days as full days, and allows reasonable evidence but prohibits requiring a health practitioner’s certificate.
Who It Affects
All employers and employees covered by Ontario’s Employment Standards Act — with particular impact on small businesses, HR/payroll teams, and low-wage or precarious workers who rely on short-term paid leave. It also affects the Ministry of Labour (program delivery) and health practitioners insofar as the law defines who may provide evidence of illness.
Why It Matters
The bill restores and consolidates paid leave protections that affect absenteeism costs, scheduling and labour budgeting for employers while reducing incentives for sick employees to come to work. It shifts some cost risk back to employers (with a potential but non-guaranteed government backstop) and introduces operational rules that employers must weave into payroll and attendance systems.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The core of the bill replaces three separate statutory leaves with one consolidated personal emergency leave. Employees who have worked at least one week for an employer gain a statutory entitlement to take leave for their own illness or medical emergency, to respond to the death, illness or urgent matters of defined family members, or to handle other urgent family-related situations.
The entitlement is expressed as days per calendar year and is structured to be simple to administer: partial days can be treated as whole days for counting purposes if the employer chooses, and the law specifies who qualifies as a family member.
On pay and calculation, the employer must pay an employee for paid days off either by substituting the wages the employee would have earned that day or, for performance-based pay like commissions or piece work, by using the greater of the employee’s hourly rate and the applicable minimum wage; the statute also contemplates an alternate prescribed calculation. The bill explicitly caps entitlement so employees do not receive overtime rates, shift premiums or public-holiday premium pay in addition to paid leave, which narrows the employer’s exposure to premium pay costs but also creates timing and scheduling considerations when leave falls during premium periods.Evidence and verification are intentionally flexible: employers may require evidence “reasonable in the circumstances,” but the bill bars employers from insisting on a certificate from a qualified health practitioner as the only form of proof.
The statute defines “qualified health practitioner” (physicians, registered nurses, psychologists, and potentially other prescribed classes in prescribed circumstances), which both limits and leaves open regulatory scope for what health documentation counts.For employees employed less than one week, the protection is limited to unpaid days until they reach one week of employment; any unpaid days taken before that point count against their eventual paid entitlement once they cross the one-week threshold. The bill also provides that the entitlement is measured on a calendar-year basis and comes into force on Royal Assent.Separately, the minister must implement an employer support program to provide resources and supports — and may include financial support only if the Legislature appropriates funds for that purpose.
The minister must consult industry leaders in designing and implementing the program; beyond that the statute leaves program detail and any financial scale to the minister and to future appropriation decisions.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill entitles employees employed one week or longer to a total of 10 paid personal emergency leave days per calendar year.
An employer may count any part of a day of leave as one full day for the purposes of the annual entitlement.
Employers must pay leave days either by replacing the wages the employee would have earned that day or, for performance-based pay, by paying the greater of the employee’s hourly rate and the minimum wage; the bill also allows a prescribed alternative calculation method.
Employers may require evidence reasonable in the circumstances but cannot require a certificate from a qualified health practitioner as the only form of evidence; the statute defines ‘qualified health practitioner’ and permits further classes or circumstances by regulation.
The Minister must implement an employer support program (including consultation with industry) and may provide financial support only if the Legislature appropriates funds for that purpose.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
New definitions and change to 'regular wages'
The bill inserts a definition for 'personal emergency leave pay' and replaces the existing definition of 'regular wages' to expressly exclude many statutory pay items (including this new leave pay) from the regular-wage calculation. Practically, that clarifies which pay components count when computing entitlements tied to 'regular wages' elsewhere in the Act and prevents double-counting of premiums or other special pay when workers take personal emergency leave.
Personal emergency leave: scope, eligibility and covered relationships
This is the central rewrite. It creates an entitlement to leave for the employee’s own illness or medical emergency, the death, illness or urgent matters relating to a defined list of family members, and other urgent family situations. The list of covered individuals is broader than immediate family and includes step- and foster relatives and dependent relatives, which widens who can trigger protected leave. Eligibility begins after one week of employment for paid days; employees with less than one week get unpaid leave until they cross that threshold.
How paid days are calculated and premium limitations
The statute prescribes two calculation methods: paying what the employee would have earned for that day, or—if the employee receives performance-related pay—paying the greater of their hourly rate and the minimum wage for the hours they would have worked. The provision also makes explicit that leave does not carry entitlement to overtime or shift premiums, nor to public-holiday premium pay, constraining employer exposure to premium-level compensation for leave days but raising practical questions about scheduling and pay fairness when leave intersects premium periods.
Notice, evidence standard and partial-day rule
Employees must advise the employer when taking leave and must do so as soon as possible if the leave begins before notice. Employers may demand evidence reasonable in the circumstances but cannot require a medical certificate from a qualified health practitioner. The employer may deem any portion of a day taken as leave to be a full day for counting against the annual entitlement, a rule that simplifies tracking but may accelerate entitlement consumption.
Employer support program — consultation and conditional financial assistance
The minister is required to implement a program providing resources and supports to help employers comply with the new leave rules. The program must include consultation with industry leaders and may include financial support, but only where the Legislature has appropriated funds. The statute leaves the program’s operational design, eligibility for any financial assistance, and the scale of funding to ministerial discretion and budgeting decisions, creating an implementation gap to be filled administratively.
Increase to infectious disease leave and coming into force
The bill raises the paid infectious disease emergency leave number from three to ten days by amending subsection 50.1 (1.3). The Act comes into force on Royal Assent and sets its short title. That immediate commencement means employers must be ready to apply the new rules from assent forward.
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
- Employees with short-term illnesses or caregiving responsibilities — they gain a statutory entitlement to paid leave that reduces pressure to work while sick and covers a wider set of family relationships.
- Low-wage and precarious workers — the pay calculation rule that protects performance-pay workers by guaranteeing at least the minimum wage or their hourly rate offers a floor that can be meaningful for commission or piece-rate workers.
- Public health objectives — broader paid leave and a higher infectious disease leave entitlement reduce incentives for contagious employees to attend work, which can lower workplace transmission risks.
- Employers that receive government support — firms eligible for resources or any appropriated financial assistance will have reduced net costs and access to implementation guidance.
Who Bears the Cost
- Employers, especially small businesses — they face direct payroll costs for up to 10 paid days per employee each year and administrative costs to track entitlement, process claims and alter scheduling.
- Provincial government budgets — while the program can include financial support, that assistance requires legislative appropriation, creating potential fiscal pressure if uptake is high and costs are not contained.
- Payroll and HR departments — increased recordkeeping, changes to wage-calculation rules and new evidence-handling procedures add compliance work and potential need for system changes.
- Workers employed fewer than one week — they receive unpaid protection initially, which leaves very new hires more exposed until they pass the one-week mark.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The bill balances two legitimate goals — protecting workers and public health by guaranteeing paid time off, and limiting employer financial and administrative burden — but it does so without committing public funds. That trade-off forces a political and fiscal decision: expand protections and shift costs to employers (with uncertain relief), or limit entitlements to contain employer and government costs; the statute opts for protection with conditional, not guaranteed, public support.
The bill leaves important implementation choices to regulation and ministerial design. The employer support program is mandatory as a program but optional on the provision of financial assistance, because funding depends on appropriation; that creates uncertainty for employers about whether and when they will receive cost relief.
The consultation requirement is limited to 'industry leaders' — a phrasing that may privilege larger employers' perspectives over frontline, small-business or worker organizations when the program is designed.
Operational tensions are significant. Allowing employers to deem partial days as whole days simplifies tracking but accelerates depletion of an employee’s annual entitlement and can create perceptions of unfairness.
Banning a mandatory medical certificate limits employer-proof burdens but shifts the line-drawing problem to courts and tribunals: what counts as 'evidence reasonable in the circumstances' will be litigated in close or recurrent cases. The exclusion of premiums from payable leave reduces employer exposure to premium pay liabilities but may produce inequities for employees who regularly work premium-shift hours and then take leave during those periods.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.