The Working for Workers Act, 2023 packages changes to seven Ontario statutes that affect enforcement against recruiters and employers, workplace leave and coverage rules, regulatory licensing, government program administration and privacy, and corporate penalties under health and safety law. It is an omnibus statute: some changes are technical and regulatory, others raise fines and alter who can collect and receive personal information for program delivery.
For professionals: the Act raises potential compliance costs and legal exposure for recruiters, employers and large corporations; it alters how “establishment” is defined for employment standards (with implications for home-based work); and it permits broader inter-ministerial data-sharing to support employment and social benefit programs. Regulatory bodies and delivery partners will need to update application requirements, privacy practices and contracts to reflect the new authorities and obligations.
At a Glance
What It Does
The Act amends seven statutes to (1) change review and penalty rules for contraventions involving passports or work permits, (2) expand who qualifies for certain employment leaves and when a private residence counts as an employer’s establishment, (3) require licensing applicants to disclose recruiter-fee practices, (4) permit broader collection and disclosure of personal information for employment and social benefit program delivery, and (5) increase the corporate maximum fine under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Who It Affects
Recruiters, employers (including temporary help agencies), provincially regulated professions and licensing bodies, delivery agents/partners and ministries administering employment and social benefit programs, and corporations subject to OHSA enforcement.
Why It Matters
The Act amplifies enforcement risk for actors who recruit or employ foreign nationals, tightens licensing vetting for recruiters, moves the province toward greater operational data-sharing between ministries, and raises financial exposure for corporations on health and safety convictions — all of which require policy, privacy and compliance updates across public and private actors.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
Schedule 1 tightens enforcement tools tied to the Employment Protection for Foreign Nationals Act, 2009: it directs the Ontario Labour Relations Board to consider whether a penalty assessed for contraventions involving passports or work permits is excessive and to reduce it where appropriate, while simultaneously raising maximum fines for convictions (distinct individual and corporate caps and potential jail time for individuals). That combination signals a two-track enforcement approach — more severe criminal/penal caps on conviction, paired with a formal review mechanism to temper administrative penalties when they are punitive.
Schedule 2 focuses on the Employment Standards Act, 2000. It expands reservist-style leave eligibility to cover employees who are in treatment, recovery or rehabilitation resulting from participation in certain operations or activities.
The Schedule also introduces a tailored definition of “establishment” for Part XV and key enforcement and review parts of the Act so a private residence counts as the employer’s business location when the employee works there and nowhere else. Practically, employers must update notice/posting practices and temporary help agencies must ensure required information reaches affected workers on the first day of any notice period; the Lieutenant Governor in Council is also given explicit transitional regulation authority for implementing these changes.Schedule 3 amends the Fair Access to Regulated Professions and Compulsory Trades Act to broaden the definition of registration, impose a public-interest duty on regulated professions to ensure adequate supply of qualified professionals, and require that Canadian experience be replaceable by prescribed alternatives where accepted.
These changes push regulatory bodies toward more flexible credential recognition and toward planning obligations in consultation with ministers.Schedules 4, 6 and 7 create a framework for cross-ministry operational data flows. The Ministry of Training, Colleges and Universities gains explicit purposes for collecting and sharing personal information to administer, evaluate and fund employment programs, including fraud detection and research; the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development (MLITSD) is authorized to collect personal information on behalf of the Minister of Children, Community and Social Services (MCCSS) for ODSP and Ontario Works administration and to disclose that information to MCCSS, delivery agents and delivery partners.
Those provisions limit access to collection only (MLITSD cannot themselves use data unless separately authorized) but allow notice of collection to be satisfied by public website posting when the information is indirectly collected.Schedule 5 raises the maximum corporate fine under the Occupational Health and Safety Act from $1.5 million to $2 million. This straightforward increase raises potential financial exposure for corporations convicted under OHSA while leaving the underlying offence structure intact.
Across the Act, changes come into force either on Royal Assent or at specified later dates tied to prior Working for Workers legislation, creating staggered implementation that regulators and employers must track.
The Five Things You Need to Know
Schedule 1 requires the Ontario Labour Relations Board, when reviewing a notice for contraventions involving a passport or work permit, to reduce the penalty if the Board finds it excessive or punitive (see new subsection 30(3)).
Schedule 1 raises criminal/penal maximums for those offences: individuals face up to $500,000 and/or 12 months’ imprisonment; corporations face fines up to $1,000,000.
Schedule 2 adds clause 50.2(b.2) to the Employment Standards Act giving leave entitlement to employees in treatment, recovery or rehabilitation from physical or mental injury or medical emergency that results from participation in certain operations or activities.
Schedule 2 inserts a new Part XV definition (section 53.2) making an employee’s private residence an employer ‘establishment’ for specified parts of the Act when the employee works exclusively there.
Schedules 6 and 7 add statutory authority (ODSP s.53.1 and Ontario Works s.72.1) for MLITSD to collect personal information, including indirectly, on behalf of MCCSS and to disclose that information to MCCSS and to delivery agents/partners, with public-website notice permitted for indirect collection.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Board review plus higher conviction penalties for passport/work‑permit offences
The Schedule amends the Act so the Ontario Labour Relations Board must assess whether a notice penalty for contraventions related to passports or work permits is excessive or punitive and reduce it if appropriate; this creates a built‑in mitigation path for administrative penalties. At the same time, the Schedule raises the maximum fines and adds potential imprisonment for convictions, creating a larger gap between administrative notices and criminal conviction exposure. Practically, employers and recruiters who handle foreign nationals should reassess risk models: the Board’s review offers a procedural remedy, but conviction risk — and the potential for high fines or imprisonment — increases the stakes for compliance and prosecution strategies.
New leave for treatment and private‑residence as establishment; posting and transitional rules
This Schedule adds an entitlement to leave where an employee requires treatment, recovery or rehabilitation stemming from participation in specified operations or activities. It also inserts a new definition limiting when a private residence qualifies as an employer’s establishment — only where the employee works there and at no other employer business location — which matters for notice, investigations and enforcement. The Schedule tightens notice mechanics (prescribed forms to the Director and required posting/provision to employees on the first day of a notice period), imposes specific obligations on temporary help agencies, and authorizes transitional regulations to manage implementation timing.
Broader definition of registration, public‑interest duty, and alternatives to Canadian experience
The definition of 'registration' is recast to cover all modes of granting membership regardless of terminology, and the Act now imposes a duty on regulated professions to plan, in consultation with ministers, to ensure adequate numbers of qualified professionals in Ontario. Crucially, the Schedule requires that Canadian experience may only be used if regulators also accept prescribed alternatives — shifting credential assessment rules toward alternative pathways and tighter regulatory oversight of access to professions.
Expanded collection, uses and disclosure for employment program administration
Section 15 is expanded to authorize the collection, disclosure and use of personal information for planning, funding and administering employment programs, including fraud detection, monitoring, evaluation and longitudinal research. The Minister may disclose personal information to entities that administer or deliver funded programs, and to MCCSS for social benefits program delivery. Organizations receiving data should expect new operational and privacy obligations, and the Ministry gains a statutory basis for cross-program data analytics.
Higher corporate maximum penalty
The corporate maximum fine for a conviction under the OHSA is raised from $1.5 million to $2 million. The change is narrow in scope but increases potential monetary liability for corporate defendants and may influence settlement, prosecution and corporate compliance priorities given the larger financial exposure.
Statutory authority for MLITSD collection and disclosure to MCCSS, delivery agents and partners
Both Acts authorize the Minister of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development to collect personal information (including indirectly) on behalf of MCCSS and to disclose that information to MCCSS and delivery agents or delivery partners for program administration. The provisions explicitly limit MLITSD’s own access to the collected information unless other law permits it, permit indirect collection by delivery agents/partners, and allow the statutorily required notice of collection to be satisfied by a public website posting in indirect‑collection cases. Contracting, privacy impact assessments and governance controls for delivery partners will require updates to reflect these authorities and limits.
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
- Foreign nationals: stronger statutory vetting and licensing language increases the chance that recruiters who illegally charge fees are excluded from licensing rolls, potentially reducing exploitative recruitment practices.
- Employees who are injured through participation in certain operations or activities: new leave rights for treatment, recovery and rehabilitation provide a clearer statutory basis for time off and job protection while recovering.
- Regulated‑profession applicants with foreign credentials: the requirement that Canadian experience be replaceable by prescribed alternatives expands pathways to registration if regulators adopt those alternatives.
- Program clients of ODSP and Ontario Works: authorized inter‑ministerial data collection and sharing is designed to streamline administration and reduce duplication in benefit delivery, which can speed eligibility determination and service coordination.
- Researchers and policy planners in government: explicit statutory authority for longitudinal studies and program evaluation enables more systematic analysis of program outcomes and fraud detection.
Who Bears the Cost
- Recruiters and employers who place foreign nationals: higher conviction penalties and tightened licensing questions increase legal and reputational risk and may require stricter compliance controls and legal review.
- Employers with remote or home‑based workers: redefining 'establishment' to include private residences when work is performed exclusively there raises exposure to posting, notice and inspection obligations and may increase administrative burden.
- Delivery agents and delivery partners (service contractors): new authority to indirectly collect personal information shifts operational and privacy compliance responsibilities to third‑party contractors, requiring contractual amendments and privacy safeguards.
- Regulated professions and licensing bodies: the duty to plan for public access to professionals and to accept alternatives to Canadian experience may require resource allocation, regulatory changes and potentially increased application volumes.
- Corporations subject to OHSA enforcement: the increased corporate fine raises potential financial exposure and may change internal compliance priorities and insurance considerations.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The central dilemma is between stronger worker protections and program integration on one hand, and increased enforcement exposure plus privacy and operational risk on the other: the law tightens penalties, broadens who can collect and share personal data for program delivery, and expands coverage to home workplaces — each step advances administration and protection goals but simultaneously raises compliance cost, privacy management and legal risk for employers, delivery partners and regulators.
The Act stitches together enforcement, program administration and privacy authorities in ways that create tradeoffs. Expanding MLITSD’s authority to collect personal information on behalf of MCCSS and to disclose to delivery agents tightens program integration and operational efficiency, but it relocates privacy and security risks to ministries and third‑party contractors; the statute limits MLITSD’s own access, yet does not fully circumscribe downstream uses by delivery partners or mandate specific safeguards beyond existing FOI/PHIPA frameworks.
That ambiguity will force ministries to translate statutory authority into concrete data‑sharing agreements, access controls and oversight mechanisms — and courts or tribunals may be asked to resolve disputes about scope and permitted secondary uses.
On enforcement, the bill creates an awkward pairing: the Board must temper administrative penalties when they are punitive, while criminal/conviction maximums increase substantially. That combination can lead to strategic behavior by prosecutors and respondents: aggressive criminal prosecutions with exposure to high fines and jail can coexist with administrative notices that the Board may reduce, producing uncertainty about how cases will be resolved and whether settling administrative notices leaves criminal risk untouched.
Employers and recruiters will need to consider both administrative review strategies and criminal defence planning.
Finally, the private‑residence 'establishment' definition clarifies coverage for some home‑based work but leaves borderline scenarios open (shared‑work arrangements, hybrid schedules, gig arrangements), and the Act’s staggered commencement tied to prior Working for Workers provisions complicates operational planning. Ministries and regulated entities must map which provisions are in force when and prepare transitional compliance steps and communications accordingly.
There's more to this law than the bill.
Codify Laws traces every connection across the legislative lifecycle.