McLennan Ross Update for Friday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• Earlier this week, the Government of Alberta announced that the province is advancing to Stage 2 of its relaunch strategy today, which is a week earlier than originally expected. This will apply to the entire province, with only one region under a "watch" status but still moving to the next stage without restrictions. Stage 2 allows additional businesses and services to reopen and resume operations, however, physical distancing and public health guidelines remain in place.
• With the move to Stage 2, indoor events can now host up to 50 people and outdoor events can have up to 100 attendees. The previous caps on attending church, restaurants and bars, casinos, and bingo halls have been removed, although these facilities must still adhere to the public health measures. 
• Stage 2 also allows more flexibility with respect to expanding cohort groups - small groups whose members do not need to always stay 2 metres apart.
• Still not approved are social gatherings in excess of the above numbers, regular in-school classes, major festivals, concerts and sporting events, nightclubs, amusement parks, large conference and trade shows, and other large events. Non-essential travel outside of the province remains not recommended and will stay so until Stage 3. 
• The moving up of Stage 2 has resulted in the public health guidance that was previously provided for businesses at Stage 1 being incomplete in some cases for Stage 2, although additional guidance is being posted daily. Employers are recommended to continue to monitor the Government of Alberta's COVID-19 webpage for guidance applicable to their business.

What we are hearing

• One of the biggest issues that continues to face employers and employees is the lack of certainty around childcare. Some summer school, childcare, and day camps have been approved as part of Stage 1 and capacity restrictions will be eased to some degree at Stage 2. However, the availability of childcare will undoubtedly continue to be in short supply through the summer, and the province's direction about school and childcare options in the fall remains unclear. The Government of Alberta has signalled its preference for K-12 learning to return to the classroom in the fall, but a final decision is not expected until August 1. These continuing childcare challenges may make it difficult for employers to secure commitments from employees to return to the workplace during Stage 2.

What we are saying

• We are getting inquiries from clients who will be reopening their workplaces and are trying to best protect against liability arising from employees contracting COVID-19 at work. The nature of the inquiry is often whether an employer can ask an employee to sign a waiver before being permitted to return to work. The short answer is no.
• The most effective form of protection for an employer is to ensure the following are in place:
• Have a clear COVID-19 sick policy that reiterates the Government of Alberta's public health directions regarding travel, symptoms, or being in the proximity of someone who is subsequently diagnosed as having COVID-19.
• Follow the workplace screening, physical distancing, sanitation, and PPE requirements and guidelines issued for businesses in your industry by the Government of Alberta for Stage 1 and 2. 
• Ensure and document that these policies have been clearly communicated (signed off as being reviewed and understood by each employee) and then strictly enforced. 
• An employer cannot guarantee that an employee will not contract COVID-19, but if public health and OHS guidelines are diligently followed, this should be a full response to any claims. Employers with WCB insurance im place may also enjoy statutory immunity from civil claims made by workers who contract COVID-19 in the workplace if the infection is considered a workplace injury. 
• Even if an employee would sign a waiver and was given consideration for doing so, such a waiver would be of dubious practical benefit given that employers cannot contract out of their statutory duty to provide a safe work environment.

McLennan Ross Update for Monday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• Last week, the Government of Canada announced assistance for municipalities facing a financial crisis due to COVID-19. First, the Government announced that it would accelerate $2.2 billion in annual federal infrastructure funding for communities. Funding will be delivered in one payment this month. These funds were promised to municipalities as part of last year's federal budget. The intention is to fund infrastructure projects to help restart local economies. Projects could include access to high-speed broadband internet, improvements to water and road systems, and the building of cycling and walking paths.
• Municipalities are facing budget deficits due to continuing or increased demand for public services such as local police, ambulance and fire service, local public health, municipal waste collection and social services, while experiencing decreased revenues from user fees (such as public transit fares) and deferred or lost property or business taxes. The Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) had already predicted a collective shortfall of at least $10 billion for its members. Despite the announcement from the Federal Government of the acceleration of funds already budgeted, that shortfall has not been reduced. 
• As the hope is that the current revenue and expense issues facing municipalities are temporary and will return to normal once the pandemic has passed, providing short-term liquidity to municipalities, which cannot otherwise run a deficit, may be a simple and cost-effective solution for the Federal Government.
• On June 5, 2020, the Federal Government also announced that it would be providing an additional $14 billion to provinces and territories to help safely restart their economies. Provinces were quick to support the concept but were critical of the details. The biggest issue appears to be that the Federal Government wants to control how the funds are spent, calling the assistance "targeted" and requiring the funds be used for programs and projects pre-approved by Ottawa. One such item is that the provinces legislate a requirement that employers provide their employees with 10 paid sick days, something we were critical of in an earlier blog post.
• The provinces were also critical of the amount of assistance being provided, including its allocation on a per capital basis, as opposed to where COVID-19 had the biggest outbreaks and economic impacts.

What we are hearing

• The Government of Alberta announced on June 5, 2020 that it was introducing legislation to prevent commercial landlords who refused to take advantage of the Canada Emergency Commercial Rent Assistance (CECRA) from evicting business tenants impacted by COVID-19. CECRA provided forgivable loans to commercial landlords if they reduced their tenants' rent by 75% for April, May, and June. As we discussed here, because the program was voluntary and placed restrictions on landlords' rights to evict tenants, some landlords elected not to participate in the program. Following in the steps of British Columbia, Alberta is attempting to further protect small businesses struggling to pay rent as a result of drastically reduced revenues. 
• Premier Kenney also announced a one-time payment of up to 15% of monthly sales revenue, with the maximum amount capped at $5,000, for employers with 500 or fewer employees forced to close or curtail their operations due to the pandemic. The intention is that employers can use this money for start-up costs like purchasing inventory, acquiring personal protective equipment, and bringing back staff.

What we are saying

• As we have been stating consistently, we envision a large volume of COVID-19 related litigation commencing in the next few months following the lifting of the state of emergency. The anticipated volume of claims will undoubtedly be increased by claims that are either spurious or may involve situations where a defendant employer may have absolute statutory immunity, such as with claims for workplace injuries that are the exclusive jurisdiction of the Workers Compensation Board.
• With the Alberta courts already struggling to determine how to provide full service while resolving the large backlog of court dates that were postponed due to the state of emergency, we will be curious how these types of frivolous cases will be dealt with, and whether the courts will assist in separating these claims from legitimate ones.

McLennan Ross Update for Friday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• Premier Ford from Ontario announced that despite the recent increase in COVID-19 cases, he is focused on moving to Stage 2 of Ontario's reopening strategy, which will result in the opening of more workplaces (such as some service industries and additional office and retail workplaces), public spaces and will allow for some larger public gatherings. 
• Ontario's top criteria for further easing its semi-lockdown is a consistent decline over a two to four-week period in the daily number of new cases. Cases have not declined consistently in three weeks since the implementation of Stage 1 of Ontario's strategy.
• Ontario's health minister is less confident and has stated the public health officials want to delay moving to Stage 2 until there is a steady reduction in the number of daily new cases.
• The City of Toronto is actively encouraging the city's other major downtown employers and post-secondary institutions to follow its lead and continue to support employees, where possible, to work from home until September at the earliest. This is in part to keep pressure off of the Toronto transit system. Once large employers start to have employees return to their offices, there is an agreement that the return will be phased in gradually with staggered start times, where possible, to help maintain physical distancing.

What we are hearing

• As we have discussed previously, we anticipate pressure from the Courts for parties to litigation to settle minor issues between themselves and use non-traditional methods to try to resolve the underlying dispute without taxing the Court's limited ability to hear in person contested applications and trials. 
• On June 4, 2020, the Court formally announced that it would be scheduling and hearing non-binding judicial dispute resolutions (JDRs) in June, July, and August. The Court has stated that it will only schedule JDRs in actions where both parties are represented by legal counsel and all agree to proceed via WebEx video and audio. As either an incentive or a warning, the Court has also indicated that there may be limited availability for JDRs in the Fall of 2020, which suggest that the Court will be using its resources to schedule trials which have been forced to be adjourned since March, 2020. 
• Although we are confident that the Court will apply the same legal principles and standards of proof in contested applications, we also believe that the Court will likely inquire with counsel what steps were taken by them to resolve issues in light of the Court's announcements and warnings. We are not suggesting that any party should accept an improvident settlement, but having evidence of good faith efforts to resolve issues may be beneficial.

What we are saying

• Employers are justifiably concerned about labour costs once they are permitted to more fully reopen during Stage 2 of Alberta's relaunch strategy. It is unclear how quickly customers will return to their old habits and forecasting the appropriate staffing levels will be challenging.
• One solution is to hire casual, on-call employees who only work when needed. Two issues which have been asked about are (a) the ability of an employer to adjust casual employees' hours based on business need and what limitations there are on those adjustments, and (b) what is an employer's notice obligation to casual employees if the employer decide to terminate the employment relationship. As with most such issues, the key to protect the employer is a properly drafted employment agreement, which likely need be nothing more than a 1 to 2 page offer letter.
• An employer can hire an employee to work variable hours depending on need. The employer must still comply with the sections of the Employment Standards Code which regulates hours worked.
• Section 17(1) of the Code has historically required an employer to notify employees of their start and end time by posting a notice or some other reasonable method. Section 17(2) requires an employee to provide notice of changes to shift schedules. Prior to the temporary changes to the Code necessitated by COVID-19, an employer had to provide at least 24 hours' written notice of changes to shift times. The temporary changes to the Code, which are set to expire in mid-August, allowed an employer to change shifts schedules on less than 24 hours' notice if notice was provided as soon as reasonably possible in the circumstances. 
• For on-call workers, as long as the employee can elect to work or not to work for a temporary period, shifts do not need to be posted in advance. However, once an employee is called into work, the employee must be paid for a minimum of three hours.
• For terminating casual employees, the offer letter should contract out of requiring common law notice of termination and should state that the employee will only receive his or her entitlement under the Code. For an employee who has been employed for less than three months, or who has the option to work or not to work for a temporary period, no notice is required. For all other employees, if they are employed for longer than three months but less than two years, only one week notice or pay in lieu of notice would be required.
• Experienced employment counsel should be consulted to properly advise an employer on its hours of work requirements and to ensure the offer letter properly limits the employer's liability when terminating excess staff.

McLennan Ross Update for Wednesday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• As we mentioned here on May 29, 2020, the Government of Alberta announced that the state of public health emergency under the Public Health Act, will not be renewed. In contrast, the Legislature of the Government of Ontario voted on June 2, 2020 to extend its provincial state of emergency to June 30, 2020. This decision came after there were an additional 446 cases of COVID-19 reported by the Ministry of Health. These increases are due in part to an error made in flagging positive cases by two Toronto area hospitals, leading to thousands of Torontonians ignoring social distancing guidelines and gathering in close proximity together in local parks the previous weekend.
• The extension of the state of emergency may impact the opening up of the Ontario economy, which would benefit all Canadians. Although Ontario has said it still intends to proceed with plans to implement a regional phased approach to reopening, the large cluster of cases in the Greater Toronto Area will almost certainly inhibit the ability of that area to do so.

What we are hearing

• A key part of allowing Albertans to return to work and to an effective relaunch of the economy is the ability of employees to find childcare. Stage 1 of Alberta's relaunch strategy allowed licensed daycare and out-of-school care programs to reopen as of May 14, 2020. Preschools were permitted to begin reopening as of May 28, 2020. 
• Unfortunately, the limitations placed on daycare and preschool facilities may make reopening until the fall uneconomical. According to the Province's guidance for these facilities, which can be found here, childcare can only operate in cohorts of 10 people, including staff and children. Cohorts are directed not to mix with other cohorts or be within the same room/space at the same time, including pickups and drop-offs, mealtimes, playtime, outdoor activities, staff rooms, nap time, etc. Although multiple programs can be offered in the same building, each must have separate entrances. Even if these childcare operations can figure out how to meet expenses with reduced enrolment, many have stated they could not do so in the short-term so they will not open for June. 
• As more and more employers are requesting employees return to the workplace, accommodation of childcare needs will continue to be necessary if other options are not available.

What we are saying

• The Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta made another announcement regarding its ability to hear contested interlocutory applications effective June 3, 2020:
• The Court will commence hearing regular Masters Chambers applications (with an anticipated length of 20 minutes or less) remotely via WebEx video and audio. In Calgary and Edmonton, regular Masters Chambers will be held at 10 am every Court sitting day, Tuesday through Friday. In regional centres, Masters Chambers will be available on specified sitting dates. 
• The Court will also commence hearing regular Civil Justice applications remotely via WebEx video and audio in Edmonton and Calgary. Regular Civil Chambers will continue to be held at 10 am every Court sitting day. 
• To secure a hearing date, parties are first required to view available sitting dates online. Once parties have determined an appropriate (available and alternate) sitting date, the parties contact the Clerk's Office by sending the draft Application and Form of Order, along with their proposed available and alternate date in accordance with the procedures outlined on the Court's website. 
• Although this announcement signals that interlocutory matters can be heard immediately, subject to availability, Masters Order #4 granted by the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench is still in effect. Paragraph 10 of that Order states that "[a]ll filing deadlines under the Alberta Rules of Court, including Rule 13.41(4), are suspended until June 26, 2020 with the exception of those Rules applicable to the commencement of proceedings, including originating applications.
• It therefore appears that applications that were contemplated prior to the declaration of the state of emergency and the closing of the Courts will be able to be argued, but applications to compel parties to complete steps required under the Rules or to seek relief due to a party missing a filing deadline will not yet be available.

McLennan Ross Update for Monday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• The Government of Ontario enacted Ontario Regulation 228/20 on May 29, 2020 which introduced temporary changes to Ontario's employment standards legislation, the Employment Standards Act, 2000. The Regulation applies to the "COVID-19 period" which is defined as March 1, 2020 to 6 weeks after the date that the state of emergency declared in Ontario is terminated or disallowed.
• The key impact of the Regulation is that it expressly excludes a temporary reduction or elimination of an employee's hours of work by the employer for reasons related to COVID-19, or a temporary reduction in an employee's wages by the employer for reasons related to COVID-19, as the basis for a constructive dismissal claim under the Act. The Regulation further directs that any complaint filed under the Act predicated on a temporary reduction or elimination of an employee's hours of work by the employer or a temporary reduction in an employee's wages by the employer shall be deemed not to have been filed if the temporary reductions occurred during the COVID-19 period and were for reasons related to COVID-19.
• Section 6 of the Regulation also addresses "layoffs" and provides that a person who experiences a reduction or elimination in hours or reduction in wages due to COVID-19 is not considered to be on a layoff. Thus, the Act's termination deeming provisions addressing when a temporary layoff becomes a deemed termination, which would trigger entitlements under the Act, do not apply.
• It is important to note that the Regulation has no application to Alberta employees and no similar changes were made to the Alberta Employment Standards Code. However, while these changes do not supersede the common law, they suggest a general acceptance that hours reductions related to COVID-19 are a reasonable change and may not be a constructive dismissal at common law. 
• We have been consistent in our advice that it is unclear how the courts will treat reductions in hours or wages for employees due to legitimate business imperatives created by COVID-19. It is entirely possible that courts will follow the lead of the Regulation and find that an employer's decisions to implement temporary changes to hours or wages in order to survive would not trigger a constructive dismissal claim for affected employees.

What we are hearing

• In advance of the province's anticipated transition to Stage 2 of the Government of Alberta's relaunch strategy, the Government announced that Albertans could obtain a COVID-19 test without being symptomatic, with residents able to make an appointment by filling out the province's online assessment tool. 
• This expansion of testing availability may lead some employers to consider requiring employees to obtain a COVID-19 test before being permitted to return to the workplace or perhaps to be tested weekly. Whether such requirements are permissible, and whether an employee refusing the test can suffer negative consequences, has not been addressed to date as, until now, elective testing was not possible. 
• We expect, like most legal issues, that an employer's ability to force employees to obtain a COVID-19 test will be very much fact dependent. 
• The website for Alberta Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) does not address the issue. As opposed to when an employee presents with symptoms or has been in the presence of someone with COVID-19 and there is a legitimate need to test to ensure that the employer is providing a safe workplace for its employees, OHS does not provide the same direct guidance, and requirements apply more generally. 
• The website for the Alberta Human Rights Commission does contain a COVID-19 FAQ sheet, but it does not address this specific situation. The sheet generally states that employers are required to consider flexible options for employees, consider requests for accommodation in good faith, and be flexible and consider not overburdening the health care system.

What we are saying

• As we summarized on May 29, 2020, the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen's Bench of Alberta reported in an open letter to members of the Law Society of Alberta and the Alberta Branch of the Canadian Bar Association that a return to normal operations would not be occurring any time soon. Although a limited number of Queen's Bench courtrooms will be equipped with new plexiglass shielding for in-person criminal trials in Edmonton, Calgary, Red Deer, and Lethbridge (with similar steps being contemplated for Provincial Court criminal courtrooms), there was no information regarding when civil trials would resume. 
• In comparison, other jurisdictions appear to be returning to normal operations at a much quicker pace:
• In British Columbia, civil trials set to begin on or after June 8, 2020 are currently scheduled to proceed as normal. Interlocutory applications that were already scheduled will be proceeding via telephone conference. The B.C. Supreme Court still does not appear to be accepting new interlocutory applications. 
• In Ontario, urgent matters can still be argued in person, with criminal matters scheduled to return to normal operations on July 6, 2020 and civil matters tentatively set to return to normal operations in September.  
• In Saskatchewan, non-urgent interlocutory applications will be heard by telephone commencing on June 1, 2020, with additional application dates added in order to address the various applications adjourned because of COVID-19.
• Although each province is dealing with its own specific circumstances, we hope that a more expedited strategy can be developed to allow civil matters in Alberta to move forward as quickly and fairly as possible.

McLennan Ross Update for Friday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• Premier Kenney announced on May 28, 2020 that Order in Council 080/2020 which declared the state of public health emergency under the Public Health Act will not be renewed.
• Section 52.1(2) of the Public Health Act allowed the Government, when a declaration of a state of public health emergency had been made, to suspend or modify the application or operation of all or part of an enactment if such actions were determined to be in the public's interest. The Government of Alberta issued over 40 Ministerial Orders to address issues arising from the state of emergency in such areas as privacy, child care programs, community and social services, employment, health, environment, landlord and tenants, transportation and legal proceedings. A listing of all of the Ministerial Orders can be found here.
• Section 52.1(2) also states that unless terminated earlier by the terms of the Ministerial Order itself or by further Order, the Ministerial Orders all expire 60 days following the end of the state of public health emergency. For employers, this means that the temporary changes to the Employment Standards Code and Employment Standards Regulation, which we summarized here, will expire as well, meaning:
• Elimination of the unpaid leave of absence for employees who need time off from work because they are caring for children affected by school and daycare closures or self-isolated family members;
• The shortening of the permitted initial period for a temporary layoff back to 60 days from 120 days;
• Group termination notice requirements will apply again; and
• The 24-hour notice requirement for changes to schedules will again be in place.
• It is possible that some of these changes will be re-implemented by way of formal amendments to the Employment Standards Code and Employment Standards Regulation, which is unlikely to happen prior to the expiry of the Ministerial Order issued under the Public Health Act. It is expected that changes to the Employment Standards Code and Labour Relations Code will be introduced in a June session of the Legislature.
• On Wednesday in the Legislature, the Premier also noted the following statistics in describing the need to dismantle the economic lockdown:
• the average age of death in Alberta is 83, while the life expectancy in the province is 82;
• in Canada, 95% of fatalities from COVID-19 are from those over age 60, 80% are in care facilities, and the risk of death from COVID-19 for people under 65 is 0.006%;
• younger people, while not completely immune, have a rate of mortality related to COVID-19 that is no higher than their general mortality rate from other illnesses;
• for most Albertans, the risk of death from other pathogens, accidents, and traffic fatalities is actually higher than it is for COVID-19.
• These statistics suggest that, in retrospect, Government strategies could have focused more effort on protecting the vulnerable while implementing other measures which would be less disruptive for the general population such as the intensive testing and contact tracing suggested by health professionals.

What we are hearing

• The Law Society received notice on May 27, 2020 from the Deputy Minister of Justice and Deputy Solicitor General that Ministerial Order 27/2020, which suspended the running of time for limitation periods and other time periods set by certain listed statutes, will not be extended and, as a result, the time required to take actions covered by those listed statutes will resume running on June 1, 2020. The total effect of the Ministerial Order then is to remove the period of time between the effective date of the Ministerial Order of March 17, 2020 and its expiry date of June 1, 2020 in calculating the time to take steps. For example, a limitation period to commence a claim under the Limitations Act which otherwise would have expired on June 30, 2020 would now be extended to approximately mid-September. Any person who believes that a claim was impacted by this Ministerial Order should confirm with legal counsel.

What we are saying

• On May 27, 2020, the Chief Justices of the Court of Appeal and the Court of Queen's Bench as well as the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court of Alberta delivered a letter to the Law Society of Alberta and the Alberta Branch of the Canadian Bar Association to update lawyers regarding the steps being taken by the Courts to facilitate a return to more regular sittings of the trial courts in response to the Province of Alberta's relaunch strategy.
• Unfortunately, there was not much information that suggests the capacity of these Courts to hear and resolve matters will be returning to normal in the near future. Of note from the letter is the following:
• The Court of Appeal has been operating at full capacity and has not had its hearing schedule impacted, due in part to appeals being argued by legal counsel only and there not being live witnesses.
• The Government of Alberta has committed $27 million in funding to improve the technology used by the Alberta justice system. 
• The biggest barrier to the resumption of normal operations for the trial courts is the implementation of appropriate sanitation protocols.
• A limited number of Queen's Bench courtrooms are being equipped with new plexiglass shielding for in-person criminal trials in Edmonton, Calgary, Red Deer, and Lethbridge, with similar steps being contemplated for Provincial Court criminal courtrooms. 
• The Court of Queen's Bench will not be taking its annual summer recess and will instead conduct as many hearings as circumstances allow through July and August 2020 to reduce the current backlog of applications. 
• Judicial mediation will also be offered to attempt to resolve exiting court actions.
• Our takeaway from this letter is that the Courts will be focusing on dealing with criminal and family law claims for the foreseeable future and that civil matters will not be a priority. This may lead some counsel to try to settle matters through more urgent negotiation or lead parties to convert an existing litigation matter commenced via Statement of Claim to be converted to a private arbitration for more timely resolution.

McLennan Ross Update for Wednesday

By McLennan Ross Labour & Employment Team

 

What we are seeing

• The Government of Canada has extended the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS), which provides subsidies to help businesses keep employees on payroll or re-hire workers previously laid off, to August 29, 2020. The Government has created an on-line calculator to help determine eligible subsidy amounts.
• To date, the Government has not stated whether it will extend the Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) beyond its initial 4-month time limit. The Government has paid out over $40 billion in CERB payments since being implemented, although a percentage of that amount will be returned to the Government when recipients pay taxes on the amount received and recovers improperly paid benefits. 
• A concern with the CERB is that it may create too much of an incentive for employees not to return to work. As it is not taxed when paid, and as the benefit is the same $500 per week irrespective of the employee's past earnings, the subsidy in Alberta is roughly the net equivalent of an employee earning $17.00 an hour for a 40-hour work week; $19.00 an hour for a 35-hour work week and over $22.00 an hour for a 30-hour work week. Although some tax will have to be paid on the benefit amount at some point, many entry level employees would prefer to have the cash in hand now (without having to work) and will address the tax issue next year.
• With the provincial economies re-opening across the country, and employers needing their employees to return to work, even if on reduced hours, it would be counterintuitive for the Government to continue a benefit that gives employees an attractive alternative to returning to work.

What we are hearing

• On May 25, 2020, the federal Government announced it was in discussions with the provinces to ensure that "every worker in Canada who needs it has access to ten days of sick leave a year." Alberta, unlike some provinces in Canada, does not currently statutorily guarantee that employees must be given paid sick leave. Most provinces that do have such a guarantee only guarantee employees 3 sick day per year. The reaction to this announcement from businesses has been strongly negative. If the leave does not require a doctor's note, it will invariably lead to employees treating the sick leave as additional vacation and taking more time away from work. If, to address this concern, a doctor's note is required to take advantage of the sick leave, it will also place an increased burden on the healthcare system. As employment standards fall within provincial jurisdiction other than for federally regulated industries, it will ultimately be up to the Alberta Government to implement such a program. We expect this program will be limited to sick leave related to COVID-19, at least initially, since that is what it is intended to address, particularly once the CERB ends. 
• The various Government of Canada programs available to energy producers in Alberta seem to be providing some relief for employers, although many are disappointed by the strings attached to the relief programs or are taking a wait-and-see approach on their effectiveness. These programs include:
• Interest free loans from the Business Development Bank and loan guarantees of up to $100 million per company from Export Development Canada;
• The Large Employer Emergency Financing Facility (LEEFF), which provides financing up to $60 million, but with strings such as limits on executive pay, dividends, and share buy-backs;
• The CEWS that is discussed above;
• The Well Cleanup Program; and
• The creation of the methane reduction fund.
• The CBC has summarized each program that it believes may be of assistance for energy producers and how they have been received to date.
• As all of Alberta is now at Stage 1, with Stage 2 tentatively set to be implemented in mid-June, it is more important than ever to follow the advice of Alberta's Chief Medical Officer to avoid a step back in the relaunch strategy. The Government of Alberta has also finally followed the direction of this blog by reducing its COVID-19 news conferences from daily to only holding them on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays.

What we are saying

• The federal Government continues to support the operation of the Temporary Foreign Worker Program (TWF) and the Seasonal Agricultural Worker Program (SAWP) in all Provinces during the COVID-19 pandemic, recognizing the vital role these workers play in supporting food security and other industries critical to the Canadian economy.
• The Government of Canada recently modified the criteria relating to the Temporary Foreign Worker Programs and published a brief guide to assist employers in understanding these changes. Key components include: 
• Foreign workers must complete the 14-day period of quarantine upon arrival as outlined under the Quarantine Act, and the employer must ensure the worker does not interact with workers or other persons who are not in quarantine.
• The worker's period of employment begins upon arrival to Canada and includes the mandatory quarantine period.
• The employer must pay the worker regular pay and benefits for the quarantine period including a minimum of 30 hours per week at the hourly rate of pay specified on the Labour Market Impact Assessment (LIMA) and/or offer of employment. For SAWP workers, the 14-day period of paid quarantine will be in addition to the minimum 240 hours of pay as specified in the SAWP contract. 
• The employer cannot authorize the worker to work during the quarantine period, even if requested by the worker, although there are some discrete exceptions, such as providing an essential service. 
• The Canada Emergency Response Benefit (CERB) may be available to workers; however, CERB is not available for the initial quarantine period. 
• Employers must not terminate the employment contract due to a worker contracting COVID-19.
• If workers become ill after the initial quarantine period, they may be entitled to either paid or unpaid sick leave, depending on their employment contract and the relevant federal or provincial employment standards, including any newly enacted legislation for job-protected leave because of COVID-19.
• If employers provide accommodation, there are additional guidelines:
• Employers must house quarantined workers in accommodations that are separate from those not subject to quarantine.
• The employer may house workers who are subject to quarantine together, but the housing must enable them to be 2 metres apart from each other at all times, although shared facilities (for example bathroom, kitchen, living space) are allowed.
• If a new worker arrives at the accommodation facilities during the quarantine period, the quarantine period restarts. 
• The employer is required to provide cleaning materials. 
• If a worker becomes symptomatic, the employer is required to immediately provide accommodations that enable the worker to be isolated from others. 
• The above requirements have created significant changes to Alberta's farming industries. The delays in ensuring workers arrive on time is compounded by the mandatory quarantine period, resulting in anticipated substantial loss of business profits. If your business is encountering challenges with meeting the requirements of the SAWP or TFW programs, consider posting the available employment positions on the Alberta Agricultural Job Connector.