In late January, we launched a series of articles about trends affecting benefits in 2025, starting with one about regulations and public policies. We believe this will be a hot topic in the news in 2025. In this second article, we address the outlook for remote work, a phenomenon that continues to have a direct impact on the labour market and employer-employee relations. While some organizations have opted to force their employees to return to the office, many have maintained a hybrid work model due to its benefits on productivity and employee attraction. We will look at the issue of monitoring employees working remotely and the legal framework of this practice in order to equip employers who use it.
Remote monitoring: A double-edged sword
Since the massive rise of remote work, driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, new practices have emerged to manage employees’ activities remotely. Among these, remote monitoring has become a solution enabling employers to supervise performance. However, it also raises serious concerns regarding privacy and ethics.
Remote monitoring comprises a range of technological tools designed to monitor electronic communications, analyze employee movements and track their online activity. These tools, which were initially intended for specific uses, such as information security and schedule management, have been fine-tuned to become sophisticated instruments able to capture biometric data and geolocate employees in real time.
For employers, they offer an opportunity to maintain control over productivity, even in an online environment. However, for employees, they can represent a major invasion of their privacy, particularly when their home has become their primary workspace.
Legal limitations to remote monitoring
There are several pieces of Canadian legislation that govern remote monitoring, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Meanwhile, Québec legislation includes the Charter of human rights and freedoms, the Civil Code of Québec and laws governing the protection of personal information. These legal frameworks impose clear restrictions. Any monitoring measures must be justified by a legitimate objective, be proportional and be used in a manner that respects employees’ basic rights.
A key principle has emerged through case law: proportionality. For example, in the case of Syndicat des travailleurs(euses) de Bridgestone Firestone de Joliette (CSN) c. Trudeau[1], the Court of Appeal of Quebec emphasized that intrusive measures must be justified by serious grounds and carried out with minimal means to avoid excessively infringing on employees’ privacy.
Psychological and organizational impacts
Beyond legal issues, remote monitoring can have serious repercussions on work relations. Excessive monitoring can generate increased stress among employees, erode trust their in their employer and make them less motivated at work. Even worse, these practices can spur employees look for ways to avoid being monitored rather than increase their productivity.
Responsible technology oversight
In the face of rapidly changing technology, it’s become increasingly urgent to review and adapt existing legal frameworks. Here are a few avenues employers can explore to provide better oversight:
- Informed consent: Inform employees of the monitoring tools rolled out, as well as their scope and how they work.
- Strict proportionality: Limit the collection of data to information that is strictly necessary to reach your objectives.
- Transparency: Provide employees with access to the data collected that concerns them.
- Less intrusive alternatives: Promote trust-based management tools, such as regular reviews or virtual meetings.
Striking a balance between control and freedom
Human resources management often has legal foundations, and remote work is no exception. Remote monitoring is a clear example of the modern dilemma between meeting organizational needs and respecting individual rights. While technology offers undeniable benefits for optimizing remote management, it must be used with caution to avoid creating an oppressive work environment. That way, everyone—employers and employees—can ensure that their needs are met in a remote work arrangement.
The team at Dunton Rainville L.L.P. is here to help, whether you’re an employer looking to better manage your remote monitoring system or an employee wondering whether your rights are being respected.
[1] Syndicat des travailleurs(euses) de Bridgestone Firestone de Joliette (csn) c. Trudeau, 1999 CanLII 13295 (QC CA)
These articles might interest you
In late January, we launched a series of articles about trends affecting benefits in 2025, starting with one about regulations and public policies. We believe this will be a hot topic in the news in 2025. In this second article, we address the outlook for remote work, a phenomenon that continues to have a direct impact on the labour market and employer-employee relations. While some organizations have opted to force their employees to return to the office, many have maintained a hybrid work model due to its benefits on productivity and employee attraction. We will look at the issue of monitoring employees working remotely and the legal framework of this practice in order to equip employers who use it.
Remote monitoring: A double-edged sword
Since the massive rise of remote work, driven by the COVID-19 pandemic, new practices have emerged to manage employees’ activities remotely. Among these, remote monitoring has become a solution enabling employers to supervise performance. However, it also raises serious concerns regarding privacy and ethics.
Remote monitoring comprises a range of technological tools designed to monitor electronic communications, analyze employee movements and track their online activity. These tools, which were initially intended for specific uses, such as information security and schedule management, have been fine-tuned to become sophisticated instruments able to capture biometric data and geolocate employees in real time.
For employers, they offer an opportunity to maintain control over productivity, even in an online environment. However, for employees, they can represent a major invasion of their privacy, particularly when their home has become their primary workspace.
Legal limitations to remote monitoring
There are several pieces of Canadian legislation that govern remote monitoring, including the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Meanwhile, Québec legislation includes the Charter of human rights and freedoms, the Civil Code of Québec and laws governing the protection of personal information. These legal frameworks impose clear restrictions. Any monitoring measures must be justified by a legitimate objective, be proportional and be used in a manner that respects employees’ basic rights.
A key principle has emerged through case law: proportionality. For example, in the case of Syndicat des travailleurs(euses) de Bridgestone Firestone de Joliette (CSN) c. Trudeau[1], the Court of Appeal of Quebec emphasized that intrusive measures must be justified by serious grounds and carried out with minimal means to avoid excessively infringing on employees’ privacy.
Psychological and organizational impacts
Beyond legal issues, remote monitoring can have serious repercussions on work relations. Excessive monitoring can generate increased stress among employees, erode trust their in their employer and make them less motivated at work. Even worse, these practices can spur employees look for ways to avoid being monitored rather than increase their productivity.
Responsible technology oversight
In the face of rapidly changing technology, it’s become increasingly urgent to review and adapt existing legal frameworks. Here are a few avenues employers can explore to provide better oversight:
- Informed consent: Inform employees of the monitoring tools rolled out, as well as their scope and how they work.
- Strict proportionality: Limit the collection of data to information that is strictly necessary to reach your objectives.
- Transparency: Provide employees with access to the data collected that concerns them.
- Less intrusive alternatives: Promote trust-based management tools, such as regular reviews or virtual meetings.
Striking a balance between control and freedom
Human resources management often has legal foundations, and remote work is no exception. Remote monitoring is a clear example of the modern dilemma between meeting organizational needs and respecting individual rights. While technology offers undeniable benefits for optimizing remote management, it must be used with caution to avoid creating an oppressive work environment. That way, everyone—employers and employees—can ensure that their needs are met in a remote work arrangement.
The team at Dunton Rainville L.L.P. is here to help, whether you’re an employer looking to better manage your remote monitoring system or an employee wondering whether your rights are being respected.
[1] Syndicat des travailleurs(euses) de Bridgestone Firestone de Joliette (csn) c. Trudeau, 1999 CanLII 13295 (QC CA)