If 2024 was characterized by employer hesitation, the past year marked a significant shift. According to prominent employment lawyer Howard Levitt, 2025 became the year employers cautiously attempted to reassert control in the Canadian workplace. In a recent analysis published on January 2, 2025, Levitt argues that while employers can regain ground, success hinges entirely on moving within the bounds of an evolving legal landscape. Those who fail to adapt, he warns, risk funding the next wave of employment law judgments.
The High-Stakes Legal Landscape of 2025
Levitt emphasizes that courts, legislators, and unions have been exceptionally active, creating a complex environment where some employer instincts are vindicated while others are met with severe penalties. He identifies ten critical employment-law realities that now define the modern workplace, born from the costly mistakes he observes daily.
1. The Return to In-Person Work is Here, But Tread Carefully
The era of remote work as an untouchable norm is over. Levitt notes that remote arrangements have, in many cases, weakened supervision, eroded accountability, and provided cover for poor performers. Employers are justified in bringing staff back to the office, but the process must be handled with legal precision.
Where remote work has become an entrenched condition of employment, a sudden, unilateral recall can legally constitute constructive dismissal. Levitt stresses that providing reasonable notice for such a change is essential. The most prudent strategy involves having employment contracts that clearly define the limits of any future remote or hybrid work. Without these safeguards, a push for productivity can quickly devolve into expensive litigation.
2. Artificial Intelligence: A Powerful Tool, Not a Decision-Maker
While Artificial Intelligence (AI) is an undeniable force for boosting efficiency and cutting costs, Levitt issues a stark warning: employers who delegate decision-making to algorithms are playing with fire. AI systems rely on historical data, and flawed or biased data will inevitably produce flawed, discriminatory outcomes.
Critically, when these failures occur, courts will hold the employer—not the AI model—legally liable. Levitt's advice is clear: use AI as a supportive tool, not as an autonomous decision-maker. All hiring, firing, and disciplinary decisions must be thoroughly vetted by human managers. He adds a crucial caveat: AI should never, under any circumstances, be relied upon for legal advice.
3. The Underutilized Power of Working Notice
Levitt identifies working notice as one of the most misunderstood and underused tools available to employers. When implemented correctly, it creates a win-win scenario: employees continue to receive income and gain valuable time to seek new employment, while employers significantly reduce their severance liability by receiving actual work in return.
Despite these benefits, Levitt observes that too many companies still opt for immediate termination, only to find themselves embroiled in avoidable lawsuits over reasonable notice periods. He expresses hope that this practice will change, noting that some internal HR departments incorrectly advise against working notice.
4. Hiring Transparency is Now the Law in Ontario
A major shift has occurred in Ontario's hiring practices due to the province's Working for Workers legislation. Employers with 25 or more employees are now legally required to document job postings, retain application records, and notify candidates of interview outcomes within 45 days.
Levitt underscores that these are not mere guidelines but enforceable legal requirements, with non-compliance carrying penalties. He advises employers outside Ontario to pay close attention, as other provinces are likely to introduce similar transparency mandates in the near future.
Navigating the New Normal
The overarching lesson from Levitt's analysis is straightforward. The workplace power dynamics are shifting, and the window for employers to legally re-establish control is open. However, this opportunity is only available to those who move deliberately and in full compliance with the new legal realities defining Canadian employment in 2025. Failure to do so, as Levitt concludes, will prove to be a very expensive mistake.
