Skip to content

Time off to vote in the 2021 federal election

Richard Jordan

The federal election will be held on Monday, September 20, 2021.

Under s. 132 of the Canada Elections Act (“Act”), every employee who is an elector (i.e. a Canadian citizen and 18 years of age or older) is entitled, during voting hours on polling day, to have three consecutive hours for the purpose of casting his or her vote.

The voting hours on polling day for electoral districts in the Newfoundland or Atlantic time zone are 8:30 a.m. to 8.30 p.m.

Therefore, for an employee who works from 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., the employee would still have three consecutive hours off work while the polls are open in order to vote (5:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.). The employer need not provide this employee with any additional time off work.

However, where an employee’s working hours do not permit three consecutive hours off work to vote while the polls are open, the employer must allow the employee additional time with pay to provide the three consecutive hours. However, it is at the employer’s discretion as to when the three consecutive hours will occur.

Therefore, for an employee who works from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m., the employee would only have one and a half consecutive hours to vote while the polls are open (7:00 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.). In these circumstances, the employer could choose to let the employee:

(a) leave work at 5:30 p.m. (so the employee has three consecutive hours to vote from 5:30 p.m. to 8:30 p.m.);

(b) begin their work day at 11:30 a.m. (so the employee has three consecutive hours from 8:30 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. to vote); or,

(c) have three consecutive hours off at any point during the work day while the polls are open.

The only exception in the Act to the “three consecutive hours rule” is for employees who transport goods or passengers by land, air or water, who operate these transportation services outside his or her polling division. An employer is not required to offer three consecutive hours away from work if the time off would interfere with the transportation service.

Employers are prohibited under the Act from failing to allow an employee three consecutive hours for voting or for interfering with an elector’s right to have three consecutive hours for voting by intimidation, undue influence, or by any other means. Employers are also prohibited under the Act from deducting from the pay of an employee or imposing a penalty on the employee for the time that the employer is required to allow for voting.


This client update is provided for general information only and does not constitute legal advice. If you have any questions about the above, please contact a member of our Labour and Employment group.

 

Click here to subscribe to Stewart McKelvey Thought Leadership.

SHARE

Archive

Search Archive


 
 

Client Update: Outlook for the 2017 Proxy Season

February 8, 2017

In preparing for the 2017 proxy season, you should be aware of some regulatory changes and institutional investor guidance that may impact disclosure to, and interactions with, your shareholders. This update highlights what is new…

Read More

Client Update: The Future of Planning and Development on Prince Edward Island – Recent Amendments to the Planning Act

January 23, 2017

Perlene Morrison and Hilary Newman During the fall 2016 legislative sitting, the Province of Prince Edward Island passed legislation that results in significant changes to the Planning Act. The amendments received royal assent on December 15, 2016 and…

Read More

Plaintiffs’ medical reports – disclosure obligations in Unifund Assurance Company v. Churchill, 2016 NLCA 73

January 10, 2017

Joe Thorne1 and Justin Hewitt2 In Unifund Assurance Company v Churchill,3  the Newfoundland and Labrador Court of Appeal considered the application of our rules of court and the common law as they relate to disclosure of documents produced in…

Read More

Prince Edward Island adopts new Municipal Government Act

December 22, 2016

Perlene Morrison Prince Edward Island’s municipal legislation is being modernized with the implementation of the Municipal Government Act (the “MGA”). The legislation has now received royal assent and will be proclaimed in force at a future date.…

Read More

Land Use Planning in Prince Edward Island: The Year in Review

December 20, 2016

Jonathan Coady and Chera-Lee Gomez It’s that time of year – the moment when we look back at the year that was and chart our course for the year ahead. For many councillors, administrators and planning professionals…

Read More

The Latest in Labour Law: A Stewart McKelvey Newsletter – Onsite OHS liability: Who is (and who is not) the true constructor?

December 15, 2016

Peter McLellan, QC and Michelle Black In a recent decision, R v McCarthy’s Roofing Limited, Judge Anne Derrick provided some much-needed clarity around what it means to be a “constructor” on a job site. This is critical as…

Read More

Federal Government’s Cannabis Report: What does it mean for employers?

December 15, 2016

Rick Dunlop On December 13, 2016, the Government of Canada released A Framework for the Legalization and Regulation of Cannabis in Canada: The Final Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation (“Report”). The Report’s…

Read More

Canadian employers facing marijuana challenges in the workplace

November 25, 2016

Brian Johnston, QC Canadian employers are already coping with approximately 75,000 Canadians authorized to use medical marijuana. Health Canada expects that this number will increase to about 450,000 by 2024. Employers know that medical marijuana…

Read More

You’ve got mail – Ontario Court of Appeal sends a constitutional message to municipalities about community mailboxes

October 28, 2016

Jonathan Coady With its decision in Canada Post Corporation v. City of Hamilton,1 the Ontario Court of Appeal has confirmed that the placement of community mailboxes by Canada Post is a matter beyond the reach of municipalities…

Read More

A window on interpreting insurance contracts: Top 10 points from Ledcor Construction

September 23, 2016

Jennifer Taylor Introduction Thanks to some dirty windows, insurance lawyers have a new go-to Supreme Court case on issues of policy interpretation: Ledcor Construction Ltd v Northbridge Indemnity Insurance Co, 2016 SCC 37. The insurers in Ledcor Construction had…

Read More

Search Archive


Scroll To Top