Newsletters

310

What are your obligations towards an employee on probation?

You just hired a new employee. In the employment contract, or under a verbal agreement, you specify that the employee will be on probation for a period of six months. What are the consequences of such a condition?

Salary

The question of compensation is easily answered: an employee on probation has a right to be paid. Under s. 57, para. 4 of the Labour Standards Act, “[a]n employee is deemed to be at work […] during any trial period or training required by the employer.”

The end of probation

As an employer, a reasonable application of your management rights allows you to supervise your new employee, to inform her of your objectives and to help her achieve those and, eventually, if the performance is not convincing, to terminate the employment.

The rules on termination do not differ whether the employee is on probation or not. If the termination occurs during the first three months of service, you do not have to give a notice, by application of s. 82.1 of the Labour Standards Act. But if the termination occurs after three months of uninterrupted service (and within the planned six-month probation), a one-week notice is required, except under exceptional circumstances (if the employee has committed a serious fault, for instance).

What about temporary leaves of absence?

Here, things can become delicate. Under your original agreement, you simply stated that the employee would be on probation for six months. What happens if, during this period, your employee takes a two-week sick leave?

Normally, a probation period is reserved for training and for performing the work; in other words, for job-related activities. The sick leave should therefore be excluded from the six months, and the probation period should be suspended.

For added certainty, probation periods should be measured in hours worked. A six-month probation for a job with 40-hour weeks could therefore be counted as 960 hours worked, including all time spent training and performing the work.

Lessons to be learned

The purpose of a probation period is to ascertain whether an employee is able to hold a given position. This could apply equally to a new hire or to an employee being promoted to a new position.

A probation can therefore be an effective way of making sure that you have found the ideal candidate for a position. Just keep in mind, however, that an employee on probation, just like a “regular” employee, is entitled to some legal protection.

A commentary by Jacques Bélanger, from our Labour and Employment Law Group.
<|--

Click here for a PDF version of this text.
–>

310

Articles in the same category

New CAI Guidance on Preventing Confidentiality Incidents: A Practical Roadmap for Businesses in Quebec

On January 30, 2026, Quebec’s privacy regulator, the Commission d’accès à l’information (“CAI”), published fresh guidance aimed at strengthening how organizations prevent confidentiality incidents involving personal information. Confidentiality incidents are one of the most significant privacy risks facing organizations today. In Quebec, these incidents are governed by several laws, including the Act respecting the protection […]

Not-So-Latent Defects for a Poorly Equipped Tradesman

In Beaudoin v. Boucher, 2025 QCCA 1646, rendered last December 19, the Court of Appeal upheld the dismissal of an action in latent defects brought by the buyers of a residential property. The Court reiterated the buyer’s duty to pursue further inspections when confronted with serious indicia of defects, particularly where they possess recognized expertise […]

When Love and Construction Contracts Go Out the Window…

In Gélinas v. LG Constructions TR inc., rendered on October 30, 2025, the Court of Appeal comments on the legal framework governing a contractor unilaterally terminating two construction contracts. In particular, the Court clarifies the application of article 2129 of the Civil Code of Quebec (“C.C.Q.”), which provides, when applicable, that a client is bound […]

Finally Properly Interpreted, the Policy Had a Heart

In a recent decision, Morissette v. BMO Société d’assurance vie, the Superior Court reviewed the principles applicable to the interpretation of insurance policies. Facts In June 2003, the Plaintiff took out a health insurance policy (hereinafter “Policy”) with BMO Société d’assurance vie (hereinafter “BMO”). The Policy provides, among other things, that $150,000 will be paid […]

When the Remedy Becomes the Dispute: Medical Liability Under Scrutiny

In the case N.L. v. Mathieu, 2025 QCCS 517, the Superior Court dismissed a medical liability lawsuit filed by a teacher against her former family doctor, in which she sought over $1.9 million in damages. The plaintiff accused her doctor of having inappropriately prescribed medication over several years, without proper follow-up and without informing her […]

Bill 89 and the Future of Labour Disputes in Quebec

Passed by the National Assembly on May 29, 2025, Bill 89 (An Act to give greater consideration to the needs of the population in the event of a strike or a lock-out, hereinafter the “Bill”) will come into force on November 30, 2025. The Bill, which has faced strong opposition from unions, will bring significant […]