BC Court Rules Remote Work Arrangement a Protected Term, June 02

The British Columbia Court of Appeal upheld a ruling in May 2026 that an employee was constructively dismissed when her employer abruptly ended a remote work arrangement she had maintained for years. The decision establishes that long-standing flexible work arrangements can become enforceable terms of employment, even without explicit written clauses. This ruling affects how Canadian employers manage return-to-office policies and employee expectations around work location.

How the Case Unfolded

Tracy Parolin worked for Cressey Construction Corporation in Vancouver for approximately 18 years, serving as director of marketing. She received a flexible work schedule starting in 2013 after returning from maternity leave to care for twins, one with significant health needs. In March 2020, she moved to full-time remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic and continued working from home after other employees returned to the office, with approval from successive supervisors who understood her childcare responsibilities.

In May 2023, a new supervisor revoked her remote work arrangement without notice and directed her to return to the office five days per week. Parolin left her job shortly after and sued for wrongful dismissal.

What the Court Decided

The trial judge and the appeal court both sided with Parolin, finding that her flexible working arrangement had become an enforceable, fundamental term of her employment despite lacking explicit written terms in her contract. The court noted that the company had supported this arrangement for years and made the change unilaterally without prior notice.

Cressey had argued that no explicit contract clause permitted remote work, but the judges rejected this argument. Employment lawyer Howard Levitt stated: “It has long been the law that if people are being allowed to work from home and they have not signed a contract saying the company can recall them at any time, and enough time goes by, calling them back to the office is a constructive dismissal.”

What Constructive Dismissal Means

The Supreme Court of Canada defines constructive dismissal as when an employer unilaterally makes substantial changes to essential employment terms that the employee does not agree to, causing the employee to leave their job. Fundamental changes include cutting pay significantly or requiring someone who has worked remotely to return to the office full time.

Employment experts note that employers should give written notice of any fundamental changes and seek employee consent. If an employee refuses, the employer should consider properly terminating the employee without cause rather than forcing the change. Good faith or bad faith does not matter to the determination of constructive dismissal.

Implications for Canadian Employers

The ruling signals that Canadian employment law protects work arrangements that have been established over time, even informally. Employers navigating return-to-office policies should provide written notice and seek employee agreement before making changes. There is no hard-and-fast rule on how much change constitutes dismissal, but Ontario cases have suggested that changes affecting 10 to 20 percent of compensation may cross the threshold.

The decision comes as many employers continue to navigate workplace expectations following the COVID-19 pandemic and widespread adoption of remote work arrangements.

Final Thoughts

The BC ruling establishes that remote work arrangements approved over years can become protected employment terms. Employers must provide notice and seek consent before revoking such arrangements, or risk constructive dismissal claims.

FAQs

Disclaimer:

The content shared by Meyka AI PTY LTD is solely for research and informational purposes.  Meyka is not a financial advisory service, and the information provided should not be considered investment or trading advice.