'Act as though there's no difference between the physical workplace and remote workplace'

When Leïla Ben Salem was found dead in her downtown Montreal apartment on Sept. 22, she had allegedly been in the middle of a virtual meeting with a work colleague. The 45-year-old was a member of the Union of Taxation Employees' Montreal Local 10008, which represents Canada Revenue Agency employees. At the time of that report, Montreal police said suspects were being sought and the motive remained unknown.

Whether the killing had any direct link to Ben Salem's work is a question the investigation will have to answer, according to Patrick Essiminy, a partner and head of the Montreal office's Employment & Labour Group at Stikeman Elliott.

As a federal government employee, she would be subject to the Canada Labour Code, while provinces such as Quebec have also amended health and safety legislation to extend the concept of workplace to remote work, “and therefore the obligations that would normally apply in a traditional work environment or workplace are now being applied,” he says.

That includes preventing risks to an employee's health and safety and addressing workplace violence, including family-related violence.

"You can assume that someone who is working in a remote workplace in their home, for example, would still be covered by all of these different obligations, especially if the employee has disclosed or complained about anything of that nature, even though they are working from their home," says Essiminy.

Work-from-home safety obligations

In Ontario, the Occupational Health and Safety Act now applies to telework performed in or around a private residence as of 2024. Aaron Zaltzman, an associate lawyer at Whitten & Lublin in Toronto, says the change extends to private residences where telework is performed — but likely not someone who works from home for a single day because they're sick, or after hours of their own volition.

What that means in practice comes down to common sense, according to Zaltzman.

"Certain things like air quality or building security, those are things that the employer cannot possibly have control over, and therefore it wouldn't be their responsibility," he says.

Harassment is another matter. Ontario’s Bill 190 also expanded the definitions of workplace harassment and sexual harassment to include behaviour that occurs virtually through information and communications technology, so “OSHA obligations and protections do extend there,” says Zaltzman.

"Harassment, sexual harassment, those can all be done remotely," says Zaltzman. "And on a Zoom meeting or Teams or email or anything, even if you're at home, it does count as it happening in the workplace."

He says employers should confirm in their health and safety policies, usually in the definitions section, that obligations and protections extend to remote work: "On a realistic level, there's not that much more that employers can do aside from making sure that everyone understands that while they're at home, they're also at work."

Essiminy points to a 2021 case where a Quebec labour judge ruled that an Air Canada call centre employee who worked from home was eligible for workers’ compensation benefits after she injured herself from a fall down the stairs going from her home office to her kitchen while on a lunch break. The judge found that the employee’s injury was a “sudden and unexpected event that occurred during work,” despite Air Canada’s argument that the employee wasn’t working when she was injured and it couldn’t be responsible for her safety in the private, personal space of her home.

Domestic violence and duty to act

Essiminy says the definition of workplace harassment and violence now extends to domestic or family violence, including in an employee's home when they work from there.

"But the employer has to be made aware of that situation… Even though a work-from-home station is a workplace under the code, an employer is not monitoring what's going on in between private walls," he says. "And once an employer is made aware of that situation, they have to provide necessary support to the employee vis-à-vis any potential risks."

He says that obligation is clear in several provincial laws, as well as in the Workplace Harassment and Violence Prevention Regulations that govern federally regulated employers, and that it requires support measures and investigations.

Essiminy contrasts that with a spouse showing up at an office and making a scene, or waiting for an employee in the parking lot, where the situation is visible to the employer.

"I think the challenge with a remote work environment is that the employee has to denounce the situation and seek the employer's assistance to deal with any workplace violence that is happening as a result of a family or domestic issue," he says.

"Employers across Canada need to review their harassment and workplace violence policies to make sure that they are providing clarity, meaning clear guidelines to their employees on how to denounce a situation of workplace violence when an employee is primarily in a remote work environment."

If an employer has reason to believe an employee's workspace is unsafe, whether because of domestic violence or a physical hazard, Zaltzman suggests there's some obligation to try to address that “with all proper sensitivity with that employee to ensure their safety."

Regular check-ins from managers also make sense, he says. "If you can see something remotely that causes you the same kind of concern that if you were able to see it in person, by all means, you should be taking the appropriate action."

However, Zaltzman points out that the employer “does not have the ability to go into that employee's home and make it safer.”

When harm happens at home

The connection between work and home is not always obvious when it comes to safety.

Essiminy points to an early 2026 Quebec decision in which an employee was sexually assaulted in her own home. In the De Sousa case, Quebec's Administrative Labour Tribunal (ALT) found the employer had failed in its duty to prevent psychological harassment and that the worker had suffered a work-related psychological injury, even though the assault happened at her home after a company event.

The data analyst attended a video game launch party the employer organized and paid for at an Old Montreal hotel, where alcohol was supplied. Heavily intoxicated, she asked to be taken home, and a consultant working for the employer accompanied her in a taxi, then sexually assaulted her at her home.

"The tribunal found that there was a continuum between the assault and the work, and therefore it was deemed to be on the occasion of work and recognized as a workplace accident," says Essiminy.

Planning for emergencies

Zaltzman says an emergency plan for when a remote worker can't be reached is worth considering, but must respect employees' privacy rights, and any home address or contact information must be kept confidential.

"It would not be a bad idea, certainly, to have an emergency plan if you cannot reach a remote worker to be able to reach out to them," he says. "But is it something that I would absolutely say needs to be done? No."

He notes one complication in trying to contact someone during an emergency: "Are you potentially violating that person's privacy by reaching out to someone else in their life?"

“If it's information that's already known to the employer, reasonably for other reasons, then it's perfectly fine as long as everything's done within the confines of appropriate privacy rights of the employee.”

Reporting a death or serious injury

As for a rare situation where an employee dies while working at home — whether by violence or a health emergency — there are obligations to report the fatality within 24 hours of becoming aware, says Essiminy, pointing to the Canada Labour Code and its regulations, as well as Quebec's health and safety legislation.

 "It is not only in the case of a fatality but also in the case of a serious injury resulting in, for example, the loss of a limb."

In Ben Salem's case, he says, it can be assumed the apartment became primarily a crime scene rather than a workplace accident scene: "This was not a situation where the actual work tools are connected to the death."

Zaltzman says Ontario employers would have to report a workplace incident or injury, including to the WSIB, the same way whether it occurs at the office or at home. "For the purposes of this legislation, the home is defined as the workplace here."

Employee supports after trauma

In Ben Salem's case, the union's statement directed affected CRA employees and eligible family members to the Employee Assistance Program.

For a colleague who witnesses a traumatic event remotely, Zaltzman says the response should mirror an in-person incident.

"I would say [offer] the exact same support that you would offer if someone was to witness something traumatic at work. Make sure that they understand there are resources available to them, that they can take leave if need be, whether it's sick leave or mental health [leave}.”

The same principle applies to any regulatory obligations, he says: "Act as though there is no difference between the physical workplace and the remote workplace."