Ontario arbitrator weighs in on MPAC decision that saw 39 employees lose pay for six months
An Ontario arbitrator has ruled that placing 39 employees on six months of unpaid leave for failing to provide proof of full vaccination against COVID-19 was reasonable, even when office attendance was optional and field work was suspended.
Arbitrator Jesse Nyman issued the decision on March 23, 2026, dismissing a policy grievance filed by the Ontario Public Service Employees Union, Local 409, against the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC), with individual employee grievances being held in abeyance pending the outcome.
MPAC administers property assessments and appeals of assessment in Ontario.
Vaccination policy rolled out
MPAC introduced its vaccination policy on Sept. 23, 2021, requiring all employees to be fully vaccinated by Oct. 18, 2021, absent an approved accommodation.
Those who remained unvaccinated by choice moved through a graduated rollout of consequences:
- a mandatory education program on the benefits of vaccination and the risks associated with COVID-19 (Phase 4, Oct. 29, 2021)
- submission of proof of a first dose, or documentation of exceptional circumstances preventing vaccination along with a stated intention in good faith to be vaccinated (Phase 5, Nov. 12, 2021)
- a transition plan worked out with their manager, along with the return of all MPAC assets (Phase 5(b), Nov. 13 to Dec. 24, 2021)
- placement on unpaid leave effective Jan. 4, 2022 (Phase 6).
Twenty-one of the 39 employees placed on leave had filed accommodation requests. By July 4, 2022, when the policy was lifted, 33 of the 39 returned to work. Two resigned upon learning of the recall, and four did not respond.
OPSEU did not challenge MPAC's right to introduce the policy. Its grievance targeted the application of the policy after Dec. 10, 2021, when MPAC suspended its one-day-per-week office requirement and paused all field work in response to the Omicron variant.
Unpaid leave for unvaccinated
The amended policy's central provision read: "Employees who remain unvaccinated by choice and have not been granted an accommodation will be placed on an unpaid leave effective Jan. 4, 2022." OPSEU argued that once office attendance was optional and interior inspections were suspended, this clause had no remaining business rationale.
The union called two witnesses: a property valuation analyst, who testified that most of his work could be performed from his computer, and a central processing facilities specialist, who had worked entirely from home since roughly 2017. Both testified that nothing in their duties changed upon return to work.
MPAC countered that no position in its 1,800-person, 28-office operation was ever entirely remote, and that the policy was a necessary tool for returning to pre-pandemic field inspections covering 5.6 million Ontario properties and meeting its obligations under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Responding to pandemic changes
Nyman framed the central question directly: "The real issue in this case is how quickly an employer is required to respond to a change of circumstances and whether an unforeseen and temporary change in circumstances renders a reasonable policy unreasonable."
He found MPAC's six-month assessment period reasonable, given the pandemic's unpredictability, the employer's statutory health and safety obligations, and its intention to return employees to office and field work.
Employer decisions, the arbitrator noted, "are not measured with the benefit of hindsight."
In his closing disposition, Nyman wrote: "I find that the policy remained reasonable, including the imposition of ULOAs from Dec. 10, 2021 to July 4, 2022, notwithstanding the changing circumstances in Ontario and at MPAC."
