From ‘treason’ accusations to packed independence rallies, separatism is back in headlines — and Canadian employers need to know what is signal and what is noise: lawyer
Alberta’s latest round of separatist politics is generating national headlines and strong language from premiers across the country.
British Columbia premier David Eby, citing a report in The Financial Times, told reporters in Ottawa last week that leaders of the group have met three times with U.S. officials since April.
“To go to a foreign country and to ask for assistance in breaking up Canada, there’s an old-fashioned word for that. And that word is treason,” Eby said.
Employment lawyer Sarah Di Liello with Nelligan Law says that in the near term, workplaces should not expect immediate disruption – “It is effectively ‘business as usual’,” she says.
Di Liello characterizes the separation conversation as politically active but still in an early legal and procedural phase, and notes that pro-independence groups are still working through the mechanics of even getting a referendum question before voters.
“The Alberta Prosperity Project, which supports separation, hopes that a referendum will occur in October 2026,” she explains.
“A referendum question has been approved by Elections Alberta, but the petition to trigger the referendum vote is still underway and gathering signatures. The result of the petition may not be known until the May 2, 2026 deadline.”
Managing political debate and respectful workplaces
In Ottawa, Eby linked his concerns about separatist outreach to the broader question of Canadian sovereignty and the role of the U.S. He said news of the reported meetings in Washington is especially alarming because U.S. president Donald Trump is “not particularly respectful to Canada’s sovereignty.”
Ontario Premier Doug Ford also weighed in, calling the reported meeting between Alberta separatists and U.S. officials “unacceptable” and “unethical,” and warning against groups “going around the federal government’s back or the province’s back to negotiate something with the U.S.”
For employers, Di Liello says the priority is to ensure respectfulworkplace frameworks and off-duty-conduct policies are clear, communicated and enforced, so that separatism debates do not spill over into harassment or other employee claims.
“Political topics of all kinds are bound to come up in the workplace and can create a variety of issues that human resources departments and executive leadership may need to address,” she says.
For Di Liello, the starting point is not Alberta-specific, but a solid framework of guidance for respectful behaviour at work.
“All employers should have up-to-date respectful workplace, anti-harassment, anti-violence and anti-bullying policies in place,” she says.
“Not only to address situations where discussions of Alberta separation or other political topics become heated or disrespectful, but to ensure compliance with occupational health and safety legislation.”
On the legal side, Di Liello says “It is effectively ‘business as usual’,” and her advice is to focus on current obligations rather than speculating on future constitutional shifts.
“A referendum question has been approved by Elections Alberta, but the petition to trigger the referendum vote is still underway and gathering signatures,” she says.
“The result of the petition may not be known until the May 2, 2026 deadline.”
Off-duty conduct and employer reputation
Even if a referendum for Alberta separation were successful, Di Liello points out, it would be a complex and drawn-out legal process before such a change were felt in employer-level laws and practices.
But employers should still keep an eye on developments that could affect federally-regulated operations, immigration-related laws and payroll contributions, Di Liello warns.
As political movements organize rallies, petitions and online campaigns, employers may also be confronted with tensions around employees’ off-duty conduct, she says, adding that this is another area where clear, consistently applied expectations are essential.
“Managers and employers may also need to develop policies and communicate expectations to employees about off-duty conduct, such as attending protests and demonstrations, or even engaging in online debates on political topics on social media,” says Di Liello.
“In some cases, an employer may be justified in disciplining or terminating an employee who engages in off-duty conduct that could damage the employer’s reputation,” such as committing vandalism or violent behaviour at a demonstration.
Di Liello stresses that employees and managers need clear guidance on how to handle disagreement, which for HR means revisiting policy language, training cadence and complaint procedures to address polarization, not just traditional harassment or conflict scenarios.
“Employees and managers alike should be aware that not everyone will share their point of view on certain topics and that conversations need to remain professional and respectful at all times,” Di Liello says.
“Communicating workplace policies to employees, and providing regular training to ensure compliance, is crucial.”
