Ontario Workplace Harassment Policy: A Plain-English Employer Guide for 2026

Learn Ontario workplace harassment policy requirements, investigations and annual reviews. Download the free Ontario policy and program template.

Overview

Ontario employers need more than a short statement saying harassment is not allowed. The Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) requires a workplace harassment policy and a program that explains how the policy will work in practice. The program must include reporting routes, an investigation process, privacy rules and written communication of investigation results and corrective action. The policy and program must also be reviewed as often as necessary and at least once a year.

This guide explains those duties in plain English. It is built around Canada Policy Manual's detailed Ontario template and shows employers how to turn a downloadable document into a working system.

Quick answer: what must an Ontario employer have?

Every Ontario employer covered by the OHSA must prepare a workplace harassment policy and develop and maintain a program to implement it. If six or more workers are regularly employed at a workplace, the policy must be in writing and posted conspicuously. Ontario also permits compliant electronic posting where workers are directed to where and how they can access the document and the employer provides a paper or electronic copy on request.

The program must explain:

• how a worker can report harassment to the employer or a supervisor;
• how a worker can report when the employer, supervisor or normal recipient is the person accused;
• how incidents and complaints will be investigated and dealt with;
• how identifying information will be protected, subject to necessary and lawful disclosure;
• how the person who allegedly experienced harassment and the alleged harasser, if that person is an employer worker, will receive written results and information about corrective action; and
• any other prescribed elements.

The employer must ensure an investigation appropriate in the circumstances is conducted when it becomes aware of an incident or complaint. A formal written complaint is not always needed to trigger that duty.

This guide is general information, not legal advice. A template cannot identify every risk in a specific workplace or replace legal advice about a serious complaint, collective agreement, regulated profession, privacy issue or parallel police matter.

What Ontario law means by workplace harassment

The OHSA definition is the right starting point. In simplified language, workplace harassment is a course of vexatious comment or conduct against a worker in a workplace, including virtual conduct through information and communications technology, when the conduct is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome. The definition includes workplace sexual harassment.

Several parts of that definition matter.

“A course” usually means a pattern

A course normally involves more than one comment or act. Repeated insults, exclusion, humiliating messages, sexual jokes or work sabotage can form a course when viewed together. An employer should not divide connected incidents into isolated pieces and then dismiss each piece as too small to matter.

However, a single event should never be ignored just because the OHSA definition uses the word “course.” A single serious act may engage workplace violence duties, the Human Rights Code, criminal law, another legal obligation or a broader employer policy. A strong internal policy can also prohibit serious one-time misconduct even when the narrow statutory harassment definition may not apply.

“Vexatious” is about troubling or abusive conduct

Ordinary workplace disagreement is not automatically harassment. A difficult conversation, a reasonable correction or a fair performance discussion can be uncomfortable without being vexatious. The surrounding facts matter: the words used, tone, frequency, power relationship, setting, effect and whether the conduct served a real work purpose.

The person does not need to say “stop” every time

Conduct is covered when the person engaging in it knew or reasonably should have known it was unwelcome. An obvious sexual comment, slur, threat or public humiliation does not become acceptable merely because the affected worker froze, laughed nervously or did not confront a manager. Employers should consider the power imbalance and the context, not demand proof that the worker objected in the moment.

Intent is not the only question

“I was joking” is not a complete answer. The test includes what the person reasonably should have known. The investigation should consider the actual conduct and its context, not only the respondent's stated intention.

Virtual harassment and telework are expressly covered

Ontario's current OHSA wording recognizes harassment that occurs virtually through information and communications technology. The Act also applies to telework performed in or about a private residence. That means work email, chat, video meetings, collaborative platforms, employer systems and connected social-media conduct may fall within the workplace harassment system.

A remote workplace is not a policy-free workplace. Employers should explain how workers can save digital evidence, report after hours, identify the correct recipient and obtain help when the conduct happens through a private account or personal device but has a clear connection to work.

Workplace sexual harassment in Ontario

Ontario's OHSA definition of workplace sexual harassment has two main branches.

The first covers a course of vexatious comment or conduct against a worker because of sex, sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression when it is known or ought reasonably to be known to be unwelcome. The second covers an unwelcome sexual solicitation or advance made by a person who can grant, confer or deny a benefit or advancement.

Examples can include:

• sexual jokes, messages, images or gestures;
• repeated requests for dates after a refusal;
• unwanted touching or invasion of personal space;
• comments about a person's body, clothing, sexuality or gender expression;
• sexual rumours, including rumours sent through group chat;
• an offer of better shifts, promotion or another benefit in return for sexual cooperation;
• threats or increased scrutiny after a person rejects an advance; and
• gender-based hostility that polices stereotypes, even when the conduct is not motivated by sexual interest.

The Ontario Human Rights Commission explains that employers have a duty to prevent and respond to sexual harassment and to maintain a poison-free environment. That human-rights duty overlaps with, but is not identical to, the OHSA system. An employer should therefore assess both occupational health and safety requirements and protected-ground discrimination or harassment.

What is not usually workplace harassment?

The OHSA says a reasonable action by an employer or supervisor relating to the management and direction of workers or the workplace is not workplace harassment.

Examples may include:

• assigning work based on legitimate operational needs;
• giving clear, fact-based performance feedback;
• applying a reasonable attendance rule;
• conducting a fair investigation;
• imposing proportionate discipline for a supported reason; or
• making a lawful restructuring or scheduling decision.

The word reasonable is important. The management exclusion is not permission to insult, discriminate, threaten, retaliate or humiliate. A manager can deliver a legitimate message in an abusive way. The employer may need to separate the decision itself from the way it was communicated.

If a report is really about a normal management decision, document that threshold assessment and explain the appropriate route, such as performance review, grievance, accommodation or conflict resolution. Do not use the phrase “management rights” as a shortcut that ends all inquiry.

Policy and program: why Ontario requires both

People often use “policy” and “program” as if they mean the same thing. Under Ontario's OHSA, they serve different functions.

The policy is the employer's commitment and governing rule. It says workplace harassment is prohibited, identifies scope and responsibility, and signals how the organization will respond.

The program is the operating system. It tells people exactly where to report, what happens next, who investigates, how privacy is handled, how results are delivered and how corrective action is tracked.

The distinction is practical. A two-paragraph promise may look professional but still leave a supervisor unprepared on the day a worker reports harassment by the owner. A useful program answers that question before the complaint arrives.

The Ontario workplace harassment requirements, step by step

1. Prepare the policy and review it at least annually

Every covered employer must prepare a policy with respect to workplace harassment. The employer must review it as often as necessary and at least annually.

The annual review should not be a date change only. Ask whether reporting routes still work, whether the alternate recipient remains independent, whether remote-work tools changed, whether training reached new supervisors, whether investigations were delayed and whether corrective actions were completed.

2. Know the six-worker writing and posting rule

If six or more workers are regularly employed at a workplace, the policy must be in writing and posted in a conspicuous place. The OHSA's electronic-posting rule can be used when its conditions are met. Count and workplace questions can be fact-specific, especially with seasonal, mobile or multi-location operations. When uncertain, use the written and posted approach.

Even a smaller workplace benefits from a written policy. Oral-only systems are difficult to apply consistently and hard to prove later.

3. Develop and maintain a written program

The program requirement applies to every employer covered by the Ontario rule, not only workplaces with six or more workers. The employer must develop and maintain the program in consultation with the joint health and safety committee (JHSC) or health and safety representative, if there is one.

Consultation should be real. Give the workplace party enough information and time to comment. Keep minutes, drafts, recommendations and the employer's decision record. Consultation does not necessarily mean the committee has a veto, but it should not be reduced to an email sent after the program is already final.

4. Create a normal reporting route and a genuine alternate route

The program must let a worker report to the employer or a supervisor. It must also explain how to report to someone other than the employer or supervisor when the employer or supervisor is the alleged harasser.

This is one of the most important design choices in the policy. Naming the owner's close subordinate as the “independent” route may not solve the problem. The alternate could be a board chair, outside human-resources professional, external hotline or another person with real authority and secure channels.

List a name or role, email address, telephone number and backup. Test the route at least once a year. An inbox nobody monitors is not an effective procedure.

5. Act when the employer knows about possible harassment

The duty is not limited to perfectly completed complaint forms. A supervisor may witness conduct, receive a vague disclosure, see a group chat or learn about an incident during an exit interview. The employer should assess what it knows and decide what response is appropriate.

Workers should be allowed to report orally, in writing, through an accessible format or with help from a representative. The policy should request useful details without making every field a condition of acceptance.

6. Ensure an investigation appropriate in the circumstances

The OHSA requires the employer to ensure an investigation appropriate in the circumstances is conducted into incidents and complaints of workplace harassment.

“Appropriate” depends on the matter. Relevant factors include seriousness, number of allegations, power imbalance, disputed facts, possible violence, protected-ground issues, senior leadership involvement, technical evidence, workplace size and whether the proposed investigator is neutral.

A sound investigation normally includes:

1. a clear list of allegations and issues;
2. an impartial and competent investigator;
3. notice to the respondent with enough detail to answer;
4. separate interviews of the parties and relevant witnesses;
5. collection and preservation of relevant documents and digital records;
6. a fair opportunity to respond to material conflicting evidence;
7. findings based on the balance of probabilities; and
8. reasons that connect the evidence to each finding.

An internal investigator can be appropriate in a straightforward matter if that person has the skill, authority and independence to do the work. An external investigator is often safer when the allegation involves an owner, senior executive, human-resources leader, serious sexual misconduct, systemic discrimination, a major credibility dispute or a reasonable concern about internal neutrality.

An Ontario inspector can also order an employer to retain an impartial person with specified knowledge, experience or qualifications to conduct an investigation at the employer's expense.

7. Use interim measures without deciding the case early

The employer should consider immediate safety, possible workplace violence, reprisal, accommodation, contact between the parties and the risk that evidence will disappear.

Interim measures can include reporting changes, schedule or location adjustments, no-contact directions, remote work, security measures, paid leave or temporary reassignment. They should be proportionate, reviewed regularly and presented as non-disciplinary while facts remain unresolved. Where possible, avoid placing the main burden on the reporting worker.

8. Protect confidentiality, but do not promise absolute secrecy

Information about an incident or complaint, including identifying information, must not be disclosed unless disclosure is necessary to investigate, take corrective action or is otherwise required by law.

That is different from promising that no one will ever be told. A fair investigation usually requires the respondent to understand the substance of the allegation. Witnesses may need selected facts. Decision-makers need enough information to act. The policy should explain limited, need-to-know disclosure and should discourage gossip without preventing lawful access to a union, support person, health professional, regulator, police or legal adviser.

9. Give written results and corrective-action information

The worker who allegedly experienced harassment and the alleged harasser, if that person is a worker of the employer, must each be informed in writing of the investigation results and any corrective action taken or to be taken.

This does not automatically require the employer to give either person the full investigation report. It also does not usually justify disclosing the exact discipline imposed on another worker. The notice should be meaningful enough to communicate the disposition and relevant corrective steps while protecting unnecessary personal information.

10. Provide information and instruction

Workers need more than a link in an onboarding email. They should understand the definitions, examples, reporting and alternate routes, investigation process, privacy limits, available supports, virtual-conduct rules, violence overlap and protection from reprisal.

Supervisors need additional training on receiving reports, urgent safety triage, preserving evidence, maintaining neutrality, avoiding promises and sending the concern to the correct person without delay.

Keep records of content, dates, attendance and any knowledge check. Training should be refreshed after material changes and for people moving into supervisory or complaint-recipient roles.

Ontario's 90-day and 10-day timelines: law or Code method?

Ontario's Minister-approved Code of Practice to Address Workplace Harassment provides one approved way to comply with specified OHSA duties.

Under the Code method, an investigation must be completed within 90 calendar days or less unless extenuating circumstances justify a longer period. Written results and corrective-action information must then be communicated within 10 calendar days after the investigation concludes. The Code method also requires investigation records to be kept for at least one year after the investigation concludes.

These numbers are important, but they should be described accurately. The OHSA itself requires an investigation appropriate in the circumstances and written outcome communication; it does not put the words “90 calendar days” and “10 calendar days” directly into those statutory provisions. An employer that adopts the Code method should follow it consistently and document any extenuating circumstances.

Do not treat 90 days as permission to wait. Safety steps, evidence preservation, interim controls and a prompt start may be needed immediately. Many straightforward investigations should finish sooner.

A practical Ontario complaint-response workflow

The sequence is easy to remember: receive, protect, assign, investigate, notify and improve. Some steps overlap. For example, evidence preservation and reprisal monitoring should continue throughout the process.

Two practical examples

Example 1: repeated humiliation in a remote team chat

A team leader repeatedly posts sarcastic comments about an analyst's intelligence in a work chat. Other employees add laughing reactions. The analyst works from home and has never met most of the team in person. After several weeks, the analyst tells another supervisor, “I cannot take the group chat anymore,” but does not file a form.

The employer should not dismiss the issue because it happened online, at home or without a formal complaint. The conduct is connected to work and occurs through information and communications technology. The supervisor's knowledge should trigger the program.

A practical response would be to preserve the chat, protect against deletion, screen for retaliation, identify an impartial investigator and give the team leader sufficient particulars to respond. The investigator should examine the full thread and context, not only the most recent message. The employer should also assess whether group norms, manager training or chat moderation need correction, regardless of the final finding.

Example 2: the owner is named in a sexual-harassment report

An employee says the owner repeatedly comments on her body and has suggested that travelling with him would help her promotion prospects. The policy tells workers to report to the owner or their manager. The manager reports directly to the owner and has no authority to protect the employee.

This reporting design is defective. Ontario's program must explain how to report to someone other than the employer or supervisor when the employer or supervisor is the alleged harasser.

The safer response is to activate a pre-appointed external or board-level recipient, use an independent investigator, consider interim limits on contact and preserve messages and travel records. The employee should not be required to confront the owner or attempt mediation. The employer must also examine OHSA duties, workplace sexual harassment, possible human-rights issues and reprisal risk.

Real-world Ontario case study: Bassanese v. German Canadian News Company Limited

The 2019 Ontario Superior Court decision Bassanese v. German Canadian News Company Limited et al., 2019 ONSC 1343, is a stark example of the cost of ignoring a worker's complaints.

What happened

The plaintiff alleged that a co-worker had repeatedly harassed her. She complained to the employer, but the employer did not investigate or take adequate steps to address the conduct. The conflict later escalated to a physical assault. The plaintiff complained again and her employment was terminated the same day.

The employer did not defend the action and was noted in default. That procedural fact matters: the decision should not be read as a full trial resolving contested evidence from both sides.

What the court awarded

The court awarded the plaintiff 19 months' pay in lieu of reasonable notice, $50,000 in aggravated damages connected to the employer's bad-faith handling of the situation and $15,000 for assault and battery. The decision is Bassanese v. German Canadian News Company Limited et al., 2019 ONSC 1343.

The employer lesson

The lesson is not that every complaint leads to the same damages. It is that silence is a decision. When an employer receives repeated harassment concerns, failing to investigate, failing to protect the worker and then ending the employment relationship can create serious legal and human consequences.

An operating program would have provided a recipient, preserved the complaints, separated urgent safety issues from the merits, started an impartial investigation and tracked corrective action. It would also have forced the employer to review any termination decision for possible reprisal and bad-faith risk.

Another Ontario decision worth knowing: harassment complaints and reprisal

In Ljuboja v. The Aim Group Inc., 2013 CanLII 76529 (ON LRB), the Ontario Labour Relations Board considered whether a worker who alleged he was terminated after using the employer's workplace-harassment complaint process could advance a reprisal complaint under the OHSA. The Board rejected a narrow approach that would leave a worker unprotected for using the very mechanism the statute requires an employer to create.

The decision addressed a preliminary legal issue rather than making a final finding that the employer committed reprisal. Its practical lesson remains useful: do not punish, threaten, isolate or unfairly treat a person because they reported harassment, participated in an investigation or tried to enforce an OHSA right. When discipline or termination is being considered near a complaint, document the independent business reason and have the decision reviewed carefully.

Common Ontario policy mistakes

Copying a generic Canadian policy

Harassment rules differ across Canada. A policy written for another province may omit Ontario's alternate reporting route, program consultation, written outcome duty or virtual-conduct wording. Use the Ontario-specific free workplace harassment policy, not a generic national page.

Naming no alternate recipient

“Report to your supervisor” is not enough when the supervisor or employer is accused. The policy needs a real alternative with working contact details.

Requiring a formal signed complaint before acting

The employer's duty can arise from an incident it knows about, not only a completed form. Forms help organize facts, but they should not become a gate that blocks the program.

Promising complete confidentiality

Absolute secrecy may be impossible. Promise controlled, need-to-know disclosure consistent with a fair investigation, corrective action and legal duties.

Letting a conflicted manager investigate

A person who is involved, reports to the respondent or has already decided what happened may not be impartial. Screen conflicts before appointing the investigator.

Treating mediation as mandatory

Informal resolution can help with suitable conflict, but it should be voluntary and safe. It is generally a poor fit for violence, serious sexual or discriminatory conduct, retaliation, coercion or a major power imbalance. It also does not erase the duty to investigate unresolved harassment facts.

Sending a one-line outcome

“The matter is closed” may not meaningfully inform the parties of the result and corrective action. Use a carefully drafted notice that communicates the disposition while protecting unnecessary personal and disciplinary information.

Reviewing the date, not the system

Annual review is not satisfied in spirit by changing the footer. Test the reporting inbox, update names, examine delay, verify training, audit open corrective actions and consider new virtual-work risks.

Ontario employer implementation checklist

Before issuing the policy, an employer should be able to answer yes to each item:

• We confirmed that Ontario provincial law, rather than the federal regime, governs the workplace.
• We replaced every placeholder and removed every drafting note.
• We identified all workplaces and work arrangements, including telework and virtual systems.
• We named a primary recipient and a genuinely usable alternate recipient.
• We consulted the JHSC or health and safety representative on developing and maintaining the program, if one exists.
• We decided who can investigate and when an external investigator is required.
• We created a secure evidence and case-record process.
• We linked the harassment program to workplace violence, emergency and domestic-violence procedures.
• We wrote interim-measure, confidentiality, accommodation and reprisal steps.
• We prepared written results and corrective-action notice templates.
• We trained workers, supervisors, recipients and decision-makers for their roles.
• We posted or made the policy electronically accessible where required.
• We entered the annual review and earlier review triggers in a compliance calendar.
• We checked collective agreements, privacy, accessibility, human rights and sector-specific rules.

For a broader review, use Canada Policy Manual's free HR compliance checklist. For plain-English definitions of legal and HR terms, visit the Legal Glossary.

Ready to customize the document? Get the free Ontario Workplace Harassment Policy and Program Template. The download contains the detailed policy plus operational forms for intake, investigation, outcomes, corrective action, training and annual review.

How to customize the free Ontario template

The downloaded template is deliberately detailed. Do not publish it unchanged.

First, complete the policy record. Insert the legal employer name, covered locations, accountable signatory, primary recipient, alternate recipient, effective date, annual review dates and posting method.

Second, adapt the scope. Include physical workplaces, client locations, vehicles, travel, training, events, remote work and the digital systems your workers actually use.

Third, connect the policy to the workplace violence program. Harassment and violence can overlap, but Ontario has separate violence-assessment and program duties. A threat, assault, stalking concern or domestic-violence risk needs immediate escalation.

Fourth, tailor the investigation protocol. Decide who appoints the investigator, who receives the report, how conflicts are screened, what representation is allowed and how documents are preserved. Establish when the employer will use an external professional.

Fifth, complete the schedules. A blank hazard assessment, outcome notice or training log is a drafting aid, not evidence that the employer implemented the policy.

Finally, have a qualified Ontario professional review the document where the workplace has a union, vulnerable clients, regulated services, complex privacy obligations, a history of serious complaints or operations that may be federally regulated.

Employers building a full HR system can review the Ontario policy manual or create an account to generate a broader, organization-specific manual.

Frequently asked questions about Ontario workplace harassment policies

Does every Ontario employer need a workplace harassment policy?

Every employer covered by Ontario's OHSA must prepare a workplace harassment policy. The policy must be reviewed as often as necessary and at least annually. If six or more workers are regularly employed at a workplace, it must be written and posted as required by the Act.

Does every Ontario employer need a workplace harassment program?

Yes. The employer must develop and maintain a program to implement the policy. The program duty is not limited to workplaces with six or more workers. It must be developed and maintained in consultation with the JHSC or health and safety representative, if any.

Must an Ontario investigation finish within 90 days?

The OHSA requires an investigation appropriate in the circumstances but does not itself state a universal 90-day deadline in that provision. The Minister-approved Code of Practice uses 90 calendar days unless extenuating circumstances justify longer. An employer adopting that Code method should follow and document it.

When must written investigation results be given?

The OHSA requires written results and information about corrective action to the worker who allegedly experienced harassment and to the alleged harasser if that person is an employer worker. Under the Minister-approved Code method, the communication is made within 10 calendar days after the investigation concludes.

Do the parties receive the full investigation report?

Not automatically. The statutory duty is to inform specified parties in writing of results and corrective action. The employer must balance meaningful communication with privacy, privilege, collective-agreement and other legal considerations.

Can a worker report workplace harassment orally?

An employer should accept oral reports and should not make a particular form a barrier. The program must set out reporting measures and procedures. Recording the report accurately helps, but the employer's duty can arise when it otherwise becomes aware of an incident.

What if the owner or supervisor is accused?

The program must explain how the worker can report to a person other than the employer or supervisor when the employer or supervisor is the alleged harasser. The alternate route must be practical, accessible and free from disabling conflict.

Does workplace harassment include remote work and online messages?

Yes. The current OHSA definition expressly includes virtual harassment through information and communications technology, and the Act applies to telework performed in or about a private residence. The conduct must still have the required workplace connection and meet the applicable legal test.

Is reasonable performance management harassment?

Not by itself. A reasonable action relating to management and direction is excluded from the OHSA definition. The exclusion does not protect discriminatory, retaliatory, abusive or humiliating methods.

Can an employer use mediation instead of an investigation?

Voluntary informal resolution may be useful in suitable cases, but it is not a mandatory first step and does not replace the duty to ensure an investigation appropriate in the circumstances where unresolved harassment facts or risks remain.

How long should Ontario harassment investigation records be kept?

Under the Minister-approved Code method, investigation records are kept for at least one year after the investigation concludes. Employers may need longer retention because of limitation periods, litigation holds, collective agreements, privacy rules or other legal and operational needs. A retention schedule should be deliberate and access-controlled.

Can an employer discipline someone for making an unproven complaint?

An unsubstantiated complaint is not the same as a dishonest complaint. Reprisal is prohibited. Knowingly fabricated material may be addressed only after a separate fair assessment, and employers should obtain advice before disciplining a complainant or witness.

Final takeaway

An Ontario workplace harassment policy is not a decorative document. It is the front door to a system that must work when a complaint is difficult, confidential, urgent or directed at a powerful person.

The safest practical approach is to prepare the policy, build the program, consult the workplace party, train each role, test both reporting routes, investigate fairly, communicate outcomes in writing, correct the problem and review the system at least every year.

Download the free Ontario Workplace Harassment Policy and Program Template, then customize every field and implementation step for the actual workplace.

Authoritative Ontario sources

• Ontario Occupational Health and Safety Act
• Ontario guide to OHSA Part III.0.1: workplace violence and workplace harassment
• Ontario Code of Practice to Address Workplace Harassment
• Ontario guidance on workplace harassment investigations by an impartial person
• Ontario Human Rights Commission: Sexual harassment in employment

Legal information notice: This article and the linked template provide general information and drafting support. They are not legal advice, do not create a lawyer-client relationship and do not guarantee compliance or a particular result. Confirm jurisdiction, current law and workplace-specific obligations before adoption. Laws and official interpretations may change after August 13, 2026.

Key Takeaways

Disclaimer: This article and the linked template provide general information and drafting support. They are not legal advice, do not create a lawyer-client relationship and do not guarantee compliance or a particular result. Confirm jurisdiction, current law and workplace-specific obligations before adoption.