WorkMonitor.
Notice and proportionalityMonitoring is lawful with advance written notice, a documented lawful basis and a proportionality test. The paperwork is the requirement.

Employee monitoring law · Canada (federal)

Reasonableness is the statutory test, and the OPC applies a four-part necessity analysis.

Show the measure is necessary, effective, proportionate and the least intrusive option available.

Region
North America
Instruments
2 governing
Employer duties
3 listed
Last reviewed
August 22, 2026

Canada (federal) · what the law requires

Notice and proportionality

PIPEDA applies to federally regulated employers and, for provincially regulated ones, to commercial activity in provinces without substantially similar legislation. Its governing standard is that collection, use and disclosure be for purposes a reasonable person would consider appropriate. The OPC applies a four-part test: is the measure demonstrably necessary, likely to be effective, proportionate to the loss of privacy, and is there a less invasive alternative, which is a useful framing everywhere in Canada.

Audit log
Hash-chained, including who read what
Chain verified to entry 48,210 — no gaps, no rewritesChain intactChecked 2 min ago
EVENTSOURCETIMEHASH
  • AKAria K. viewed screenshotsLena M. · 3 capturesScreen capturemacOS · London09:42a91f…4c023d7b…91ee
  • JMJon M. exported time reportDesign team · CSVmacOS · Berlin09:313d7b…91ee77c5…0ba4
  • SDSara D. opened capture reviewRavi P. · one flagged frameWindows · Manchester09:1877c5…0ba4e208…5f13
  • wm_live_7f2… read /v1/deliverablesScoped key · read onlyPublic API · allowlisted IP08:57e208…5f13b64a…2d90
  • LMLena M. viewed her own recordWhat We SeemacOS · London08:44b64a…2d901cf9…8e77
  • AKAria K. changed capture policyBlur set to alwaysmacOS · London08:261cf9…8e7705d2…ae31
Each entry carries the hash of the one before it, so an edit anywhere breaks everything after it.48,210 entries

The instruments, and which control answers each duty

  • PIPEDA: S.C. 2000, c. 5. Appropriate-purposes standard, knowledge and consent, and limits on collection. Applies to federal works, undertakings and businesses.
  • OPC four-part test: Office of the Privacy Commissioner guidance. Necessity, effectiveness, proportionality, and whether a less privacy-invasive alternative exists.

No product does this part

What you must still do yourself

Compliance is a property of your deployment. These are the steps in Canada (federal) that no vendor can complete on your behalf, and skipping them is what turns a rollout into a finding.

  1. 1Run the OPC four-part analysis in writing before deployment.
  2. 2Check whether you are federally or provincially regulated, and which provincial statute applies.
  3. 3Give meaningful notice: the OPC reads "knowledge" as actual understanding.
  4. If you get it wrongOPC findings are non-binding but publishable, with Federal Court enforcement and damages available. Provincial regimes vary.

Verify the claim

Every control above, on the page that describes it

Sources and review date

Last reviewed August 22, 2026

This is a summary of how employee-monitoring rules generally work in this jurisdiction, written to help you scope a rollout and brief your own advisers. It is not legal advice, it is not a substitute for it, and law changes. Verify against the primary sources listed and take local counsel before you deploy.

Nearby jurisdictions

Monitoring law elsewhere in North America

Point it at one team for a week.

Create the account, put the agent on a handful of desks, and leave it alone. On Friday you read the week instead of reconstructing it: hours against their projects, focus and idle per person, and the timesheets already filled in.

Free for two seats. No card, and no sales call to sit through.