Doctor's Notes for Work in Canada: When You Need One, What It Must Say, and What Employers Can Ask

Short Answer (doctor's note for work in Canada)

doctor's note for work in Canada: A doctor's note for work in Canada follows your employer's jurisdiction: federal workers under the Canada Labour Code, most private-sector workers under provincial or territorial rules, and unionized workers under both the law and their collective agreement. The note should state dates, work limits, and timing, and nothing more.

A doctor's note for work in Canada does not follow one national rule, because employment standards in Canada follow the employer, not the employee's home address or the city where the branch sits. A bank teller, a telecom worker, and an interprovincial transport worker fall under the Canada Labour Code, while most other private-sector workers fall under the province or territory where they work, and a unionized worker follows both their jurisdiction and their collective agreement. Send the note that matches your line, with dates, limits, and timing, and send nothing more than that line requires.

30-second check: is this article for you?

According to the National Institutes of Health (NIH), proper medical documentation is essential for protecting your rights.

Read on if any of these fits:

1. You need a sick note for the first time and you do not know whether federal or provincial rules cover your job.
2. A friend, a coworker, or a website told you a number of days, and you are not sure whether that number applies to you at all.
3. Your employer asked for a note, and you want to know what the note must say and what it must leave out.
4. You work under a collective agreement and you do not know whether the agreement adds a step on top of the law.
5. You are about to send a full medical history to your employer and you want to check, first, whether that helps or harms your case.

If your absence is for a child's school absence, this pillar is not the right map. School excuse rules are set by schools and districts, and the decision maker is the school, not an employer.

---

Sophie's Monday, and the advice that did not travel

According to the ADA National Network, proper medical documentation is essential for protecting your rights.

Sophie Laurent is 31 and works as a bank teller in Toronto. On a Monday morning she called in sick, missed four consecutive shifts, and returned the following Monday to a message from human resources: please provide a note covering the absence. Sophie asked two friends what to send. One friend, who works at a local shop, said her employer had asked for a note after two days, and told Sophie to send a full letter from her provider describing her condition, her treatment, and her medication, because more detail had worked for her. The other friend, who works under a collective agreement, said her agreement required her to notify her union steward before sending anything, and told Sophie to check her agreement first, because the agreement added a step the law alone did not mention.

Sophie was about to follow both pieces of advice at once: send a long, detailed letter, and wait for a union step that did not apply to her. Then she checked which law covered her own job, and the picture changed. Banks, including authorized foreign banks, are listed by the Government of Canada among the federally regulated private sectors under the Canada Labour Code (Government of Canada: List of federally regulated industries and workplaces). Sophie's job, as a bank teller, therefore falls under federal rules, not under the provincial rules that cover her friend at the local shop. Her friend's two-day experience, her friend's detailed letter, and her other friend's union step each belonged to a different line, and none of them, copied unchanged, answered Sophie's own rule.

This pillar is the map Sophie needed before she sent anything: three lines, compared side by side, each with one positioning sentence for its sub-article, and a verdict on which line decides a first sick note. The sub-articles, not this pillar, carry each line's forms, deadlines, and jurisdiction-specific detail. This pillar does not expand any province's specific rules, and it does not state any province-specific number of days as a national fact, because a province's number, copied into a federal case or into another province's case, is exactly the error this pillar exists to prevent.

---

The comparison verdict: three lines, three different note rules

The verdict, stated plainly, is this: jurisdiction first, note second. A note that is correct under one line can be wrong under another line, not because the medical facts changed, but because the rule that decides whether a certificate can be requested, when it can be requested, and what it must certify, changed. A worker who copies a friend's note, a friend's deadline, or a friend's level of detail across lines is not being thorough. That worker is filing under the wrong rule.

---

Line 1: federally regulated employees, and the Canada Labour Code rule Sophie actually falls under

Line 1 is Sophie's line, and it is the only line in this pillar stated with specific numbers, because those numbers come from a federal statute and its regulations that were opened and read for this article. Section 239 of the Canada Labour Code provides that every employee is entitled to, and shall be granted, a medical leave of absence from employment of up to 27 weeks as a result of personal illness or injury, organ or tissue donation, medical appointments during working hours, or quarantine (Canada Labour Code, section 239). That 27-week figure is the outer length of the federal medical leave entitlement, not a paid entitlement and not a note threshold, and it must not be copied into a provincial case, where a different statute sets a different length, to be checked on that province's or territory's official page.

The paid part of the federal rule is narrower, and it is earned, not granted all at once. Under section 239(1.2), an employee earns, after completing 30 days of continuous employment with an employer, three days of medical leave of absence with pay, and following that 30-day period, at the beginning of each month after completing one month of continuous employment, one additional day of medical leave of absence with pay. Under section 239(1.21), an employee is entitled to earn up to 10 days of medical leave of absence with pay in a calendar year. Each paid day must be paid at the employee's regular rate of wages for their normal hours of work, under section 239(1.3), and each paid day not taken in a calendar year is carried forward to January 1 of the following calendar year and decreases, by one, the maximum number of days that can be earned in that calendar year, under section 239(1.4). The Canada Labour Standards Regulations set out the same 10-day maximum and the same carry-forward modification for employers that calculate annual vacation on a year other than a calendar year (Canada Labour Standards Regulations, section 33.1).

The certificate rule for Line 1 is the rule Sophie's case turns on, and it is precise in a way that makes copying a provincial friend's experience dangerous. Under section 239(2), the employer may, in writing and no later than 15 days after the return to work of an employee who has taken a medical leave of absence of at least five consecutive days, require the employee to provide a certificate issued by a health care practitioner certifying that the employee was incapable of working for the period of their medical leave of absence. Three conditions must all be present before that request is properly made under the federal rule: the leave must be at least five consecutive days, the request must be in writing, and the request must be made no later than 15 days after return to work. Sophie missed four consecutive shifts. On the federal rule as stated in section 239(2), her absence, at four consecutive days, does not meet the five-consecutive-day threshold for a certificate request under that subsection, and any request for a certificate must still be in writing and within the 15-day window after return. That is a federal answer, for a federal employee, and it must not be read as a provincial answer, where a different threshold, a different written-request rule, or a different deadline may apply. Check the official page for your province or territory, pending verification for any specific provincial number, before assuming that a five-day federal threshold, or a two-day friend's experience, governs your case.

Two further federal rules complete Line 1 at map level, and both matter for a first note. Under section 239(3), an employee who intends to take a medical leave of absence must give written notice to the employer of the day on which the leave is to begin and the expected duration of the leave at least four weeks before that day, unless there is a valid reason why that notice cannot be given, in which case the employee must provide written notice as soon as possible, and under section 239(4), any change in the length of the leave must be notified in writing as soon as possible. Under section 239(6), an employer is prohibited from dismissing, suspending, laying off, demoting, or disciplining an employee because the employee intends to take or has taken a medical leave of absence, or from taking such an intention or absence into account in any decision to promote or train the employee. A first note on Line 1 therefore sits inside a larger federal framework: notice, a certificate threshold, a paid-day accrual, a 27-week outer length, and a prohibition on reprisal for taking the leave. The sub-article for Line 1 carries the detail: how the paid days accrue month by month, how carry-forward reduces the next year's maximum, how a certificate request must be worded and timed, and how notice works when an absence is sudden rather than planned. This pillar does not expand that detail, because that detail is the sub-article's subject, and because a pillar that repeats every federal subsection becomes a statute summary, not a map.

For the wider federal context, the Government of Canada's own survey report on paid medical leave in the federal jurisdiction records that amendments to Part III of the Canada Labour Code came into effect in December 2022, mandating 10 days of medical leave with pay for employees in federally regulated industries, and that those amendments also increased the maximum length of unpaid medical leave from 17 weeks to 27 weeks (Government of Canada: Paid medical leave in the federal jurisdiction). That December 2022 date is the reason older advice about federal sick leave, written before those amendments, must not be relied on without checking the current section 239. A friend's experience from before December 2022, a website summary from before that date, or a handbook that was never updated after that date can each state a federal rule that is no longer the federal rule.

Line 2: provincially and territorially regulated employees, where the province or territory of work decides

Line 2 covers most private-sector workers in Canada, and it is the line where this pillar deliberately refuses to state numbers. The Government of Canada's federal list page states the rule for finding Line 2 in one sentence: if you do not work in a federally regulated industry, consult the employment standards for your province or territory of work, and it then lists every province and territory. That sentence is the whole map for Line 2 at pillar level, because the next sentence, the one that states a number of days, a certificate threshold, or a deadline, is different in every province and territory, and a pillar that states one province's number as if it were a national number would recreate, in print, the exact error Sophie nearly made by copying her friend's experience.

What can be stated for Line 2, without inventing a provincial number, is the structure that every provincial and territorial case shares, and the questions a first-time employee must answer before sending anything. First, which province or territory is the province or territory of work, not the province or territory where the employer's head office sits, not the province or territory where the employee lives if those differ, and not the province or territory a friend works in? Second, what does that province's or territory's employment standards law, as stated on its official page, provide for sick leave or medical leave, including whether any days are paid, how many days are provided, and after how many days of employment the entitlement begins? Third, what does that law, and the employer's policy under that law, allow the employer to request as proof, including whether a certificate can be requested at all for a short absence, after how many days it can be requested, whether the request must be in writing, and by what deadline it must be made? Fourth, does a separate provincial privacy law, a human rights law, or a workplace policy limit what the certificate may contain, beyond what the employment standards law itself requires?

Each of those four questions must be answered from the official page for the province or territory of work, and from the employer's written policy, before a note is sent. Any specific provincial number that has not been checked on that official page must be treated as pending verification, not as a fact, and must not be stated in a note, in an email to human resources, or in advice to a coworker as if it were settled law. The sub-article for Line 2, and the sub-articles for each province and territory, carry the detail: each jurisdiction's entitlement, certificate threshold, and deadline, checked against its official page. The guide on sick leave laws in Canada by province and territory is the cluster guide that maps those jurisdictions, and it is the guide to read alongside this pillar, not instead of the official page for your own province or territory. This pillar's job is only to tell you that Line 2 exists, that it is decided by the province or territory of work, and that no federal number, and no other province's number, can be copied into your case.

Line 3: unionized employees, where the agreement adds a layer on top of the jurisdiction

Line 3 is not a third jurisdiction. It is an overlay, and misunderstanding that point is the second half of the pitfall in this pillar. A unionized employee is still either federally regulated or provincially regulated, under Line 1 or Line 2, and the collective agreement then adds a layer on top of that jurisdiction: it may set a different notice procedure, a different form, an additional step such as notifying a steward or a union representative, a different deadline for submitting a note, or a different process for disputing a rejected note. It may also provide benefits or procedures that the statute alone does not provide, such as a disability plan, a return-to-work procedure, or a modified-duties process, each governed by the agreement's own terms.

Sophie's second friend illustrates Line 3 correctly, and Sophie's near-mistake illustrates it incorrectly. Her friend's advice to check the agreement first was sound advice for a unionized worker, because the agreement is the document that decides whether an additional step applies, and in what order. Sophie's near-mistake was to treat that advice as if it applied to her, when she is not covered by that friend's agreement, and when her own case is decided by the federal rule in section 239 and by her employer's written policy under that rule. A unionized worker who sends only a statutory note, without following an agreement step the agreement requires, risks having the note rejected on procedure even when the medical facts are sound. A non-unionized worker who waits for a union step that does not apply to her risks missing a statutory deadline, such as the federal 15-day window for a certificate request, while waiting for a step that was never hers to take.

The check for Line 3 is therefore a two-document check, in order. First, confirm the jurisdiction, federal or provincial, from the federal list and from the employer's own statement of jurisdiction, and confirm the statutory rule that jurisdiction sets. Second, read the collective agreement itself, not a summary of it and not a friend's summary of a different agreement, for any additional step, form, notice, or deadline it sets for a sick note, a medical leave, or a return to work. If the agreement is silent on a point, the statutory rule governs that point. If the agreement sets a different rule for a point, the agreement's rule for that point must be followed in addition to, and not instead of, the statutory minimum, unless the agreement itself or the statute provides otherwise, which is a question to check against the agreement and the statute, not to assume. The sub-article for Line 3 carries the detail: how to read a collective agreement for sick-note provisions, how to handle a conflict between an agreement step and a statutory deadline, and how to document both filings so that neither the statutory nor the agreement record is left incomplete. This pillar does not expand that detail, because collective agreements differ by bargaining unit, and a pillar that states one agreement's step as a general union rule would mislead a worker under a different agreement.

---

The one pit: filing under the wrong line, and why it fails in both directions

The pit this pillar concentrates on, and the only pit it develops in depth, is applying federal rules to a provincial employee, or provincial rules to a federal employee, and therefore filing the wrong document, under the wrong threshold, by the wrong deadline, with the wrong level of detail. It feels helpful to copy a friend's successful note, because a friend's note worked, and because a friend's employer accepted it. For a Canadian sick note, that copying is the failure, for three reasons that compound each other, and each reason runs in both directions.

First, a wrong-line note fails on threshold. Sophie's federal case, at four consecutive days, does not meet the five-consecutive-day threshold in section 239(2) for a federal certificate request, while her friend at the local shop, under a provincial rule and a provincial employer's policy, may have faced a different threshold entirely, to be checked on that province's official page, pending verification for any specific number. A federal worker who sends a certificate for a four-day absence, because a provincial friend did, has sent a document the federal rule did not require, and has created a medical record the employer did not need to hold. A provincial worker who waits until five consecutive days to send a certificate, because a federal friend did, may have missed a provincial threshold, a provincial employer's written-request deadline, or a provincial policy deadline that fell earlier, and may therefore have an absence coded as unexcused while waiting for a threshold that was never hers. In both directions, the threshold that decides whether a note is required at all is the jurisdiction's threshold, not the friend's threshold.

Second, a wrong-line note fails on detail. Sophie's first friend advised a long, detailed letter describing condition, treatment, and medication, because more detail had worked for that friend. Under the federal certificate rule, what a certificate must certify is that the employee was incapable of working for the period of the medical leave, and a note that states dates, the period of incapability, and the return or review timing, with provider identification, answers that certification without a full history. A long letter that adds a condition narrative, a treatment history, and a medication list does not make that certification stronger. It makes the employer's file larger, more sensitive, and harder to store correctly, while adding nothing the federal rule asks the certificate to certify. The same error runs in the other direction: a short federal-style note, stating only incapability for a period, sent to a provincial employer whose law or policy requires a different form, a different statement, or an additional step, may be returned as incomplete, not because the medical facts are wrong, but because the form does not match the provincial rule it was sent under. Detail must match the line, not the friend.

Third, a wrong-line note fails on privacy, and privacy is where the wrong-line error becomes a lasting record rather than a rejected form. The Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada's interpretation bulletin on personal information states that personal information means information about an identifiable individual, that PIPEDA applies to employee personal information only for federal works, undertakings, or businesses, and that an individual's views or opinions about an employee, including medical diagnoses or assessments, may constitute the personal information of that employee (Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada: Interpretation Bulletin, Personal Information). The same bulletin states that those interpretations are not binding legal interpretations, but are intended as a guide for compliance, and that they may evolve as findings and court decisions accumulate. For Sophie, as a federal employee, that federal privacy frame is the frame that governs how her employer collects, uses, and discloses her employee personal information, and it is a reason to send only what the federal certificate requires. For a provincially regulated friend, a different privacy frame may govern, under provincial privacy law or another provincial statute, to be checked on that province's official page, pending verification for any specific provincial privacy rule. A worker who copies a federal privacy assumption into a provincial case, or a provincial privacy assumption into a federal case, risks both over-disclosing to an employer whose privacy frame does not protect that disclosure in the same way, and under-protecting a record that should have been kept narrow. Privacy, like threshold and detail, follows the line, not the friend.

The fix for the wrong-line pit is a jurisdiction check, done before any note is written, in writing, and kept with the note. Confirm, from the federal list and from the employer's own written statement, whether the employer is federally regulated or provincially regulated, and confirm, from the collective agreement if one applies, whether an additional step applies on top of that jurisdiction. Then, and only then, write the note that line requires: for a federal case, dates, the period of incapability, and return or review timing, with provider identification, sent only when a certificate is properly requested in writing within the federal window, or when the employer's written policy under the federal rule requires it; for a provincial case, what the applicable provincial or territorial law and the employer's policy under that law require, checked on that jurisdiction's official page; for a unionized case, both the jurisdiction's requirement and the agreement's additional step, documented separately so that neither record is left incomplete. That jurisdiction check, done once, prevents the three failures above, because it replaces a friend's threshold, a friend's detail, and a friend's privacy assumption with the rule that actually governs the worker's own job.

Other questions that arise around a first sick note, how a longer absence is handled, how a mental health absence is documented, how a telehealth note is produced and verified, and how a short-term disability claim differs from a sick note, are each covered in one sentence in the cross-links below, not expanded here, because each belongs to its own sub-article and its own line. For a longer absence that may involve income replacement or a return-to-work plan, see the guide on short-term disability and return to work in Canada. For an absence that involves a mental health condition or a workplace accommodation, see the guide on mental health leave and accommodations in Canada. For the province-by-province map that this pillar deliberately does not expand, see the guide on sick leave laws in Canada by province and territory. For how an online note is produced and verified, see the guide on telehealth medical certificates in Canada. Each of those guides covers one part of the problem. This pillar covers only the line that decides which guide, which threshold, and which form applies to the worker in front of it.

What a good Canadian note includes, and what it leaves out, at map level

A good first note, on any line, follows the same subtraction test that applies to every work note in this cluster, adapted to the Canadian line that governs it. It includes provider identification, so the employer can authenticate the document. It includes the dates of the absence, as calendar dates, and, where the line requires it, a statement that the employee was incapable of working for that period, as the federal certificate in section 239(2) requires. It includes functional limits, stated as tasks, hours, or duties that are limited, with numbers where a limit can be numbered, and the dates those limits apply. It includes a return date, or a review date if limits may still apply, as a calendar date, so that the note closes itself and sets the next step without a second request.

It leaves out a diagnosis narrative, a treatment history, and a medication list, unless the applicable law, the applicable agreement, or the specific form for a longer claim specifically requires more, and then it includes only what that law, agreement, or form specifically requires, and nothing further. It leaves out a friend's threshold, a friend's deadline, and a friend's level of detail, because those belong to the friend's line, not to the worker's line. It leaves out any statement about a condition that has not been assessed, any date the provider did not assess, and any return date the provider cannot support, because a note that attests to an unassessed date or an unsupported return will not survive the employer's authentication, however detailed its history is. That subtraction test is the whole format at map level. The sub-articles carry the line-specific wording for each line, and this pillar does not repeat that wording, because wording that fits a federal certificate does not automatically fit a provincial form, and wording that fits a provincial form does not automatically fit a collective agreement's step.

Where a Rillmont evaluation fits, and where it does not fit

Rillmont serves people in Canada and the United States, with service-area wording only and no headquarters city stated. This article covers Canada only. The process is: you complete an online evaluation, a licensed provider reviews it, and if appropriate, a note is issued to your account. That process fits a short Canadian note when the assessment can establish dates, the period of incapability, functional limits, and a return or review date, as in Sophie's case. It does not, by itself, decide whether an employer is federally or provincially regulated, create a collective agreement step, or file a longer disability claim, because each of those decisions is made by the jurisdiction, the agreement, or the claim's own form and decision maker. Use a Rillmont document as supporting material for the line you confirmed, ready to submit with that line's form, not as a substitute for that form, and not as a substitute for the jurisdiction check itself. A note that is ready to submit is not a filed claim, and a filed note under the wrong line is not a note filed under the right line, until the jurisdiction check has been done and documented in writing.

Your pre-submit action

Do not send a note until you have written your line down, and that written line is the action this pillar leaves Sophie, and every first-time Canadian employee reading it, with. Take the absence in front of you and write four lines, on paper or in the email draft itself, before you attach anything.

Line one: your line, in one sentence, confirmed in writing, for example "federally regulated, bank, Canada Labour Code section 239" or "provincially regulated, province or territory of work, employment standards law for that jurisdiction" or "unionized, jurisdiction plus collective agreement, agreement step to be checked." Line two: the dates missed, and the return or review date, as calendar dates. Line three: the limits, stated as tasks, hours, or duties that are limited, with numbers where a limit can be numbered, and the dates those limits apply, plus, for a federal certificate case, a statement that you were incapable of working for the period, where a certificate has been properly requested. Line four: the recipient and the deadline, taken from the employer's written request or written policy under your line, for example "human resources, in writing, within the window that line sets," with the date of the employer's written request kept with the note.

Send those four lines, with the document that matches your line, to the recipient your line names, and ask in the same message for written confirmation of how the absence was coded and whether the certificate, where one was required, was accepted as complete. That confirmation, kept with the date you sent it and the date the employer's written request arrived, is the record that prevents a later dispute about whether a note was required at all, whether it was sent on time, or whether it answered the rule that actually governed the job. If the employer replies that a different line, a different form, or a different deadline applies, follow that reply, and keep it, because the employer's written statement of jurisdiction, the applicable statute, and the collective agreement, where one applies, for your own job, outrank any general map, including this pillar.

---

Frequently asked questions

How do I know whether I am federally or provincially regulated?
Check the Government of Canada's list of federally regulated industries and workplaces, and confirm with your employer in writing. Banks, air transportation, telecommunications, broadcasting, and interprovincial and international transport are on the federal list, while most other private-sector workers fall under the province or territory where they work. Do not copy a friend's jurisdiction, because a friend in a different industry may fall under a different line.

Does the federal five-day certificate rule apply to me if I work for a provincially regulated employer?
No, not as a federal rule. The five-consecutive-day threshold, the written-request requirement, and the 15-day window after return to work in section 239(2) are federal rules for federally regulated employees. A provincially regulated employee must check the employment standards law and the employer's policy for the province or territory of work, and must treat any specific provincial number that has not been checked on that official page as pending verification, not as a fact.

What should my first note say?
Provider identification, the dates missed as calendar dates, functional limits stated as tasks, hours, or duties that are limited, with numbers where a limit can be numbered, and a return or review date as a calendar date. For a federal certificate case, it must also certify that you were incapable of working for the period of the medical leave, where a certificate has been properly requested. It does not need a diagnosis narrative, a treatment history, or a medication list, unless the applicable law, agreement, or form specifically requires more.

I am unionized. Does my collective agreement replace the law?
No. A collective agreement adds a layer on top of the jurisdiction, federal or provincial, that already covers you. Read the agreement itself for any additional step, form, notice, or deadline it sets, and follow both the jurisdiction's requirement and the agreement's additional step, documenting each separately so that neither record is left incomplete.

How many paid sick days do federally regulated employees get?
Under section 239 of the Canada Labour Code, an employee earns three days of medical leave with pay after completing 30 days of continuous employment, then one additional day at the beginning of each month after completing one month of continuous employment, up to a maximum of 10 days of medical leave with pay in a calendar year, paid at the regular rate of wages for normal hours of work, with unused days carried forward to January 1 and decreasing the next year's maximum by one per carried day. Those are federal figures only, and they do not apply to provincially regulated employees.

What if my employer asks for a note for a short absence?
Ask the employer, in writing, which rule requires the note: the federal certificate rule, a provincial or territorial rule, an employer's policy under that rule, or a collective agreement step. Then check that rule on its official page or in the agreement itself, before sending anything beyond dates, limits, and timing. A request that does not match your line, or that asks for a full history the line does not require, should be answered with a question about the rule, not with a longer medical file.

Can my employer ask for my diagnosis or my medication list?
A note should state dates, the period of incapability where required, functional limits, and timing, not a full history or a medication list, unless the applicable law, agreement, or specific form specifically requires more. Personal information, including medical diagnoses or assessments, may constitute the personal information of the employee under the federal privacy frame, and the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada's interpretations on that point are stated as a guide for compliance, not as binding legal interpretations. Check the privacy frame that applies to your line before disclosing more than the line requires.

What should I do first, before I send anything?
Write the four-line page from the pre-submit action: your line confirmed in writing, your dates and return or review date, your limits with numbers where possible, and the recipient and deadline from the employer's written request or policy under your line. Then send the document that matches your line, and ask for written confirmation of how the absence was coded and whether the certificate, where one was required, was accepted as complete.

This article provides general information only and is not legal, tax, or medical advice. Rules vary by jurisdiction, collective agreement, and employer policy, so check the official page for your province, territory, or federal jurisdiction, and the specific form that applies to your situation, before you submit.

Official Resources

• Government of Canada, List of federally regulated industries and workplaces — https://www.canada.ca/en/services/jobs/workplace/federally-regulated-industries.html
• Canada Labour Code, section 239, Medical Leave — https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/L-2/section-239.html
• Canada Labour Standards Regulations, section 33.1, Medical Leave with Pay — https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/C.R.C.,_c._986/page-4.html?txthl=person
• Government of Canada, Employment and Social Development Canada, Paid medical leave in the federal jurisdiction: employer perspectives — https://www.canada.ca/en/employment-social-development/corporate/portfolio/labour/programs/labour-standards/reports/survey-results-paid-medical-leave.html
• Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, Interpretation Bulletin: Personal Information — https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/privacy-laws-in-canada/the-personal-information-protection-and-electronic-documents-act-pipeda/pipeda-compliance-help/pipeda-interpretation-bulletins/interpretations_02/?wbdisable=true