In Ontario, Professional Engineers are currently exempt from several key protections under the Employment Standards Act (ESA), including rules related to overtime pay, hours of work, mandatory rest periods, and public holidays.
This exemption is based on a long-standing classification that views engineers as professionals presumed to have autonomy over their work schedules and compensation. But as work cultures evolve and issues like burnout, equity, and retention take center stage, is this exemption still justified, or is it time to rethink it?
Why This Matters
1. Work-Life Balance and Burnout
Engineers in consulting, tech, and construction often work long hours without overtime pay or time off in lieu. While flexibility is part of the profession, the risk of burnout is real, and expectations of 50+ hour workweeks are increasingly unsustainable.
2. Unequal Playing Field
While other professions, such as law and accounting, also have ESA exemptions, many of those professionals are self-employed or work within firms with clear compensation norms. Engineers, especially new graduates or internationally trained professionals, often lack bargaining power and are more vulnerable to exploitation.
3. Retention, Inclusion, and Equity
Lack of ESA protections may discourage women, caregivers, and racialized professionals from staying in the field.
What’s Changing
Conversations around mental health, hybrid work, fair compensation, and work-life boundaries are reshaping workplace norms across every sector, including engineering.
Some U.S. states have reclassified engineers under their labour laws, recognizing that “professional autonomy” doesn’t always reflect reality, especially in salaried positions. Could Ontario take a similar approach, perhaps by introducing partial protections or industry-specific standards?
The Employers’ Perspective
We recognize that employers may be concerned about the costs and administrative impacts of repealing the exemption. They may argue that project-based work, deadlines, and client demands make rigid work-hour rules difficult to apply to engineering roles.
OSPE’s Commitment
OSPE is committed to protecting engineers’ economic interests and workplace well-being. That means asking tough questions, even about long-standing policies, and ensuring our advocacy reflects the lived experience of today’s engineering workforce.
This issue also aligns with OSPE’s broader focus on:
- Fairness in employment practices
- Improving workplace equity
- Retaining top talent in Ontario’s engineering sector
We Want to Hear From You
We are launching a member consultation process to gather your thoughts on:
- How the ESA exemption affects you or your workplace
- Whether you believe reform is needed
- What an ideal solution might look like
Share your feedback here.
Your input will help guide our next steps. If there’s support, OSPE may consider advocating for ESA reform in a way that is balanced, evidence-based, and responsive to both engineers and employers.
Let’s build a profession where fairness, sustainability, and respect for time are part of the equation. Because engineers deserve a system that works for them.
Comments (4)
There is no reason why professional engineers should be exempt from parts of the ESA. I work in an environmental consulting company that employs scientists, technicians and P.Geo.’s and a small number of professional engineers. We all work for the same clients as a multi-disciplinary team. Luckily my company has provided me with the same compensation terms as my non-engineer colleagues, but our employment contracts are changing due to another company acquisition and I am concerned that my compensation terms could be changed. I don’t see why I should be exempt from parts of the ESA and not protected like my colleagues, just because I have a P.Eng. after my name. Please help!! and remove engineers from the exemption list.
Thank you for sharing this, and for raising your concerns. We recently surveyed OSPE members and the majority agreed with your position that professional engineers should not be exempt from ESA protections. We’ll incorporate this stance into our ongoing advocacy and upcoming submissions.
Is it possible to share a copy of the survey you already conducted recently with OSPE members which shows that the majority agreed with your position that professional engineers should not be exempt from ESA protections?
The Employment Standards Act (ESA) provides an exemption from overtime pay for individuals classified as “engineers,” a designation that does not necessarily require licensure as a Professional Engineer. This exemption is based on the assumption that engineering work is inherently flexible and that workloads remain within reasonable limits.
In reality, this exemption can shield employers when they take advantage of engineering employees. Some companies exploit the ESA exemption to unfairly extract unpaid labour from their engineering staff, and I experienced this firsthand. I worked for a foreign company newly operating in Canada—an organization benefiting from substantial taxpayer-funded incentives—where the exemption created a clear opportunity for misuse.
When two U.S.-based engineers resigned, the company chose not to replace them promptly. Instead, their full workload was shifted onto me in addition to my own duties. This led to months of excessive, unsustainable hours, including evenings and weekends, all unpaid. Management openly acknowledged that the workload was unreasonable, yet continued assigning new responsibilities without providing support, staffing, or relief.
Over more than three months, only a single replacement was hired, and that individual had minimal experience. Despite carrying the responsibilities of multiple roles during this time, I received almost no additional compensation. When I formally raised concerns about the workload, burnout, and unpaid overtime, I was abruptly terminated “without cause.”
The termination was accompanied by other unprofessional actions: reputational harm during internal meetings, refusal to reimburse work-related travel expenses (which the ESA does not require employers to cover), and minimal notice—only one week per year of service. Most concerning, the company invoked the ESA overtime exemption only after receiving my documented overtime hours. Until then, the exemption had never been mentioned.
This experience demonstrates how the ESA exemption can be misused to overwork engineers, avoid overtime obligations, and punish those who speak up. It also shows that the exemption affects far more than licensed Professional Engineers; it extends to anyone whose job title can be interpreted as “engineer,” including internationally trained professionals and new graduates who often have limited bargaining power.
Given this, I believe it is time to reconsider the exemption. Even partial protections—such as clearer definitions, caps on excessive hours, mandatory rest periods, or industry-specific standards—could help prevent exploitation while still allowing employers reasonable flexibility.
A modern engineering workforce deserves protections that reflect modern realities. My experience is one example of why updating this exemption is not only justified, but urgently needed to support fairness, equity, and the long-term sustainability of the profession.
The question is: Are we as engineers ready to challenge the broad ESA exemption that empowers employers to overwork engineers and deny them fair compensation?
Thank you for sharing your experience and for raising this important issue. OSPE consults its members on a range of policy matters, including labour and employment issues, through task forces, surveys, and other engagement mechanisms. However, we are not able to share survey instruments or detailed results externally.
If you would like to discuss OSPE’s position on the Employment Standards Act exemption or learn more about how we engage members on this file, please contact advocacy@ospe.on.ca, and a member of our team would be happy to follow up with you.
Thank you again for taking the time to reach out and for contributing to this important conversation.
Leave a Comment