Section 34 – Powers and duties of employment standards officers
Powers and duties of employment standards officers - s. 34(1)
Subsection 34(1) parallels s. 33(1), concerning, in this case, the powers and duties of employment standards officers. This section provides that employment standards officers may exercise the powers conferred upon them under theEmployment Protection for Foreign Nationals Act, 2009, S.O. 2009, c. 32 (EPFNA), and are required to perform the duties imposed on them under EPFNA.
Application of ss. 89 and 90 - s. 34(2)
This provision establishes that ss. 89 and 90 of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 apply to employment standards officers insofar as EPFNA is concerned.
Section 89 of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 requires employment standards officers to follow the policies established by the Director of Employment Standards respecting the interpretation, administration and enforcement of EPFNA and provides that an officer is not required to hold a hearing when exercising those powers or making a decision under EPFNA.
Section 90 of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 establishes that an employment standards officer is not a competent or compellable witness in a civil proceeding. An officer therefore cannot be made to testify in a civil action regarding any information obtained under EPFNA or to produce records or other documents made or received under EPFNA, except insofar as his or her duties under the EPFNA require such testimony or production. For example, if needed in a judicial review proceeding. For a more detailed discussion, see ESA Part XXI.
Prosecution of employment standards officer - s. 34(3)
This subsection provides that a prosecution of an employment standards officer for a failure to follow the policies established by the Director, as required by s. 89(2) of the Employment Standards Act, 2000 (which is incorporated into EPFNA by reference through s. 34(2)), may only be commenced if the Deputy Attorney General provides his or her consent.
Proof of consent - s. 34(4)
Subsection 34(4) states that a document that appears to be the consent of the Deputy Attorney General to prosecute an employment standards officer is admissible as evidence of his or her consent.