A blunt LinkedIn warning from recruiter and executive search leader Suzanne Sears is making the rounds in Ontario retail circles, and it is forcing a lot of employers to re-check their templates. “Ontario job posting rules,” Sears wrote, “the fine if caught? $100,000 per ad,” adding that she was “still seeing a lot of retailers NOT posting the salaries.”
In an interview with Retail Insider, Sears, CEO of Best Retail Careers International Inc. said she had posted about the changes in December with little response, then reposted again in mid-January after the rules took effect. “The thing went viral,” she said. “I’m up to about 100,000 views now. And I’m thinking, this seems to be news to everybody, have they been paying attention?”
While the $100,000 figure is widely being repeated online, the actual penalty exposure depends on how enforcement unfolds and what provision is at issue. Still, employment lawyers have been clear about one point: Ontario has now hard-wired new disclosure requirements into the Employment Standards Act, 2000 for publicly advertised job postings, and employers that ignore them are taking on real legal risk.
What Changed on January 1, 2026
The changes flow from Bill 149, the Working for Workers Four Act, and related amendments and regulations that took effect January 1, 2026.
At a high level, Ontario’s new framework adds job posting obligations around pay transparency, use of artificial intelligence in screening, and a ban on requiring “Canadian experience.” It also adds a requirement to disclose whether a posting is for an existing vacancy, plus a duty to provide candidates with a status update after an interview, within a prescribed timeline.
For retailers, the operational reality is simple: if you are posting roles that will be performed in Ontario and you meet the employee threshold, job ads are no longer “just marketing.” They are compliance documents.
Who Must Comply, and What Counts as a Public Posting
The requirements generally apply to Ontario employers with 25 or more employees on the day a publicly advertised job posting is posted.
The rules are tied to “publicly advertised job postings,” which employment law summaries describe as external postings advertised to the general public. This can include postings on LinkedIn, Indeed, third-party job boards, and recruiting agency listings, which is exactly why Sears’ post struck a nerve.
There are exclusions. Summaries of the framework note that general recruitment campaigns and general “help wanted” signs that do not advertise a specific position are treated differently than specific role postings, and internal-only postings limited to existing employees fall outside the definition.
Pay Transparency, and the $50,000 Range Rule
The highest-profile change is compensation disclosure. Covered employers must include either the expected compensation or a range of expected compensation in publicly advertised job postings.
If an employer uses a range, widely cited guidance notes the range generally cannot exceed $50,000 for positions under the $200,000 threshold, and the disclosure requirement does not apply where the expected compensation is more than $200,000 annually, or where the top of the range is above $200,000.
Sears said the point is to reduce what she views as bait-and-switch behaviour, particularly in commission-heavy environments. “Part of the problem has been,” she said, “companies with high commission structures will post a job of $150,000 a year, and then people go apply to it only to find out it’s minimum wage and if you sell enough it could be that much. So it’s deceptive.”
She also argues pay disclosure is a fairness issue. “The wage is the wage,” she said, describing how transparency can reduce the ability to pay different rates for the same job depending on who is hired.
AI Screening Must Be Disclosed
Another change that will matter to larger retailers, especially those using applicant tracking systems and automated screening, is the AI disclosure requirement. Under the ESA job postings provisions, an employer that uses artificial intelligence to screen, assess, or select applicants must disclose that use in the posting.
Sears framed the broader intent as cleaning up an increasingly impersonal hiring funnel. “The internet has made the whole process very impersonal,” she said, “and as a result, very obtuse.”
“Canadian Experience” Can No Longer Be Required
Ontario’s new job postings rules also prohibit employers from including requirements related to “Canadian experience” in publicly advertised job postings and associated application forms, a change intended to reduce barriers for internationally trained workers.
Sears called the requirement “very disheartening” for newcomers. “It’s very disheartening to move to this country, go through all the hoops, and see that in an ad,” she said. “At least someone gets to apply.”
Vacancy Disclosure, Interview Follow-Up, and Record Keeping
The rules go beyond pay and hiring language. Amendments to the ESA also require employers to include a statement disclosing whether the posting is for an existing vacancy.
For candidates who reach a real interview stage, Ontario now requires employers to provide an update within a prescribed period. Multiple legal summaries describe the requirement as notifying interviewed applicants whether a hiring decision has been made, within 45 days of the interview, or the final interview if there were several.
There is also a retention obligation. Employers must retain copies of publicly advertised job postings and associated application forms for three years after the posting is taken down or access is removed.
Sears said these changes respond to what many candidates describe as a black hole process. “How many companies let it slide in 90, 120 days with no reply?” she asked. “You have to actually reply now.”
Penalties, Enforcement, and Why Retailers Should Not Treat This as Optional
Sears’ viral framing of “$100,000 per ad” captured attention because it spoke to fear, but the legal reality is more nuanced. The ESA includes offence provisions and fines, and employment law commentary has highlighted increased maximum fines, including up to $100,000 for individuals on conviction, with higher maximums for corporations depending on prior convictions.
At the same time, commentary around the new job posting rules has emphasized that enforcement is likely to be complaint-driven, and that reputational pressure may be just as powerful as formal enforcement.
Sears believes transparency expectations will spread even beyond employers that technically fall outside the 25-employee threshold. “Once people expect that, they have that expectation that the salary will be posted, and you’re not doing it, you’ll become a less preferred employer,” she said.
Practical Implications for Ontario Retail
For large retailers, the immediate work is operational: audit every Ontario posting template, ensure pay disclosure is present and compliant, add AI screening language if applicable, remove “Canadian experience” language, and add a vacancy statement. Then build an internal process to ensure interviewees receive a status update within the required period, and that postings and application materials are retained for three years.
For recruiting agencies and third-party posters, Sears’ point is that “it applies to recruiting agencies, LinkedIn ads, Indeed ads, etc.” Even when a retailer is not posting directly, it still needs to ensure anyone posting on its behalf is aligned with Ontario’s new expectations.
And for retail employers tempted to treat this as bureaucratic noise, Sears said the public reaction to her post shows the mood is shifting. “It’s a hot issue,” she said. “It’s the hottest thing I’ve posted in the last 12 months.”
