- At common law, an employer cannot unilaterally impose a significant change to a fundamental term of an employee's job — compensation being one of the clearest examples — without the…
- Share Sale: The Same Employer, the Same Contract In a share purchase, the corporation employing the staff never changes — only its ownership does.
A new owner takes over, and within weeks, commissions get restructured or a role's pay is quietly reduced. It happens often enough after Ontario business sales that it's worth understanding clearly: can a buyer change an employee's compensation after a sale, and when does that cross into legal risk? The short answer is that it depends heavily on how the change is made, how significant it is, and — critically — how the deal was structured in the first place.
This article explains the general legal principle at play, constructive dismissal, and how deal structure changes a buyer's practical options.
The General Principle: Constructive Dismissal
At common law, an employer cannot unilaterally impose a significant change to a fundamental term of an employee's job — compensation being one of the clearest examples — without the employee's agreement. If it does so anyway, the employee may be able to treat that change as a constructive dismissal: effectively, the employer ending the employment relationship even though no one used the word "termination." An employee who successfully establishes constructive dismissal can be entitled to the same kind of notice or pay in lieu they would have received if they had simply been let go outright.
This is a general, well-established principle of Canadian employment law — it applies regardless of whether a business sale is involved. A business sale doesn't turn off this protection; it just adds a layer of complexity about who the "employer" making the change actually is.
Why Deal Structure Changes the Buyer's Position
Share Sale: The Same Employer, the Same Contract
In a share purchase, the corporation employing the staff never changes — only its ownership does. Each employee's existing employment contract (written or otherwise) continues exactly as it was. If the new owner wants to change compensation, it is making the same kind of unilateral variation any employer would be making to an existing employee, with the same constructive dismissal risk attached. Buying the shares does not, on its own, create any new leverage to alter pay terms.
Asset Sale: A New Employment Relationship — With Limits
In an asset purchase, employees who are offered jobs with the buyer are generally entering a new employment relationship with a new employer. That can give the buyer more room to set new compensation terms upfront, as part of the initial offer, rather than as a later unilateral change to an existing contract. But this flexibility exists mainly at the point of hiring — once the buyer has employed someone for a period of time under agreed terms, further changes to compensation face the same constructive dismissal analysis as any other employer-employee relationship going forward.
It's also worth remembering that Ontario's statutory continuity-of-employment rule can carry certain entitlements (like recognized length of service) forward from the seller even in an asset deal, which is a separate question from whether the buyer can set new compensation terms at the outset.
What Tends to Matter in Practice
| Factor | Why it affects the risk |
|---|---|
| Size and nature of the change | A change to a core element of compensation (base salary, primary commission structure) carries more risk than a minor adjustment to a discretionary perk |
| Whether the employee agreed, in writing, to the new terms | Genuine, informed agreement — ideally supported by something of value in exchange — reduces the risk considerably |
| Whether the change was announced as part of a new hire offer (asset deal) versus imposed later | Terms set at the point of a genuinely new hire are on different footing than a later unilateral change |
| Whether the employee kept working without objection for an extended period | Can affect (but does not automatically resolve) an employee's ability to later claim constructive dismissal — this is a fact-specific legal question |
Steps a Buyer Can Take to Manage This Risk
- Decide compensation changes as early as possible — ideally as part of the initial offer to continuing employees in an asset deal, rather than months into the new ownership
- Put any changed terms in writing, in a properly drafted employment agreement, rather than communicating them informally
- Provide something of genuine value in exchange for any change to an existing employee's terms (this is often called "consideration" in an employment law context) rather than assuming continued employment alone is enough
- Get legal advice before restructuring commission plans or pay structures for continuing employees, particularly in a share deal where the existing contracts carry forward unchanged
- Communicate changes clearly and get a documented, genuine acceptance rather than relying on silence or continued attendance at work
Frequently asked questions
Does starting a "new" job with the buyer let them freely reset my pay?
In an asset deal, the buyer generally has more room to set new terms as part of an initial offer of employment — but once you're working under agreed terms, later unilateral changes face the same constructive dismissal analysis as anywhere else.
Is a small pay reduction always a constructive dismissal?
Not necessarily — the size and nature of the change, and the overall context, matter. This is a fact-specific legal question, and there's no fixed percentage or dollar threshold that automatically decides it.
If I keep working after a pay cut, do I lose the right to complain about it later?
Continuing to work can be relevant to how a claim is assessed, but it does not automatically eliminate an employee's rights — this depends heavily on the specific facts and shouldn't be assumed either way without advice.
Can a buyer change my commission structure in a share purchase the same way it could in an asset deal?
Generally, no — in a share purchase your existing employment contract with the same corporate employer continues unchanged, so a unilateral change to core compensation terms faces the same legal exposure it would outside of a sale context.
This is a business purchase or sale question
Start a file online — flat, published fees, reviewed by a licensed Ontario lawyer before a dollar is owed.