Ontario’s latest round of Working for Workers legislation, which came into effect Jan. 1, further expands employers’ legal obligations — this time at the very front end of the employment relationship: hiring.

Many employers will groan. Another compliance burden. Another rule layered onto an already dense regulatory thicket.

But not every new obligation deserves reflexive resistance. Some of them correct deeply-embedded — and surprisingly risky — business practices that employers have tolerated for far too long.

One such change requires employers to notify job applicants of the status of their candidacy within 45 days of the applicant’s final interview. Importantly, the law does not require a hiring decision within that period. It simply requires communication: has a decision been made, yes or no?

That modest obligation targets a practice that has quietly metastasized across the labour market: candidate ghosting.

Ghosting is not confined to dating apps. In Ontario, it has become a routine feature of recruitment. Applicants submit résumés, complete assessments, attend multiple interviews, disclose personal and sometimes sensitive information and then — nothing. No rejection. No update. Just silence.

From the employer’s perspective, ghosting can feel efficient. Non-confrontational. Harmless.

It is none of those.

The costs are real and rising. Applying for a job is rarely casual. Candidates take time off work, arrange childcare, prepare presentations and invest emotional capital in the process. When an employer disappears, it sends a clear message: your effort was disposable.

That message travels fast — through professional networks, social media and employer-review platforms. One alienated candidate can quietly undermine an organization’s future hiring pipeline.

Worse, existing employees notice. Silence toward candidates is often read internally as a proxy for how the organization handles conflict, transparency and accountability more broadly.

But reputational harm is only the beginning.

Silence now carries legal risk. Failing to comply with the new 45-day notification requirement exposes employers to Ministry of Labour investigations and penalties. More troublingly, in certain circumstances, silence can be evidence — of discrimination, retaliation or negligence.

That risk is most acute where candidates have disclosed disabilities, requested accommodations or raised concerns during the hiring process. An unexplained disappearance following such disclosures can provide precisely the causal “nexus” human rights tribunals look for when assessing discrimination claims.

It takes only one overlooked applicant to trigger a human rights complaint, employment standards investigation, or lawsuit. These disputes are rarely minor. They consume management time, legal budgets and internal goodwill — and they leave scars long after the file is closed.

The irony is obvious. The effort required to avoid these outcomes is trivial. A short, professional update or rejection email costs next to nothing. Ghosting, by contrast, is a gamble — and in Ontario’s current legal climate, it is a gamble employers cannot afford.

Prudent employers should respond now by tightening their hiring discipline:

  • Mandate candidate communication: Implement a formal policy requiring applicants to receive an update or decision within defined timelines, at minimum meeting the 45-day post-interview requirement.
  • Automate where possible: Use applicant tracking systems and standardized templates to ensure timely updates and rejections.
  • Train hiring managers: Ensure recruiters and managers understand the legal, human rights and reputational risks of silence — particularly where protected grounds or accommodation issues arise.
  • Standardize respectful messaging: Develop professional, empathetic templates that acknowledge candidates’ time. Where reasons are provided, ensure they are clearly tied to bona fide job requirements.
  • Audit hiring practices: Regularly review hiring timelines and communication records to confirm compliance and identify gaps before regulators or lawyers do.

Many Ontario employers already do this well. For those who do not, the message from Queen’s Park is unmistakable.

Ghosting is no longer merely bad manners. It is a legal and operational risk — one now expressly addressed by law.