When Harassment Comes From Outside: What Are the Employer’s Responsibilities?

When Risk Doesn’t Come From Within

Harassment in the workplace is often associated with tension between colleagues or inappropriate behaviour on the part of a manager; however, the reality is sometimes more complex. Risk can also come from outside the organization.

An employee may be exposed to unacceptable behaviour from a customer, a supplier, a subcontractor, a former employee or even a relative. In these situations, the perpetrator is not part of the company, but the effects are evident in the workplace.

This is known as harassment by a third party. The source of the problem is external, but the responsibility for managing the situation may nonetheless fall to the employer.

A Reality Shared Elsewhere in Canada and Around the World

In the webinar “When Harassment Comes From Outside,” presented by Tim Harty, CEO of Mondaq, with Marc-André Groulx and Marie-Lou Gauthier, we analyze the obligations of employers in Québec, elsewhere in Canada and internationally. The evidence is clear: expectations of employers are rising everywhere.

In Ontario and British Columbia, although the law is not always explicitly aimed at outsiders, employers must protect their employees and intervene when a situation is brought to their attention. In the United States, liability rests largely on the employer’s ability to demonstrate that they reacted quickly and appropriately. In the United Kingdom and France, recent developments confirm that prevention obligations have been strengthened.

The legal frameworks differ, but the logic converges: an informed employer who fails to act exposes themselves to considerable risk.

In Québec: An Explicit and Reinforced Obligation

Québec was a pioneer in the field of psychological harassment in the workplace. In the early 2000s, provisions were incorporated into the Act respecting labour standards to recognize employees’ right to a harassment-free workplace, and to impose a duty on employers to prevent and stop harassment.

Today, this obligation applies to harassment by anyone, including people from outside the organization. The employer can therefore not invoke the fact that the perpetrator is not part of the company as an excuse to avoid liability.

It’s not enough to intervene once a situation degenerates; employers must implement preventive measures adapted to their environment, and act quickly when a problem is reported. Their liability may be incurred if they knew, or should have known, that an employee was being harassed and did not take reasonable steps to take action.

In practice, the quality and speed of the employer’s intervention will be decisive.

An Often Neglected Dimension: The Contractual Framework for Third Parties

In addition to internal policies, a truly proactive approach involves incorporating specific harassment obligations into contracts with customers, suppliers or business partners. This could, for example, include a clause requiring the third party to cooperate fully with any internal investigation, to comply with the organization’s policies or to take corrective action without delay. 

This contractual dimension not only clarifies expectations but also strengthens the employer’s ability to intervene in the event of an incident. It represents a strategic lever for risk management that is still under-utilized.

What You Need to Be Ready to Demonstrate

For officers, the real question is: Is your organization prepared if an incident occurs? Which is to say, if a situation arose tomorrow, could you demonstrate that the risk had been anticipated? Do your policies explicitly cover customer or business partner behaviour? Do your managers know how to intervene quickly and appropriately? Are the procedures documented?

In the event of a complaint or appeal, the analysis will focus not only on the behaviour of the external person but above all on the employer’s reaction. The organization must be able to demonstrate that it took the risk seriously, implemented preventive measures and acted without delay when an incident occurred.

When the perpetrator is a third party, the employer obviously has no disciplinary power in the traditional sense. They must then use other legal and organizational levers to put an end to the situation.

Depending on the seriousness of the facts, this may include sending a formal notice to the offending third party, suspending or terminating the contractual relationship, controlling or restricting access to the workplace, seeking an injunction to stop threatening or repetitive behaviour, or involving police authorities when employee safety is compromised.

The employer’s responsibility does not depend on their direct control over the perpetrator, but on their ability to act effectively once informed of the situation. Identifying the right legal leverage early and intervening in a structured way can make a decisive difference, both in terms of protecting teams and reducing the organization’s legal exposure.

In practical terms, this means having a clear policy that includes harassment from outside, adequate training for managers and a structured intervention capability. It’s as much a question of risk management as it is of team protection and organizational reputation.

Further Information

The subject raises important legal and strategic issues for organizations, particularly in terms of the evolution of legal obligations, the criteria used by the courts and best practices for limiting risks.

To understand how these obligations apply in practice and how to structure your approach, we invite you to view the webinar “When Harassment Comes from Outside” in full.