As employment lawyers, we are often asked to review our clients' human resources policy manuals. Our job is to ensure they are compliant with all relevant legislation and that they will be an effective tool in governing employee behaviour.

No matter what the industry or how large or reputable the client organization, we tend to see the same errors occurring over and over again in the HR policy manuals and employee handbooks we review.

Yet human resources policy manuals can (and should) be an important means of communicating with your employees and managing their workplace activities – if they are written and applied correctly. However, if they are not designed and implemented correctly, they can make a problematic discipline or termination situation even worse.

Here are ten common missteps that can result in headaches for employers and human resource professionals:

• Not including an introduction
The employer's introduction to its human resources policy manual is an important opportunity to inform the employee of the employer's expectations with respect to the manual and its contents. Every introduction should clearly state that it is the employee's responsibility to inform himself or herself of the current contents of the manual and to ensure that his or her behaviour complies with its provisions. The introduction should also make it clear that the employer reserves the absolute right to alter the policy from time to time.

• No accommodation/substance abuse policy
Despite the prominence of disability-related issues in today's workplace, many managers and supervisors are still not up to speed on the extent of their obligations to accommodate a person with a disability, including substance abuse. A detailed and up-to-date accommodation policy, one that explicitly sets out the employer's procedure for dealing with disability, is a valuable means of communicating with all levels of employees, including those responsible for dealing with the practical aspects of accommodation.

• Incorrect or vague definition of workplace harassment
While most human resource policy manuals address the issue of workplace harassment, it is quite common for their definitions of inappropriate behaviour to be vague, unhelpful, or even misleading. For example, we recently reviewed a policy manual that defined workplace harassment as demanding sexual favours in exchange for advancement or raises. While this is certainly prohibited behaviour, it is not the only activity captured by the term "workplace harassment". A good manual should refer to all of the prohibited grounds of discrimination and make it clear that harassment is any behaviour that is unwelcome or should reasonably be known to be unwelcome.

• Overtime
Depending on the jurisdiction, employees are entitled to overtime pay for all overtime hours worked, whether those hours were approved or not. Such is the case in Ontario. Every human resources policy manual should clearly state that employees are not permitted to work overtime without pre authorization from their supervisors and supervisors should be instructed to strictly enforce this policy.

• Zero tolerance policies
A popular way of illustrating an employer's commitment to eradicating harassment in the workplace is to state that it has "zero tolerance" for inappropriate behaviour and that violations of the policy "shall" result in termination. Although zero tolerance policies send a strong message to employees, they are not really appropriate for the Canadian workplace. Canadian case law clearly demonstrates that employers have an obligation to consider the individual circumstances of each employee, even if he or she has engaged in serious misconduct. No policy manual should have the effect of limiting an employer's discretion.

• Falling behind legislation
Many employers allow their human resources policy manuals to fall out of step with relevant statutory developments. As a result, employees and supervisors may not be aware of the employer's obligations with respect to such areas as emergency leave, maternity leave and mandatory retirement, which could lead to human rights complaints or complaints under employment standards legislation.

• Failing to keep employees apprised of changes
It is very difficult to take the position that an employee is required to abide by a policy when he or she is not updated on its revisions. Any amendments to your human resources policy manual should be brought to the attention of all employees, whether by e-mail, seminars or handouts.

• Failing to make it binding
If you intend to rely on your human resources policy manual to support disciplinary action or termination for cause, it is important to ensure it is binding on your employees. Employees should be provided with a copy of the manual prior to commencing employment and should sign an acknowledgement stating they have read and understood its terms. Where the policy manual is new to the workplace or has been significantly revised, employees should receive notice of the changes or some consideration for executing the acknowledgement. If an employee is provided with a manual after she has signed her employment agreement and she does not receive any payment or other consideration for signing the acknowledgement, a court may hold that she is not bound to observe its terms. This reaffirms the importance of always reserving the contractual right to alter company policies without notice.

• Not sticking to it
The worst thing that an employer can to do a human resources manual is fail to apply it. Ignoring one's own policy manual has the effect of undermining the policy's ability to govern workplace practices and can even undermine the employer's attempts to discipline employees. For example, if an employer fails to apply its own sexual harassment complaint procedure when terminating an alleged harasser for cause, a court may find that the dismissal was wrongful.

• Not having one at all
Human resources policy manuals are the employer's best opportunity to communicate its expectations and practices to employees. They can also be a valuable resource for both employees and supervisors. Employers who choose not to make use of a human resources policy manual risk creating confusion about their internal policies and worse, developing inconsistent practices with respect to discipline and employee benefits. Workplaces are not well-served by ambiguity and unpredictability. A clear, concise and current policy manual can be an important means of eliminating these unwanted influences.

Malcolm MacKillop is a partner with the firm Hodgson Shields DesBrisay O'Donnell MacKillop Squire LLP of Toronto. He can be reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it .

Laurie Jessome is a lawyer with the firm Hodgson Shields DesBrisay O'Donnell MacKillop Squire LLP of Toronto. She can be reached at: This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it