What’s next… emoji contracts?

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 28/12/2024 (291 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal recently made waves by ruling a simple thumbs-up emoji can signal agreement to a contract.

This groundbreaking decision has important implications for how employers manage employment agreements and navigate modern communication methods. It’s a reminder our digital world is changing not just how we communicate but how agreements are formed and enforced.

Here’s a look at what this means for employers and how you can adapt to these new realities.

The case: thumbs-up emoji as signature

The court case involved a Saskatchewan farmer who responded to a text message containing a photo of a $58,000 flax contract with a thumbs-up emoji. The court decided this acted as an electronic signature, binding the farmer to the contract terms. The ruling sparked a lively discussion about how emojis, gestures and other non-traditional symbols can create legal obligations.

Central to the court’s decision was the intent behind the emoji and the established pattern of communication between the parties. The farmer and buyer had a history of completing deals via text, which played a significant role in the judgment. The court’s conclusion serves as a striking example of how modern technology and informal communication tools can carry unexpected legal weight.

What this means for employment contracts

The idea casual digital communications could be interpreted as binding agreements adds complexity to employment relationships. Employers need to consider the ways in which informal exchanges might meet the legal requirements for forming contracts: offer and acceptance, consideration and intent to create legal relations.

Imagine a hiring manager responding to a job candidate’s question about salary expectations with a thumbs-up emoji. It could potentially be interpreted as an agreement to the proposed salary.

This is especially relevant in today’s workplace, where remote work and digital hiring practices are common. Employers frequently rely on instant messaging platforms to discuss job offers, work terms and other agreements. Without careful attention, even casual responses can carry unintended legal weight, creating challenges for employers navigating this new territory.

Electronic signatures, intent

In the Saskatchewan case, the thumbs-up emoji was treated as an electronic signature. Courts often assess the sender’s intent and whether the signature can be attributed to them. Elements like timestamps, metadata and the context of the exchange are crucial in determining whether an electronic signature is valid.

For employers, this precedent underscores the need to consider how acknowledgments of employment terms — whether via emoji, text message or other digital symbols — might be interpreted. Without clear policies in place, informal communication could inadvertently create binding agreements. This shift highlights the importance of being deliberate and consistent in how employment-related communications are conducted.

Best practices for employers

Adapting to these changes requires proactive strategies to mitigate risks and ensure clarity. Employers can take several practical steps to navigate this evolving landscape effectively.

To begin with, employers could establish clear policies that outline how agreements or changes to employment terms should be formalized. For example, organizations can require all contracts and modifications to be documented in writing and signed through approved platforms. By setting these standards, employers can avoid misunderstandings and ensure informal exchanges are not misinterpreted.

Training is another critical component. Employers should educate managers and employees about the potential risks of using ambiguous language or symbols in professional communications. Emojis, while often seen as lighthearted, could create unintended commitments when used in the context of workplace discussions. Clear guidelines can help team members understand the importance of using precise language in digital exchanges.

Consistency in communication practices is equally important. Courts often consider the context surrounding a message when determining its intent. For instance, in the Saskatchewan case, the parties’ established practice of completing deals via text was a key factor in the court’s decision. Employers should aim to maintain consistent practices, avoiding a mix of formal contracts and informal communications that could lead to confusion.

Keeping detailed records of employment-related discussions is another essential practice. This includes saving emails, text messages and meeting notes. Thorough documentation can clarify intent and provide valuable evidence if disputes arise. Employers should ensure these records are well-organized and accessible, making it easier to resolve disagreements or defend against claims.

Finally, employers should regularly review their employment practices and policies in collaboration with legal counsel. Laws regarding electronic communication and contract formation are evolving rapidly — staying informed is crucial for minimizing vulnerabilities. Regular policy reviews can help organizations stay compliant and proactively address potential risks.

Preparing for potential challenges

The thumbs-up emoji ruling underscores the potential for disputes in employment relationships. For example, an employee might argue a casual response from a manager — such as an emoji or brief text message — constituted agreement to a raise or a change in working conditions. Conversely, employers could face difficulties proving an informal response was not intended to create binding obligations.

To minimize these risks, employers should prioritize clear, intentional communication. Formal agreements should always be carefully documented, with an emphasis on unambiguous language. While courts will continue to evaluate cases based on specific facts, relying solely on judicial discretion to resolve disputes is not a practical strategy. Proactive measures are essential to prevent misunderstandings.

Advocating for clarity

This case points to a broader need for updated laws to address modern communication methods like emojis. Employers and industry leaders should advocate for clearer guidelines around electronic signatures and digital agreements. Legislative updates can provide greater certainty and help everyone navigate this evolving area with confidence.

Conclusion

The Saskatchewan Court of Appeal’s decision is a stark reminder of how quickly the legal landscape is evolving in response to technological advances. For employers, it highlights the importance of clear, consistent and intentional communication in every interaction.

As technology continues to transform how we communicate, employers must remain vigilant and adaptable. Agreements may now take forms we never imagined, but with the right precautions, organizations can ensure their intentions are always clear and their interests are protected.

Let’s face it: emojis may be fun, but in the workplace, they can mean business.

Tory McNally, CPHR, BSc., vice-president, HR consulting, is a human resource professional, radio personality, speaker and problem solver. She can be reached at tory@legacybowes.com