Summary#

Montréal city council approved, by majority, the city’s position that the agglomeration council adopt the bylaw Règlement interdisant les comportements inappropriés à l'égard des membres du personnel de la Ville de Montréal (bylaw prohibiting inappropriate behaviour toward City of Montréal staff). The agglomeration council makes the final decision at a later meeting, so this city-council decision does not itself put the bylaw into force. The stated goal is to encourage respectful behaviour and protect city staff.

• The bylaw would prohibit anyone from intimidating, harassing, threatening, insulting or abusing city staff or staff of a city council member’s office while they are doing their jobs. It would also prohibit offensive, humiliating, violent or aggressive behaviour toward them.
• The rules would apply to people receiving municipal services or interacting with staff in their work. They would not cover behaviour between City employees, which the city says is handled under internal policies.
• An offence could lead to a fine or an administrative measure, such as removal, refusal or suspension of a municipal service, or limits on communication with a staff member.

What it means for you#

• People using city services or dealing with city staff: If adopted, the bylaw would prohibit the listed behaviour. The city could impose a fine or an administrative measure; the summary does not describe a process for deciding which measure to use.
• City staff and staff of council members’ offices: The bylaw is intended to protect you when you are working. It would not govern conduct between City employees.

Money#

The materials give no estimate of the cost to implement the bylaw.

• A first fine could be $350 to $1,000; fines would double for repeat offences.
• The materials do not estimate fine revenue or the cost of enforcement, staffing or communications.

What is unclear#

• The full bylaw text is not included, so its exact wording and any definitions could not be checked.
• The materials do not explain how alleged offences would be assessed, who would decide on administrative measures, or whether there would be a way to challenge a decision.
• The materials do not specify how long service refusals or communication limits could last, or how the rules would interact with existing city policies and procedures.

Case for#

• City staff say reported incidents involving incivility, aggression, threats or violence toward staff rose by 263% from 2019 to 2025. They also report under-reporting and inconsistent responses.
• A shared set of prohibitions and possible consequences could give staff and managers clearer, more consistent rules for responding to harmful conduct.
• The bylaw could add a formal tool to the city’s existing prevention and support measures.

Case against#

• The terms describing prohibited behaviour are not defined in the materials. Without clear standards and a decision process, people may not know what conduct could lead to a fine or service restriction.
• The city could restrict or refuse a municipal service or limit contact with a staff member, but the materials do not explain safeguards or how these measures would be applied consistently.
• The materials provide no estimate of enforcement or implementation costs.