A sales presentation assignment is a fair test when it's short, clearly a simulation, and scored against the job. It turns into free work, and in Ontario possibly unpaid wages, when it asks candidates to produce something you could actually use. Since March 2024, Ontario's Employment Standards Act treats work done during a trial period as employment, so owners need to know which side of that line their assignment sits on.
Why do owners like presentation assignments?
Here's the fair part. Asking a sales finalist to prepare and present something is a sensible idea. It shows how they research, structure an argument, handle questions and think on their feet. Work samples are a legitimate assessment method: they averaged .33 validity in the most recent large review of selection methods (Sackett et al., 2022, 2023). Older estimates put them as high as .54 (Schmidt & Hunter, 1998), but that figure was revised down along with most others.
So the instinct is right. The problem is in how the assignment gets built.
Where does a fair test become free work?
It usually happens one reasonable step at a time. "Prepare a short pitch" becomes "build a prospect list for our territory," becomes "draft an outreach plan for our three biggest target accounts," becomes "come present your 90-day plan for our business." By the end, the candidate has done real work for you, for free. And they know it.
Ontario changed the rules on this in 2024. The Working for Workers Four Act, 2024 received Royal Assent on March 21, 2024 (Legislative Assembly of Ontario, 2024). It added a line to the Employment Standards Act: "training includes work performed during a trial period" (Employment Standards Act, 2000, s. 1(2.1)).
The Ministry's guide spells out what that means. A person who performs work during a trial period is an employee, "even where no employment offer has been made," if the trial assesses skills that the employer's employees use (Government of Ontario, 2024). Once someone is an employee, the ESA's minimum standards, including minimum wage, apply. And under the ESA, nobody can "contract out of or waive an employment standard" (Employment Standards Act, 2000, s. 5(1)).
One employment law firm put the practical upshot plainly: "Any practice of unpaid trial periods is now out of compliance with Ontario law" (Cutler, 2024).
Is a sales role play or pitch a "trial period"?
That's the grey zone, and we won't pretend it's settled. Neither the statute nor the Ministry guide sets out a safe harbour for assignments that are only hypothetical. The official test is whether the trial assesses skills your employees use, and a sales pitch arguably does.
So the honest framing is lower risk, not exempt. A short, fictional, in-interview exercise is a lot lower risk than a take-home project on your real accounts. If you want the realistic version, pay for it. Confirm your approach with employment counsel.
How to set a fair sales presentation assignment
Use a fictional company or a disguised past deal. Nothing the candidate produces should be usable in your business. If you'd be tempted to keep their work, it's too real.
Keep it short. Set a clear cap on preparation time, such as an hour or two, and say so. Long take-homes favour candidates with free evenings, not candidates with better skills.
Run it during the interview, not as homework. A 20-minute presentation followed by questions shows you most of what you need. Our post on how to run a sales role-play interview covers the live version.
Score it against the job, in writing, beforehand. Decide what you're looking for: research, structure, how they handle a tough question, whether the recommendation fits the buyer. Give every finalist the same brief and the same scoring guide.
Pay for anything that looks like real work. If you want a candidate to work on your real accounts or spend a day in the business, treat it as a paid trial and pay at least minimum wage under the ESA.
Tell candidates what happens to their work. Say plainly that you won't use their material. It costs nothing and tells them a lot about you.
Offer accommodation. Under Ontario's accessibility standards, applicants selected for an assessment must be told accommodation is available on request (Integrated Accessibility Standards, O. Reg. 191/11, s. 23).
What about the candidate's side?
Good candidates are often juggling several processes. A heavy assignment is a quiet filter for people who are desperate, not people who are good. If your best finalist drops out because your homework would take a weekend, that's information about your process, not about them.
Two things that are both true
We'll say it on behalf of HR: some of the most "rigorous" hiring assignments we've seen were really free consulting with a job posting attached. Candidates notice.
A short, realistic exercise is one of the best ways to see how a salesperson works. And in Ontario, the more real you make it, the more likely you're looking at paid work. For owners in Guelph and across Ontario, the safe middle is a fictional scenario, a time limit, and a scoring guide written before anyone presents.
In short
A sales presentation assignment is fair when it's short, fictional and scored against the job, and becomes free work when it produces something you could use. Since March 21, 2024, Ontario's Employment Standards Act says "training includes work performed during a trial period" (s. 1(2.1)), and the Ministry says trial-period workers can be employees even with no job offer (Government of Ontario, 2024). Keep assignments simulated and time-limited, pay for anything that looks like real work, and confirm your approach with employment counsel.
Key takeaways
Work samples averaged .33 validity in the most recent large review of selection methods (Sackett et al., 2022, 2023).
Ontario's ESA now says "training includes work performed during a trial period" (Employment Standards Act, 2000, s. 1(2.1)), in force since March 21, 2024.
A trial-period worker can be an employee even with no job offer, if the trial assesses skills the employer's employees use (Government of Ontario, 2024).
Nobody can contract out of ESA minimum standards (Employment Standards Act, 2000, s. 5(1)).
A short, fictional, in-interview exercise is lower risk than a take-home on real accounts, but no rule makes it exempt.
Frequently asked questions
Do I have to pay candidates for a sales presentation in Ontario?
It depends on what you ask for. Since March 2024, work during a trial period counts as employment under the ESA if it assesses skills your employees use (Government of Ontario, 2024). A short, fictional exercise in an interview is lower risk; work on your real accounts should be paid. This is general information, not legal advice; confirm with employment counsel.
Can a candidate agree to do an unpaid trial?
No. Under ESA s. 5(1), an employee can't contract out of or waive an employment standard, and a trial-period worker can be an employee (Government of Ontario, 2024).
How long should a sales presentation assignment take?
Set a clear limit, such as an hour or two of preparation and a 20-minute presentation. Longer assignments add little evidence and push good candidates away.
Is a take-home sales exercise better than a live one?
Usually not. A live exercise is harder to outsource, shows how candidates think under questions, and keeps the time demand reasonable.
Work with us
Down to your last few candidates? Our Final Candidate Review tests your finalists against your own best people before you make the offer. If it doesn't help, you don't pay.
This post is general information, not legal advice. Confirm employment decisions with employment counsel.
References
Cutler, L. (2024, August 22). No free trials: Ontario employees need to be paid for trial periods. SpringLaw, via Mondaq. https://www.mondaq.com/canada/employee-rights-labour-relations/1508762/no-free-trials-ontario-employees-need-to-be-paid-for-trial-periods
Employment Standards Act, 2000, S.O. 2000, c. 41. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/statute/00e41
Government of Ontario. (2024, June 26). Your guide to the Employment Standards Act: Employee status. https://www.ontario.ca/document/your-guide-employment-standards-act-0/employee-status
Integrated Accessibility Standards, O. Reg. 191/11, s. 23. https://www.ontario.ca/laws/regulation/110191
Legislative Assembly of Ontario. (2024). Bill 149, Working for Workers Four Act, 2024. https://www.ola.org/en/legislative-business/bills/parliament-43/session-1/bill-149
Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2022). Revisiting meta-analytic estimates of validity in personnel selection: Addressing systematic overcorrection for restriction of range. Journal of Applied Psychology, 107(11), 2040-2068. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000994
Sackett, P. R., Zhang, C., Berry, C. M., & Lievens, F. (2023). Revisiting the design of selection systems in light of new findings regarding the validity of widely used predictors. Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 16(3), 283-300. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2023.24
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1998). The validity and utility of selection methods in personnel psychology: Practical and theoretical implications of 85 years of research findings. Psychological Bulletin, 124(2), 262-274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.124.2.262
