The first hundred days decide whether the deal you modelled is the business you actually run. Here is the sequence that keeps the plan from being undone by a rule nobody checked before closing.
Key takeaways
STEP 01 OF 10
Ontario’s ESA continuity provisions apply where “the business the employee works for is sold or transferred in any other way to a new owner and the employee continues to work in the business for the new owner.” Where both halves hold, the employee’s length of service with the seller “flows through” to the purchaser — they do not start as a new employee. The regulator’s own worked example: an employee with 10 years at the seller, terminated one year after the transfer, “will be entitled to eight weeks’ notice rather than just one week.” Source: Ontario’s ESA continuity guide.
Build the day-one roster with two columns: who continues working for the new owner (their tenure flows through, full stop) and who is not being kept on (their termination entitlements are calculated against the seller, before closing, not the buyer). Getting this wrong in either direction either understates a real liability or creates one that did not need to exist.
STEP 02 OF 10
Statutory notice runs 1 week (under 1 year of service) rising to 8 weeks at 8 years or more, per Ontario’s termination guide. During the notice period the employer must not reduce the employee’s wage rate or alter other terms of employment, and must continue whatever contributions are required to maintain their benefits plans.
Severance on top of notice applies where an employee has five or more years of service and the employer has a global payroll of at least $2.5 million, or severed 50 or more employees in a six-month period due to a permanent closure. “Global payroll” means the buyer’s payroll everywhere, not the target’s alone — a target that never came close to that threshold on its own can trigger it the moment it becomes part of a larger group. The maximum severance payable under the ESA is 26 weeks. Source: Ontario’s severance guide.
STEP 03 OF 10
Ontario’s termination rules include special provisions for mass terminations — where the employment of 50 or more employees is terminated at an employer’s establishment within a four-week period. If the hundred-day plan calls for consolidating duplicate back-office or field roles across a newly combined operation, model the headcount and timing against that threshold explicitly. A consolidation plan that quietly crosses 50 terminations inside a rolling four-week window changes the notice obligations for everyone affected, not just the fiftieth person let go.
Where the plan can be sequenced without materially changing the business case — spreading a consolidation across two windows rather than one, for instance — that is worth doing deliberately rather than by accident.
STEP 04 OF 10
For a federally regulated business — banking, telecommunications, interprovincial transportation, and similar sectors — Canada Labour Code s. 189 deems employment “continuous with one employer” despite a lease, transfer, sale or merger, and s. 189(1.1) extends the same continuity to a retendered contract. The limit is s. 189(1.2): continuity does not apply if the employee’s first day with the new employer is more than 13 weeks after the earlier of their last day with the first employer and the transfer date.
That 13-week clock is a real planning constraint on a hundred-day timeline — if any affected employees are being re-offered roles rather than transferred immediately, get the offer and start date inside the window, or the continuity protection is lost entirely rather than merely delayed.
STEP 05 OF 10
If the buyer already controls other Canadian-controlled private corporations, ITA s. 125 requires the $500,000 small business deduction limit to be shared across the whole associated group from the point the corporations become associated — which, on an acquisition, is the closing date, not the start of the next fiscal year. Coordinate with the buyer’s existing tax advisor in the first hundred days on how the group allocates the shared limit, since an unallocated or mis-allocated limit can leave income taxed at the higher general corporate rate that a timely agreement between the associated corporations would have avoided.
Where the target was previously carrying redundant passive investment assets, revisit whether those assets stay in the corporation post-closing — the passive-income grind under s. 125(5.1)(b) travels with them into the buyer’s associated group.
STEP 06 OF 10
Competition Act s. 45(1.1) makes it a criminal offence for an employer to conspire, agree or arrange with “another employer who is not affiliated” to fix, maintain, decrease or control wages or terms of employment, or to agree not to solicit or hire each other’s employees — punishable by up to 14 years’ imprisonment. A buyer running multiple wholly-owned portfolio companies under one holding structure is typically dealing with affiliated employers, which the prohibition does not reach; a search-fund or independent-sponsor structure with genuinely separate ownership across portfolio companies may not be.
Confirm the affiliate test with counsel before treating a hundred-day compensation-harmonisation exercise, or a no-poach understanding between two portfolio companies, as automatically outside the prohibition just because both happen to be owned by related investors. Where a restraint is genuinely ancillary to a broader, legitimate agreement between the same parties and reasonably necessary for it, s. 45(4) preserves a defence — but that is a narrower shelter than common ownership alone.
STEP 07 OF 10
CBCA s. 105(3) requires at least 25% of directors to be resident Canadians, or at least one resident Canadian director where the corporation has fewer than four directors. Confirm the new board composition satisfies this the moment it is seated, not after an unrelated filing surfaces the gap.
Every director, from the first board meeting onward, owes the duty in s. 122(1) — to “act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interests of the corporation” and to exercise the care, diligence and skill a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances. Build the board’s first hundred-day agenda — approving the integration plan, ratifying key hires, setting the reporting cadence — as formal resolutions from the outset, both because it is good governance and because it creates the record a director may need later.
STEP 08 OF 10
If the target was properly screened before the letter of intent — see screening a target in the first two weeks — the buyer should already have a baseline for the metrics that matter: revenue run-rate, gross margin, headcount, customer concentration. Set the day-30, day-60 and day-90 reviews against that same baseline, using the same definitions, so the hundred-day plan is measuring drift from a known starting point rather than reconstructing one after the fact.
STEP 09 OF 10
A retention package for a key manager who is staying on is, for ESA purposes, an ordinary employment agreement — the general prohibition on non-compete clauses in Ontario employment contracts, in force since 25 October 2021, applies to it the same as to any other hire, with the narrow sale-of-business and named-executive exceptions covered in selling to the management team. Build retention around non-solicitation and confidentiality covenants, which the ESA does not prohibit, and financial incentives tied to a retention period, rather than assuming a non-compete clause will hold up if it is ever tested.
STEP 10 OF 10
Pull every statutory deadline created by the transaction itself into one calendar at the start of the hundred days: the joint election deadline if a s. 85 rollover was used on any part of the consideration, the GST/HST joint election filing date tied to the buyer’s first reporting period if an asset deal used the s. 167 election, and the ongoing six-year records retention obligation under s. 230 that now runs on the combined entity’s books. A closing binder that gets filed away without this calendar extracted from it is where a missed election deadline usually comes from.
Say the integration plan consolidates two regional back-office teams into one, eliminating 34 roles at the acquired company’s head-office location and a further 19 roles at a second location being closed the same month. If both locations count as the same “establishment” for ESA purposes — a fact-specific question turning on how integrated the operations are, not simply shared ownership — that is 53 terminations inside a single four-week window, above the 50-employee mass-termination threshold.
Spreading the second location’s 19 terminations into a following four-week window, where the business case allows it, keeps each window under the threshold and avoids the special mass-termination notice obligations layering on top of the individual notice and severance calculations from Step 2. Whether the two locations are legally one establishment is exactly the kind of question worth confirming with counsel before the headcount plan is finalized, not after notices go out.
The plan for this topic pointed at a bare StatCan host with no specific page attached — not a usable citation, and it is dropped here rather than guessed at. There is no single published Canadian benchmark for what a “successful” hundred-day integration looks like by the numbers; the mechanics in this guide (employment exposure, tax-election timing, governance duties) are the checkable, sourced parts of the plan. Treat any specific percentage or day-count target you see elsewhere — “70% of acquisitions fail without a 100-day plan” and similar figures circulate widely — as unsourced folklore unless it carries its own citation to a real study.
It applies automatically wherever both statutory conditions are met — a sale or transfer of the business, and the employee continuing to work for the new owner. Neither party needs to elect into it, which is exactly why mapping the roster against the test matters before day one rather than after a termination dispute.
That's a fact-specific determination, not a bright-line address test — get it confirmed by employment counsel before finalising a consolidation plan that assumes either answer.
No — it's specific to the Canada Labour Code and federally regulated employers. A provincially regulated business in Ontario follows the ESA continuity test in Step 1 instead, which has no equivalent 13-week gap allowance.
No — the compensation-harmonisation and hiring decisions a hundred-day plan typically makes in its first weeks are exactly the actions the boundary governs. Check it before the plan's early actions, not after they're already underway.
Name one accountable person — usually the deal lead or the CFO taking over the combined finance function — the same way Step 7's board resolutions name accountable owners for governance actions. A calendar with no single owner tends to be the one where a deadline gets missed.
A 30-minute call is enough to tell you whether AI pays for itself here.
Nobody publishes Canadian transaction data, so every valuation in this country quotes an American benchmark. We are building the Canadian one — multiples, asking-to-sale spreads and days on market, by sector and by city. Leave an email and you will see it first.
No pitch, no listings. One email when the first report lands.
