Curious to hear people's thoughts on a situation a YUL-based friend is in.
He is a Canadian citizen and works for a Canadian organization. His job has always required extensive intl. travel, typically several week long tours visiting multiple countries. None of this has happened since late Feb.

Now his employer is contemplating sending him on a first new trip - tentative itinerary would include visits to Hungary, the Netherlands and Mexico, before returning to YUL after about a month. My friend would not be considered "essential" and would have to quarantine for 14 days back in YUL. Living alone, he would depend on food delivery and would be unable to do some part-time work (in-person medical care) he typically does - employer is fully aware and okay with the side job.

Aside from the insurance questions for the trip, is it reasonable to send somebody abroad and then expect them to accept a 14 day quarantine upon return, with all the privations that brings?

Just my opinion of course, but I'd say this must be a voluntary assignment. There's no doubt that air travel, hotel stays, eating out, and multiple long form face to face contact are all risky. In a pandemic of a highly contagious, potentially lethal, disease individuals must be able to determine their own risk tolerance. The choice cannot be their employer's. This even without the onerous, for a single person, two week isolation. Which from your post sounds like it's unpaid.
No one should be compelled to risk their lives for a job involuntarily. Any employer insisting on that isn't worth your loyalty.

Yes. If a job specifically requires travel, the failure to travel can be a ground for dismissal unless the failure is justified.

But at the same time, the employer should provide all expenses and compensation for the entire 14 days of quarantine, i.e. the employee should be treated as in travel status for the entire 14 days of quarantine.

Appreciate the thoughts.
It is my understanding that the two weeks of quarantine would be paid, as if working normally at home, not travelling.

I�ll assume you are not too familiar with the law of Quebec?

Not really for a civil law system. But I do know that Air Canada is HQed at Quebec as well. So if AC assigns a pilot or FA to fly, do they have justifiable reasons not to fly?

The answer will depend on Quebec law and the OP's friend's employment contract as well.

But, it seems perfectly reasonable to ask someone to travel so long as it is done pursuant to existing law and guidelines. The friend should be paid for the period of his quarantine and one would presume that just as an employer picks up the cost of meals and other incidentals incurred during travel, that the employer would pick up the delivery fees for groceries and whatever else it is that the friend requires.

FWIW, air crew are exempt from quarantine upon return to Canada.

The real question is whether they can refuse duty, not quarantine.

In the case of my friend, the question is: Can / should he refuse travel (a normal part of his job) now that it requires a 14 day quarantine, solitary in his case, upon return? It's a major hardship for him.

Unless the job has specified a maximum length of a trip, I am inclined to say no. As I have said - simply treat the 14-day quarantine as in travel status.

I honestly don’t know what advice you feel is right, but I would be inclined to speak to my employer about this. If he is concerned about travel and subsequent quarantine, he should say so, and employer and employee can have a sensible discussion and come to an agreement.

I really don't know what advice I should give. That's why I appreciate all the thoughts voiced in this group of frequent travellers.
My friend is the only one at the organization with the specific skillset required for the trip. He is afraid of losing his job if he refuses.
I like this and will pass along the suggestion.

Is he really going to lose his job if he's the only one who can do it? Not to repeat a frequent FT phrase, but if the relationship is that black/white then maybe he should start looking for another employer. I say that partially in jest, but I can't imagine an employer dogmatically sticking to the original conditions of employment these days. The first step is a sensible conversation.

Fully agreed, and that is what I would do. Unfortunately, this friend seems to have a bit less self-confidence and is not particularly comfortable with confronting - even in a sensible matter - superiors. But that's a different topic.

Again, appreciate all thoughts, they were helpful to test my own instincts. Seems that I wasn't way off.