Not necessarily, but it raises a question the petition must answer with records. If a separate continuous year within the three-year window exists without the leave, relying on that year avoids the issue.
Answer the continuity question or avoid it
Hypothetical example: a Rothesay logistics company's vice-president of operations remained on the company's books, retained her benefits and returned to the same role after a seven-month parental leave. The employment relationship continued, and the petition can argue that the year was continuous, supported by HR records, benefit statements and the return-to-work letter. Whether an officer accepts leave as part of continuous qualifying employment is a matter of adjudication, so the stronger approach is to look at the whole three-year window.
If she worked without interruption for the two years before the leave, either of those years satisfies the rule on its own, and the petition can rely on it while disclosing the leave. The company should not attempt to describe the leave as active work. Presenting both the earlier year and the continuity argument gives the officer a clear basis for approval.