Top Employer Considerations for Managing Overlapping Regimes in the Accommodation Process

Workplace accommodation is rarely governed by a single set of rules. The company’s internal policies and agreements must be considered, along with any legislative obligations, including employment standards and human rights.  But there can be multiple third parties involved, which may provide financial support, medical review, or adjudication regarding an employee’s needs. These third parties have overlapping (and sometimes contradictory) input about whether a leave or other accommodation is required, and about a path to a return to work.

What are the overlapping accommodation regimes?

The main parties and regimes[i] that are involved in a workplace accommodation process are:

• WSIB

• Statutory obligations under employment standards and human rights legislation

• Private insurer

• Employer’s internal policies and obligations

• Service Canada

These stakeholders are discussed in more detail below.

How do the regimes work and when do they apply?

Regime/ Legislation	Type of Financial and Other Support	Minimum Eligibility	Threshold for Benefits/ Accommodation	Complexity of Assessment
WSIB and Workplace Safety and Insurance Act, 1997[i]	Loss of earning, non-economic loss, and healthcare benefits, etc.	Work-related injury or illness involving a WSIB-participating employer	Moderate – related to reduction or restriction in work, not necessarily “total disability”	High – direct review of medical records
Employment Standards Act, 2000	No direct financial support, just protected leave time and right to be free from reprisal	Employment for 2 weeks (for sick leave) or 13 weeks (for long-term illness leave), with job-protected time off for up to 3 days or 27 weeks/year, respectively	Low – an illness or injury (for sick leave) or doctor-endorsed serious medical condition (for long-term illness leave)	Low – the provision of a medical note (for long-term illness leave) is not subject to scrutiny, and no medical note can be requested for sick leave
Human Rights Code	No direct financial support, just the employer’s duty to accommodate and the employee’s right to be free from reprisal	Having a disability as defined in the Code	Low – requires only a disability that necessitates accommodation in the workplace	Variable – depends on the complexity of the disability, the significance and duration of the accommodation, and the availability of functional medical information
Private Insurer	Long-term disability benefits, and sometimes rehabilitation support	A minimum period of total disability, ongoing between 17 and 26 weeks “Total disability” from the employee’s own occupation for the first two years “Total disability” from any occupation at or after two years	High – related to inability to work (“total disability”) vs. only a reduction or restriction in function (accommodation at work)	High – review of medical records, including assessment of treatment plan
Employer’s Internal Policies and Obligations	Absence/accommodation policies, sick days or short-term disability[ii] benefits, and entitlements granted in a collective bargaining agreement	Variable, but usually unable to work because of an illness or injury with exclusions in some instances (e.g. elective procedures, work-related issues), sometimes partial sick/STD pay is available when the employee’s work time is only reduced	Moderate – for more than one-off sick days, the employer may require a more detailed note and back-and-forth with a doctor, but the enactment of long-term illness leave prevents material scrutiny (see our prior blog)	Moderate – limited because of the “dual hat” that the employer wears and the usual focus on obtaining function information vs. direct medical records
Service Canada	EI Sickness Benefits for up to 26 weeks, to a maximum of 55% of earnings or $729/week	Inability to work for medical reasons supported by a medical certificate; 600 insured work hours in the past 52 weeks/since last claim; and 40% drop in earnings for at least one week	Low – and not subject to material scrutiny, but entitlement to benefits does not oust an employer’s entitlement to ask questions about accommodation and return to work so long as statutory leave requirements are observed	Low – only a simple medical certificate is required

What obligations take precedence in an accommodation scenario?

These regimes overlap but do not synch. As is evident from the above chart, the regimes do not always contemplate one another, have different thresholds for eligibility, and provide for different entitlements or oversight.

If the employee’s need for accommodation stems from a workplace illness/injury and WSIB is involved, full deference must be given to WSIB’s adjudication, though employers have rights to seek reconsideration and appeal. Protected leave time under the ESA must also be respected and good faith obligations under the Human Rights Code must be upheld. Outside of WSIB-involved accommodations and protected statutory leave time, the employer (or third party insurer) has more control over (a) the amount and type of medical information it can request; (b) the decision-making on accommodation plans; and (c) approval of income support. For employers without STD or sick pay, EI Sickness Benefits are an income replacement tool that employees can apply for, but there is no real scrutiny or involvement in the accommodation process by Service Canada.

Recommendations for Employers

Consistent with the advice our colleagues have provided in our accommodation-related blogs this year, the confusion of the overlapping regimes is navigable. Employers should:

• Identify what stakeholders are involved in a particular accommodation request

• Confirm whether any protected leaves apply

• Advise the employee about what regimes must be considered, what financial support is available, what the employee’s obligations and deadlines are, and when further touchpoints will occur

• Treat medical opinions, insurer determinations, WSIB decisions, and statutory obligations as distinct inputs to the accommodation analysis rather than assuming one automatically dictates the ultimate outcome

• Proactively address conflicting information by seeking clarification from healthcare providers, insurers, or other stakeholders before making accommodation decisions

• Act as the “conductor” of the various stakeholders and obligations given the implications for discrimination, reprisal, and other breaches that could be triggered

• Regularly reassess accommodation plans as medical information, workplace circumstances, and third-party determinations evolve

The most significant risk for employers is assuming that compliance with one accommodation regime automatically satisfies their obligations under another. While input and decisions by WSIB, insurers, healthcare providers, and government agencies may inform the accommodation process, employers are ultimately responsible. They should independently assess their obligations under applicable legislation, collective agreements, and workplace policies. Compliant and effective accommodation requires coordination across these regimes, not reliance on any single stakeholder's determination.

---

[1] There are other regimes (e.g. Ontario Statutory Accident Benefits or SABS or CPP Disability), but only the key ones are discussed in this blog.

[1] Equivalent governing bodies and legislation exists in each province and territory in Canada.

[1] STD is occasionally both administered and paid by a private insurer, though it is rare. STD may be adjudicated by a third party and funded by the employer. But many plans are both adjudicated and paid by the employer directly.