Easier mental health claims for federal responders

Summary#

This bill changes the Government Employees Compensation Act (GECA) to widen who can get compensation and for what kinds of workplace harm. It adds a presumption that certain mental health disorders in federal public safety employees are work‑related, unless proven otherwise. It also removes a legal rule that blocked lawsuits against the Crown beyond GECA compensation and modernizes wording.

• Creates a rebuttable presumption for mental health disorders in defined public safety roles (s.4(1)(a)(i.1), s.4(1.1), s.2 “public safety employee”).
• Broadens “accident” and “industrial disease” to include more events and unsafe conditions (s.2).
• Extends GECA to injuries, diseases, and employment held outside Canada (s.3(2)).
• Aligns compensation rates with the province where the employee is usually employed, including mental health disorders (s.4(2), s.4(2)(a.1)).
• Repeals the bar on claims against the Crown beyond GECA compensation (s.12 repealed; bill summary).
• Updates terms from “workmen” to “workers” (various provisions).

What it means for you#

• Households

  • Dependants of a federal employee who dies from an accident, industrial disease, or qualifying mental health circumstances can receive compensation. If death occurs away from the usual workplace, the Minister may approve extra payments for reasonable additional expenses (s.4(1)(b), s.15).

• Public safety employees (federal)

  • If you develop a mental health disorder related to your work, the law presumes it was caused by your job, unless evidence shows otherwise. A prescribed medical professional must diagnose it as related to employment (s.4(1)(a)(i.1), s.4(1.1), s.4(7) “mental health disorder”).
  • The list of covered roles includes frontline response, law enforcement, EMS, dispatch, fire, corrections, forensic support, court support, and services to victims of crime; it can be expanded by regulation (s.2 “public safety employee”, s.8(3)).
  • Compensation rates match those in the province where you are usually employed, including coverage for mental health disorders from work circumstances (s.4(2), s.4(2)(a.1)).
  • If you might sue a third party for the same harm, you must choose to claim GECA compensation or sue; rules on sharing any excess recovery still apply (s.9, s.9.1(4), s.9.2(4)).
  • Notice to elect between GECA and a lawsuit must be given within 3 months after your employment ends for mental health claims, or within longer if allowed by the compensation authority (s.11).

• Other federal employees

  • More events count as an “accident,” including intentional acts by others (for example, assault) and natural or physical causes (s.2 “accident”).
  • “Industrial disease” is broadened to any disease, illness, or condition caused by dangerous substances, workplace hazards, or other unsafe conditions (s.2 “industrial disease”).
  • Compensation rates and administration follow the law of the province where you are usually employed, as before (s.4(2), s.4(3)).
  • The Act applies to injuries and diseases occurring while employed inside or outside Canada (s.3(2)).

• Federal departments and agencies (employers)

  • Provincial workers’ compensation boards will continue to administer claims; Treasury Board may advance funds to them as needed (s.4(3), s.4(6)(b)).
  • The repeal of the bar on claims against the Crown allows employees to pursue civil claims against the Crown beyond GECA compensation, subject to other laws (s.12 repealed; bill summary).

• Provincial workers’ compensation boards

  • You continue to administer GECA claims at provincial rates, including new presumptive mental health claims for federal public safety employees (s.4(2), s.4(3), s.4(1.1)).

Expenses#

Estimated net cost: Data unavailable.

• No official fiscal note identified. Data unavailable.
• No explicit appropriations stated in the bill text. Payments continue under existing authorities:
  • Accountable advances to provincial boards for compensation or costs (s.4(6)(b)).
  • Discretionary payments from the Consolidated Revenue Fund for certain death-related expenses occurring away from the usual workplace (s.15).
• Compensation amounts and employer assessments align with provincial workers’ compensation law where the employee is usually employed; figures vary by province. Data unavailable.
• Fiscal impact of removing the bar on claims against the Crown is not quantified. Data unavailable.

Proponents' View#

• Eases access to support for public safety employees by presuming work causation for diagnosed mental health disorders, reducing administrative delays and disputes (s.4(1)(a)(i.1), s.4(1.1)).
• Aligns federal practice with many provincial workers’ compensation systems that recognize psychological injuries for first responders, by tying rates and eligibility to provincial law (s.4(2), s.4(2)(a.1)).
• Modernizes and clarifies coverage by expanding “accident” and “industrial disease,” ensuring more real‑world harms are recognized, including assaults and unsafe conditions (s.2).
• Ensures federal employees posted abroad remain covered, promoting continuity of protection (s.3(2)).
• Enhances accountability by repealing the bar on claims against the Crown, giving employees legal recourse beyond GECA compensation in appropriate cases (s.12 repealed; bill summary).
• Updates outdated language by replacing “workmen” with “workers” (various provisions).

Opponents' View#

• Could increase costs to the federal employer due to higher acceptance of mental health claims under the presumption and broadened definitions; no cost estimate provided (s.4(1.1), s.2). Data unavailable.
• Repealing the bar on claims against the Crown may raise litigation volume and liability exposure, adding legal and settlement costs; scale is unknown (s.12 repealed; bill summary). Data unavailable.
• “Mental health disorder” includes “emotional distress,” which may be broad and create uncertainty for administrators and adjudicators (s.4(7)).
• Reliance on provincial systems means uneven outcomes across provinces in benefits and processes, complicating administration for a national employer (s.4(2), s.4(3)).
• Key details depend on future regulations, such as who qualifies as a “prescribed medical professional” and which duties count as public safety, creating implementation risk until regulations are set (s.4(1.1), s.8(3)).