Corporate employers started requiring their employee to return to in-person work midway through 2022. As more employers required their employees to return to the office, both provincial and federal governments began raising the topic of requiring public service employees to return to in person work. In the summer of 2025, the Ontario provincial government announced that it would be mandating that all Ontario Public Service employees return to the office full time in January 2026.

The situation is less clear for federal employees, but rumours abound – varying from a full time return to work in early 2026 or as late as 2027. The federal public service and federal departments are subject to federal return-to-office policies, which may impact timelines and processes for federally regulated employees.

Why Employers Are Mandating a Return to the Office

Most employers are now implementing return-to-office workplace policies, often justifying these policies by citing the benefits of collaboration, innovation, and organizational culture. Public health compliance is frequently cited as a primary defense for enforcing such workplace policies. However, for many employees, particularly those managing chronic illnesses, disabilities, or compromised immune systems, such mandates present not just logistical challenges but genuine health risks. While employers can generally require employees to return to the office, the legal situation is complex and depends on employment contracts, human rights accommodations, and the history of remote work arrangements. Employers generally maintain the right to manage workplace locations unless explicitly restricted by prior agreements. The question is what recourse does an employee have if their health prevents a return to office (RTO)?

When Health Prevents a Safe Return to In-Person Work

The range of conditions that may render in-person work unsafe or impractical is extensive. Examples include:

• Chronic illnesses such as autoimmune disorders, diabetes, or cardiovascular disease.
• Mental health conditions including anxiety, depression, or post-traumatic stress disorder, which may be aggravated by commuting or crowded office environments.
• Mobility limitations, particularly in workplaces that are not fully accessible.
• Immunocompromised individuals, for whom shared environments pose heightened risks of infection.

Employees with these conditions may require accommodation due to their functional limitations, rather than needing to disclose specific medical diagnoses. Disability-related accommodation is essential for employees whose health makes them unable to safely return to the office.

These circumstances underscore the inadequacy of one-size-fits-all mandates. Health considerations demand individualized responses.

The Legal Tension Between Workplace Policy and Employee Health

From an employer perspective, RTO policies may appear straightforward. However, the challenges and concerns of employees with serious health conditions make the move far more complex. Commuting, exposure to crowded environments, and the physical demands of office life can exacerbate medical conditions or create unsafe daily environments.

Employers have a legal duty to remove barriers and promote equal opportunity in the workplace, ensuring that all employees are treated fairly and can perform their duties effectively. A uniform mandate disregards the diversity of individual employee’s health needs and risks marginalizing those who cannot safely return. Additionally, employers must ensure a safe workplace, and employees can refuse work they believe is unsafe, which requires the employer to investigate such claims.

Furthermore, while remote work is not a guaranteed right in Canada, if it becomes an established condition of employment, it may not be unilaterally revoked by the employer. Courts consider the reality of the work relationship when determining if remote work has become a term of employment.

Employer Obligations – The Duty to Accommodate

Employers face legitimate challenges in balancing organizational needs with individual accommodations. Certain roles may require physical presence, and maintaining fairness across teams is a valid concern. Nevertheless, organizations that fail to accommodate health needs risk reputational damage and the loss of valuable employees.

Forward-looking employers recognize that inclusivity is not merely a legal obligation but a strategic advantage. Accommodations foster loyalty, enhance morale, and broaden access to diverse talent pools. Employees are not without protections. Employers have a duty to provide workplace accommodation as a legal obligation under the Canadian Human Rights Act, which covers needs related to any of the thirteen protected grounds. Employers are required to provide necessary accommodation for individuals whose health prevents them from fulfilling standard workplace expectations, and must do so in a timely manner. These accommodations may include remote work arrangements, flexible scheduling, or modified duties.

Providing accommodation is an ongoing, collaborative effort that involves regular review and monitoring as part of the accommodation process. Employers should have clear procedures available for workers on how to request accommodation as part of their workplace accommodation policy. Employers are responsible for developing the accommodation plan in collaboration with the worker and for exploring various accommodation options to meet employee needs while considering practical limits.

Medical Documentation and Accommodation Requests

In order to be accommodated, an employee must provide relevant medical information to support their accommodation request. This information helps the employer develop an individualized accommodation plan or plan, which should be regularly reviewed to ensure ongoing support and compliance with legal obligations. Employers may deny accommodations only if they can demonstrate undue hardship, but the point of undue hardship is unique in each situation and must be assessed individually by the employer. If an accommodation request is refused, the employer should provide the worker with clear, written reasons explaining their decision, including how they reached that conclusion. In practice, many accommodations—particularly remote work—are both feasible and effective, as the pandemic clearly demonstrated.

Bona Fide Occupational Requirement: When Can Employers Legally Refuse Accommodation?

A bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR) is a job requirement that is genuinely necessary for the performance of a specific role. In the context of a return to office mandate, an employer may argue that being physically present in the office is essential for certain positions—such as those involving direct client interaction, handling sensitive materials, or operating specialized equipment that cannot be accessed remotely.

However, for an in-office requirement to qualify as a BFOR, the employer must demonstrate that the rule is adopted in good faith, is rationally connected to the job’s core duties, and is reasonably necessary to achieve a legitimate work-related purpose. This means the employer must show that accommodating an employee—such as allowing remote work—would cause undue hardship, whether due to significant operational challenges or excessive costs.

Employees who are told that their accommodation request cannot be met because of a BFOR should seek legal advice and request a clear explanation of why the in-office requirement is essential. If you believe your employer is unfairly denying your accommodation, it’s important to ask for the rationale and, if necessary, challenge the decision.

What Happens If an Employer Refuses to Accommodate

In cases where employers cannot accommodate, employees may pursue formal remedies. Options include:

• Filing a human rights claim with the Canadian or provincial human rights commission.
• Applying for disability benefits through employer-sponsored insurance or government programs, which provide income replacement when medical conditions prevent you from working in a traditional, in-person environment.
• Union grievance procedures, where applicable, which may offer additional avenues for challenging non-compliance with accommodation obligations through processes outlined in the collective agreement.

Employees are encouraged to consult with an employment lawyer before responding to a return-to-office mandate to fully understand their legal rights and options.

Constructive Dismissal and Return-to-Office Mandates: What You Need to Know

When an employer imposes a significant change to your working conditions—such as requiring a shift from remote work to full-time in-office attendance—without your agreement, it may amount to constructive dismissal. This legal concept means that, even if you have not been formally terminated, the fundamental terms of your employment contract have been altered to your detriment.

If you are faced with a return to office policy that you cannot comply with due to health reasons, and your employer refuses to accommodate you or provide reasonable notice, you may have grounds for a constructive dismissal claim. In such cases, you could be entitled to severance pay, which varies based on your age, position, length of service, and other factors.

Employers have legal obligations to accommodate employees and maintain a safe work environment. Before making any decisions, it’s crucial to seek legal advice to understand your rights under the Canadian Human Rights Act and your employment contract. You may be able to negotiate alternative arrangements, such as a hybrid work program, or secure compensation if you are forced to leave your job.

Both employers and employees benefit from ongoing communication and a good faith effort to find solutions. If you believe your employer’s return to office mandate constitutes constructive dismissal, act promptly to protect your rights and ensure you receive any pay or benefits you are entitled to.

How to Raise Health-Based Concerns with Your Employer

Employees facing health-related barriers to RTO should approach the matter strategically:

• Secure medical documentation that clearly outlines limitations and required accommodations, and provide all relevant information to support the accommodation process.
• Request a formal meeting with human resources or management to present the case.
• Propose practical alternatives, such as hybrid schedules, staggered hours, or continued remote work.
• Maintain professionalism, keeping discussions focused on health needs and job performance rather than personal preference.

An employer may not fully appreciate an employee’s limitations and restrictions until they are articulated in a precise way with medical documentation and relevant information supporting the accommodation process. Constructive dialogue increases the likelihood of reaching a workable solution.

For additional guidance on navigating the accommodation process, consult your HR department or review official workplace accommodation resources.

Can I Apply for Disability Benefits if I Can’t Return to In-Person Work?

If your employer cannot provide accommodation which allows you to continue working remotely, it is important to make an informed decision of what to do. It is essential that you act proactively in order to take advance of long term disability benefits offered through your employment. If you have medical evidence which shows that you have functional limitations which will prevent you from achieving a successful return to in office work, you should make an application for long term disability benefits.

While pursuing a claim can be daunting and time-consuming, it may be the only viable path when you simply cannot return to work in person. Employees who cannot return to work due to health reasons may be eligible for long term disability benefits, sick leave, or paid sick leave. These benefits can help manage periods of absence and support gradual return-to-work plans. Employees should not be forced to compromise their health to continue their employment.

Speak to a Disability Lawyer to Understand Your Rights

Disability benefits provide crucial replacement income at a time that you are in financial crisis. We can help you by taking over dealing with the insurer so that you can focus on your health and recovery. Our lawyers will provide you with a free consultation to review your file and recommend the next steps in your fight to prove eligibility for benefits.