Ontario Municipal Human Resources Association

Employee mental health and wellness strategies were once considered perks of the privileged few. Now, legislative amendments are making them employers’ legal obligations. For HR professionals, these issues may arise in the context of psychological safety, accommodation, workplace harassment, privacy and transparency. Some of these obligations are long-standing and others are more recent. Taken together, they require employers to consider how workplace policies, practices and culture may affect employee mental health.

Occupational Health and Safety

The Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) sets out the rights and duties of employers and employees for addressing health and safety in the workplace. In the mental health context, the OHSA most directly addresses psychological harm through requirements relating to workplace violence and harassment, both of which can have significant mental health impacts. Employers must have workplace violence and harassment policies and programs in place and ensure workers are informed about them.

OHSA also requires employers to “take every precaution reasonable in the circumstances for the protection of a worker.” Courts are increasingly interpreting this obligation in a way that recognizes psychosocial hazards, including harassment and toxic work environments, as workplace risks that must be addressed.

Municipal HR leaders must take concrete steps to address psychological hazards, including toxic culture and digital harassment. From an occupational health perspective, mental health risks should be dealt with swiftly and with the same rigour and urgency as physical risks.

Human Rights and Discrimination

Mental health conditions have long been recognized as “disabilities” under the Ontario Human Rights Code (Code). Employers are obligated to ensure that workers are not treated differentially because of mental health conditions, addictions, or even perceived mental health issues. This protection extends across the entire employment relationship, from hiring to termination.

A central tenet of the Code is the duty to accommodate disabilities to the point of undue hardship. This applies equally to mental health conditions. Employers must engage with the employee, consider limitations and prognosis, and explore reasonable accommodations. Such accommodations may include altered duties, flexible hours, gradual return to work, or work from home arrangements. The threshold for “undue hardship” is a high bar. Employers cannot simply decline accommodation because it is inconvenient or difficult.

The Code also places responsibility on employers to prevent harassment and discriminatory conduct that creates a poisoned or hostile environment for workers on the basis of their disabilities. HR professionals should be alert to whether policies, workplace expectations, attendance practices or management approaches may have an unintended adverse effect on employees with mental health conditions.

Employment Standards, Electronic Monitoring and the Right to Disconnect

The Employment Standards Act, 2000 (“ESA”) requires employers with 25 or more workers to maintain a written electronic monitoring policy. While the ESA does not limit or prohibit the use of monitoring technologies, it does require employers to be transparent about what is being monitored, how, and for what purpose. In unionized environments, such policies must be reasonable in light of the underlying collective agreement. Covert surveillance can foster quiet anxiety, erode trust, and create the sense of being scrutinized. Therefore, a clear electronic monitoring policy can foster transparency in the workplace.

The ESA also requires employers with 25 or more employees to a right‑to‑disconnect policy. Although these legislative amendments do not create new rights or guarantee a free-standing right to disconnect, it does require to set out when there is or is not an expectation to engage in work-related communication. This is particularly significant for mental health following the pandemic, as work from home and COVID-19 lockdowns blurred the line between professional and personal time.

Final Thoughts

Historically, worker safety was focused on physical safety. While Mental health conditions have long been defined as disabilities within the meaning of the Ontario Human Rights Code, the modern approach has expanded over the years to now include workplace psychological safety. For HR professionals, this means mental health considerations should be reflected in workplace policies, accommodation processes, investigations, manager training and day-to-day people management. Compliance in this area is not limited to responding when issues arise. It also requires employers to consider whether their systems and practices are appropriately designed to prevent harm and respond effectively when concerns emerge.

Written by: Nigel McKechnie