Corporate employers started implementing 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.
Employers often justify these policies by citing the benefits of collaboration, innovation, and organizational culture. 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. The question is what recourse does an employee have if their health prevents a return to office (RTO)?
The tension between policy and 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. A uniform mandate disregards the diversity of individual employee’s health needs and risks marginalizing those who cannot safely return.
Legal protections and the duty to accommodate
Employees are not without protections. Employers are required to provide reasonable accommodations for individuals whose health prevents them from fulfilling standard workplace expectations. These accommodations may include remote work arrangements, flexible scheduling, or modified duties.
In order to be accommodated, an employee has to obtain medical support for their limitations. Employers may deny accommodations only if they can demonstrate undue hardship, such as significant financial or operational disruption. In practice, many accommodations—particularly remote work—are both feasible and effective, as the pandemic clearly demonstrated.
When employers cannot accommodate: disability claims
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.
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 should not be forced to compromise their health to continue their employment.
Health conditions that complicate RTO
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.
These circumstances underscore the inadequacy of one-size-fits-all mandates. Health considerations demand individualized responses.
Approaching the conversation with employers
Employees facing health-related barriers to RTO should approach the matter strategically:
- Secure medical documentation that clearly outlines limitations and required accommodations.
- 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 supporting the accommodation. Constructive dialogue increases the likelihood of reaching a workable solution.
The employer’s responsibility
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.
The human dimension
For employees whose health prevents them from returning, RTO mandates illicit fear, isolation, and anxiety. The prospect of losing one’s employment due to medical limitations puts the employee in a conundrum. Employers who respond with empathy and take a practical approach can mitigate the impact on their employees and cultivate a more resilient workforce.
Looking ahead
The future of work will not be defined by rigid uniformity. Remote and hybrid models have proven viable, and technological advances continue to expand possibilities. Health accommodations will remain central to workplace policy debates. Employees must understand their rights and advocate for their needs, while employers must balance operational objectives with compassion and inclusivity.
Ultimately, the healthiest workplaces are those that recognize the diverse realities of their workforce and adapt accordingly.
Conclusion
Mandated returns to in-person work present complex challenges to both employers and employees. Employers have both a duty and an opportunity to accommodate. The pandemic demonstrated that work can adapt; the challenge now is ensuring that adaptation continues—not merely for convenience, but for the health, dignity, and sustainability of the modern workforce. Employees have options such as making a human rights complaint or, if their health simply prevents a return to work, they may need to make a disability claim.
About the Author
Alison is the Senior Associate Lawyer at Burn Tucker Lachaine PC, disability and injury law firm in Ottawa and Waterloo. Alison has 25 years of experience in disability and life insurance litigation. She devotes her practice to presenting disabled clients throughout Ontario.
