Criminal charges, cash penalties and mental‑health claims are set to redefine employers’ risk
Canadian employers can expect a tougher, more complex occupational health and safety (OHS) environment in 2026, as regulators deploy new administrative monetary penalties, police get involved in workplace fatalities, and mental health and psychological safety issues continue to drive claims and complaints.
Traditional physical hazards and catastrophic incidents remain central to OHS enforcement, but lawyers say the legal risk is broadening toward inspectors using administrative tools instead of courts, toward greater personal exposure for supervisors and other individuals, and toward a wider conception of what constitutes a health and safety issue.
Administrative monetary penalties reshape Ontario’s enforcement toolbox
Ontario’s introduction of Administrative Monetary Penalties (AMPs) under Bill 30, the Working for Workers Seven Act, 2025, is widely seen as a pivotal change. AMPs will allow Ministry of Labour, Immigration, Training and Skills Development inspectors to impose financial penalties directly for alleged contraventions of the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) and its regulations, as an alternative to prosecution.
In their analysis, Jeremy Warning and Cheryl A. Edwards, partners at Mathews Dinsdale & Clark, caution that “AMPs are now coming to the Ontario OHSA, and subject to determining specific important details, the changes could be sweeping.” They note that key questions – including which violations will be subject to AMPs, how penalty amounts will be calculated, and who will hear appeals – will be left to regulation, not statute.
Even if AMPs do not become “the principal means of OHSA enforcement,” Warning and Edwards say they will still matter because they are likely to be treated as a record of non‑compliance that can aggravate sentencing in any subsequent prosecution. They also highlight reputational risk, pointing out that Bill 30 authorizes the Minister of Labour to publish information about imposed AMPs.
Labour and employment lawyer Ryan Conlin, partner at Stringer LLP, underscores how AMPs could operate day to day. He describes them as “a powerful new tool to penalize employers and individuals for safety violations without the need for a full prosecution,” adding they will likely be reserved for violations “not severe enough to justify the resources required for a prosecution.”
Conlin notes the appeal process for AMPs “remains uncertain at this stage,” but stresses that an AMP on a company’s or individual’s record could later be “used to support higher fines in the event of a subsequent OHSA conviction.”
Warning, Edwards and Conlin all emphasize documentation and due diligence. With inspectors gaining another enforcement option, employers, constructors and other workplace parties are being urged to review safety programs, tighten record‑keeping and ensure they can demonstrate the steps taken to comply.
Rising individual exposure: Criminal prosecutions and police involvement
Alongside new administrative tools, practitioners are watching a gradual shift toward greater criminal exposure for individuals.
Conlin says there has been “an observable increase in criminal prosecutions against individuals,” and, anecdotally, these prosecutions “are becoming more common.” At the same time, he points to a “significant debate” in the courts over the level of negligence the Crown must prove to secure a criminal conviction in an OHS context.
“Supervisors of employees who are injured or hurt need to understand the real risk of personal criminal liability,” he says, warning that “the distinction between regulatory and criminal prosecutions is not always crystal clear.”
Graeme Hooper is a Vancouver-based lawyer and principal at Hooper Law. He reports a related trend in workplace fatality cases in BC. For many years, he notes, fatalities “were investigated solely by WorkSafeBC and the Coroners.” More recently, “especially in RCMP jurisdictions, we are seeing police open criminal negligence investigation files.”
While Hooper says there has not yet been “a material increase in charges,” he cautions that with more criminal investigations, “that may just be a matter of time.”
Psychological safety, mental health and retaliation complaints
Lawyers also expect OHS disputes to increasingly centre on psychological safety, mental health and retaliation allegations.
Hooper identifies “the rise of prohibited action complaints” as one of BC’s major trends. These are cases where workers allege their employer took a negative employment action – such as termination – because they raised a health and safety concern. He notes that such complaints increased by 62% over a two‑year period, and links that growth partly to “the shift towards psychological safety,” which has created “a far broader net for what it means to raise a health and safety issue,” as well as to backlogs at other tribunals.
In Ontario, employment lawyer Matthew Badrov of Littler LLP says employers should expect more mental‑health‑related accommodation requests and claims through workers’ compensation systems. He observes “an uptick in the increase in mental health-related either accommodation requests or claims,” and expects that trend to continue.
Badrov argues OHS can no longer be viewed solely through the lens of physical hazards. “Occupational health and safety extends beyond the physical workplace and deals with mental health issues,” he says, pointing to cases involving alleged harassment or bullying over Microsoft Teams or email.
He also ties mental health claims to ongoing return‑to‑office friction. As more employers push for in‑person work, Badrov is seeing a rise in disability claims citing “stress or anxiety in the workplace” or an inability to work face‑to‑face with particular colleagues.
Preparing for 2026
Across these developments, the through‑line is that enforcement tools and expectations are multiplying. AMPs will add an administrative layer to Ontario’s regime, potentially leaving employers with published penalties that can be used to justify higher fines later. At the same time, criminal prosecutions and police investigations are keeping serious incidents squarely in the realm of personal and corporate liability, while psychological safety and mental health issues fuel more complaints and claims.
For 2026, Canadian employers are not only facing new statutory tools and higher financial stakes, but also a broader conception of what “health and safety” covers – from criminal negligence investigations and administrative penalties to mental health, remote harassment and retaliation for speaking up. The legal risk landscape is expanding on multiple fronts, and regulators now have more options than ever to respond.
