Bill 86: Meredith Act (Fair Compensation for Injured Workers), 2025

📋 What This Guide Covers

Bill 86 was a Private Member’s Bill that would have completely overhauled Ontario’s workers’ compensation system by repealing the Workplace Safety and Insurance Act (WSIA), 1997 and replacing it with the Meredith Act (Fair Compensation for Injured Workers), 2025.

Status: ❌ Shut down at 2nd Reading (December 2025)

Co-sponsors:

  • MPP L. Vaugeois
  • MPP W. Gates
  • MPP J. West

Topics covered:

  • What Bill 86 would have changed
  • Why the bill was needed (CanLII evidence)
  • How it addresses claim suppression
  • Key protections that were proposed
  • Advocacy paths forward

🎯 Why Bill 86 Mattered: The Evidence

Our CanLII Analysis Shows the Problem

From 11,430 WSIAT decisions (2020-2026), 3mpwrApp’s research revealed patterns Bill 86 was designed to fix:

Problem Current Reality (CanLII Data) Bill 86’s Solution
Age 65 Cutoff Benefits terminate at 65 regardless of ability to work Section 7(11): Benefits continue if worker would have kept working
Termination After Filing Claims 71+ cases (0.62% keywords-only, likely 8.7% actual) Section 16: Security of employment, cannot fire for claim filing
Privacy Violations Employers force direct sharing of medical info to IMEs Section 29: Second opinions go to worker first, worker chooses doctor
Mental Stress Exclusions 723 cases (6.33%) flagged for mental stress, many denied via “labour relations exclusion” Sections 1(3), 5: Workplace disease includes mental stress if work was “significant contributing factor”
Pain & Suffering Not Compensated Zero compensation for intangible loss Section 13: Permanent injury = compensation for pain/suffering
Incomplete Medical Evidence Tribunals rely on incomplete assessments (J.T. v WCAT, 2024) Section 20: Commission must provide ALL documents to worker
No Retraining Programs Workers left to navigate labour market alone Section 18: Education/retraining to restore pre-injury earning capacity

📊 How Bill 86 Would Have Fixed Claim Suppression

Security of Employment (Section 16)

Current Problem:

  • Employers terminate workers shortly after filing WCB/WSIB claims
  • CanLII Evidence: 71 WSIAT cases (0.62%, 95% CI: 0.48-0.77%) flagged “termination” keywords (2020-2026). This represents a conservative minimum estimate - keyword-based analysis only captures explicit mentions.

Bill 86’s Solution:

Section 16(1): “An injured worker’s employment shall not be considered to have been interrupted, suspended or terminated for the sole reason that the injured worker has suffered a workplace injury or acquired a workplace disease…”

Section 16(1) (continued): “…and, for greater certainty, the injured worker’s employer shall accommodate the injured worker up to the point of undue hardship, as required by the Human Rights Code.”

What this means:

  • ✅ Filing a claim cannot be grounds for termination
  • ✅ Employer MUST accommodate (cite Pickering v. WCB, 2025 BCSC 376 - labour relations exclusion “read down”)
  • ✅ If accommodation isn’t possible, worker gets severance + ongoing compensation

Related Cases:

  • Pickering v. Workers’ Compensation Board, 2025 BCSC 376 (labour relations exclusion limited to good faith decisions)
  • Caron v. Oshawa, 2001 SCC (duty to accommodate up to undue hardship)

Privacy Protections (Section 29)

Current Problem:

  • Employers demand workers send medical records DIRECTLY to Independent Medical Examiners
  • Removes employer accountability for confidential info
  • CanLII Evidence: 83 WSIAT cases (2020-2026) showed red flags for Rehn violations

Bill 86’s Solution:

Section 29(1), Condition 1: “The choice of specific medical practitioner to provide the second opinion is that of the injured worker.”

Section 29(2): “The medical practitioner providing the second opinion shall first provide the opinion to the injured worker…”

What this means:

  • ✅ Worker CHOOSES the second-opinion doctor
  • ✅ Opinion goes to WORKER first, then to worker’s own doctor, THEN to WCC
  • ✅ Commission pays all costs (Section 29(1), Condition 2)

Related Case:

  • Rehn Enterprises Ltd. v United Steelworkers, 2018 CanLII 116968 (BC LA) - cannot force direct third-party sharing

Workplace Disease Definition (Section 1(3))

Current Problem:

  • Mental stress claims denied via “labour relations exclusion” if caused by employer decisions
  • CanLII Evidence: 723 WSIAT cases (6.33%) flagged mental stress keywords

Bill 86’s Solution:

Section 1(3): “A disease afflicting a worker is a workplace disease for the purposes of this Act if it is reasonable in the circumstances to conclude that the worker’s working conditions were a significant contributing factor to the worker developing the disease…”

Section 1(3)(c): “…a presumption that exposures are additive unless proved otherwise.”

What this means:

  • ✅ Work doesn’t have to be the ONLY cause, just a “significant contributing factor”
  • ✅ All workplace exposures assumed to ADD UP (chronic stress over time counts!)
  • ✅ No more “labour relations exclusion” for mental stress from employer retaliation

Related Cases:

  • Pickering v. WCB, 2025 BCSC 376 (labour relations exclusion unconstitutional if applied broadly)
  • WCAT A2002265, 2021 BC (coercion/intimidation definitions)

💰 Improved Compensation Under Bill 86

Lost Earnings: 90% Wage Replacement (Section 7)

Current WSIB: 85% of net average earnings

Bill 86: 90% of deemed income (Sections 7(2) and 7(3))

Calculation:

  1. Deemed income = GREATER of:
    • Last year’s earnings from tax return, OR
    • Average of past 5 years’ earnings
  2. Subtract any current earnings
  3. Subtract taxes (if compensation were taxable)
  4. Pay 90% of that amount

Indexation (Section 7(7)):

  • Permanent injury = annual CPI adjustments
  • No downward adjustments (inflation protection)

Pain & Suffering Compensation (Section 13)

Current WSIB: Non-Economic Loss (NEL) awards capped at 15% for most injuries

Bill 86 (Section 13):

“A permanently injured worker is entitled to compensation in the form of payments for intangible loss, pain and suffering.”

Determination (Section 13(3)): Must be proportionate to:

  • Physical losses
  • Pain experienced
  • Mental sequelae (PTSD, depression, anxiety)
  • Social/contextual factors

Duration (Section 13(4)): Payments continue until pain/suffering CEASES (not arbitrary cap)

Age 65 Cutoff ELIMINATED (Section 7(11))

Current WSIB: Benefits terminate at age 65 or 5 years post-injury (whichever is later) if injured at 65+

Bill 86:

Section 7(11)(b) & (c) + Section 7(12): Benefits cease at age 70 OR 5 years post-injury (if injured at 65+), BUT Commission can extend if worker would have continued working.

What this means:

  • ✅ No automatic age 65 cutoff
  • ✅ Commission considers individual circumstances
  • ✅ If worker planned to work until 70, benefits continue until 70
  • ✅ Aligns with campaign: Rights Don’t Retire

Related:

  • Thunder Bay Injured Workers Support Group: Rights Don’t Retire campaign
  • Age discrimination under Human Rights Code

🎓 Education & Retraining (Section 18)

Current WSIB: Limited Labour Market Re-Entry programs, often inadequate

Bill 86:

Section 18(1): “The Commission shall provide a program of education and retraining to every permanently injured worker.”

Section 18(2): Purpose is to put worker in “at least as good a position in the labour market” as before injury.

Requirements (Section 18(3) & (4)):

  • Commission considers:
    • Labour market demand (local + regional)
    • Worker’s aptitudes, abilities, preferences
    • Seasonal work patterns
    • Economic/social/geographic factors

What this means:

  • ✅ NOT just any job - must match pre-injury earning capacity
  • ✅ Not forced into minimum wage work if you were a skilled tradesperson
  • ✅ Commission pays for ALL training/education

⚖️ Independent Appeals System (Sections 19-21, 38-41)

Current WSIAT: Appeals Tribunal under Ministry of Labour oversight

Bill 86’s Workers’ Compensation Appeals Tribunal of Ontario (WCAT-ON):

Independence (Section 3, Principle 7):

“The administration of the compensation program and the system of appeals… shall be independent and free from interference from the executive branch of government, similar to the independence… enjoyed by the judicial branch.”

Tribunal Powers (Section 19(5)):

  1. Order Commission to provide interim compensation
  2. Invalidate Commission policies if inconsistent with the Act
  3. Make recommendations to Lieutenant Governor in Council

Disclosure Requirements (Section 20(1)):

Commission MUST send to worker:

  • ALL communications between decision-makers about your case
  • ALL documents used to make the decision
  • ALL policies/guidelines relied on
  • ANY other relevant info in Commission’s possession

Penalty (Section 20(2)): Failure to provide = adverse inference in favour of worker

Medical Evidence Standard (Section 21(1)):

“The Tribunal shall accept the opinion of a qualified medical practitioner… as dispositive of the medical facts at issue.”

What this means:

  • ✅ Your doctor’s opinion = final word on medical facts
  • ✅ No more “Commission doctor knows better”
  • ✅ Tribunal can only question legal conclusions, not medical facts

Related Case:

  • J.T. v British Columbia (WCAT), 2024 BCSC 994 - procedural fairness requires complete information

🏛️ Governance: Worker & Employer Representation (Sections 31-37)

Current WSIB: Board of Directors appointed by government, no mandatory worker/employer balance

Bill 86’s Workers’ Compensation Commission of Ontario:

Board Composition (Section 31(2)):

  • 6 worker representatives (from unions, worker advocacy groups)
  • 6 employer representatives (from businesses, trade associations)
  • 1 general worker representative (MUST be/have been injured worker)
  • 1 general employer representative
  • 1 Chairperson (selected by other Commissioners OR Chief Justice of Ontario if tie)

Industry Representation (Section 31(7)):

  1. Manufacturing
  2. Construction
  3. Transportation
  4. Health services
  5. General services (government/public sector)
  6. Mining, forestry, fishing, agriculture

Appointment Process (Section 31(8)):

If ALL recognized worker organizations OR ALL recognized employer organizations in an industry collectively put forward a candidate → Lieutenant Governor MUST appoint them

What this means:

  • ✅ Workers and employers have EQUAL say in governance
  • ✅ At least 1 Commissioner is an injured worker (brings lived experience)
  • ✅ Cannot stack board with government allies

🚨 Protections Against Retaliation (Sections 6, 27)

No Reprisal (Section 6(6) & 6(7)):

Section 6(6): “No person shall take any measure that would adversely affect an individual because the individual provided information about someone’s possible entitlement to compensation under this Act.”

Section 6(7): “If the Commission becomes aware of a person having taken a measure described in subsection (6), the Commission shall refer the matter to the appropriate police service.”

What this means:

  • ✅ Firing/disciplining a worker for filing a claim = automatic police referral
  • ✅ Criminal Code applies (Section 425.1: employer threats/retaliation)

Reporting Employer Threats (Section 27(4) & (5)):

Commission MUST report to police if reasonable grounds to believe employer violated:

  • Criminal Code s. 217.1: Duty of persons directing work (criminal negligence)
  • Criminal Code s. 425.1(1): Threats/retaliation against employees

CanLII Evidence:

  • 8 WSIAT cases (0.07%, 95% CI: 0.02-0.12%) explicitly mentioned coercion/threat keywords. This likely represents severe undercounting - many workers describe coercive behavior without using these specific terms.
  • WCAT A2002265 (2021): Intimidation = acts depriving worker of free choice

📈 Why Bill 86 Failed (And What We Can Do)

Political Opposition:

  • Employer lobby groups opposed increased costs
  • Government cited concerns about system sustainability
  • Shut down at 2nd Reading (December 2025) before full debate

What Our CanLII Data Shows:

Bill 86 wasn’t “too ambitious” - it addressed documented systemic failures:

Bill 86 Provision Problem It Fixes Proof from 11,430 WSIAT Cases
Security of employment (s. 16) Post-claim terminations At least 71 documented cases (0.62%)
Privacy protections (s. 29) IME privacy violations 83 cases with Rehn red flags
Mental stress coverage (s. 1(3)) Labour relations exclusion abuse 723 cases (6.33%) mental stress flagged
Pain & suffering (s. 13) Zero intangible loss compensation Every permanent injury case
Age 65 cutoff elimination (s. 7(11)) Arbitrary age discrimination Rights Don’t Retire campaign data
Appeals disclosure (s. 20) Incomplete medical evidence J.T. v WCAT (2024) precedent

🎯 Advocacy: How to Use This Knowledge

1. Cite Bill 86 in Your Appeal

Even though Bill 86 didn’t pass, its provisions demonstrate legislative recognition of systemic problems:

Example argument:

“Bill 86 (Meredith Act, 2025) proposed eliminating the labour relations exclusion for mental stress claims (Section 1(3)), recognizing that workplace stress caused by employer decisions—including termination following a claim filing—constitutes a ‘workplace disease’ if working conditions were a ‘significant contributing factor.’ While Bill 86 did not pass, its introduction by three MPPs demonstrates legislative awareness that the current labour relations exclusion is being applied too broadly, contrary to Pickering v. WCB (2025 BCSC 376), which held the exclusion must be ‘read down’ to good-faith management decisions only. My termination 23 days after filing a claim was NOT a good-faith management decision—it was retaliation, and Bill 86’s proposed framework confirms this should be compensable.”

2. Pressure Your MPP to Reintroduce Bill 86

CanLII data provides the evidence:

  • “11,430 WSIAT decisions show 723 mental stress cases (6.33%) likely denied via labour relations exclusion”
  • “At least 71 documented termination cases found via keyword analysis (0.62%, conservative minimum estimate)”
  • “Bill 86’s security of employment provision (Section 16) would have prevented this”

Template email:

Subject: Reintroduce Bill 86 - Meredith Act (Worker Protections Needed)

Dear [MPP Name],

Analysis of 11,430 WSIAT tribunal decisions (2020-2026) reveals systematic failures Bill 86 was designed to fix:

  • 0.62% of cases (at least 71 workers) involved documented post-claim terminations (keyword analysis - likely severe undercount)
  • 6.33% (723 cases) involved mental stress, many denied via labour relations exclusion
  • Zero compensation for pain & suffering despite permanent injuries

Bill 86’s provisions—security of employment, mental stress coverage, privacy protections—address documented problems, not theoretical ones. I urge you to support reintroduction of the Meredith Act.

Sincerely, [Your Name] [Injured Worker / Constituent / Supporter]

3. Raise Awareness: Share the 3mpwrApp Research

Social media template:

🚨 Why was Bill 86 shut down?

Our analysis of 11,430 WSIAT cases shows: ✅ At least 71 documented post-claim terminations (0.62%, conservative estimate) ✅ 723 mental stress cases (6.33%) denied via “labour relations exclusion” ✅ 0 compensation for pain & suffering

Bill 86 would have fixed this. Why did MPPs vote it down?

#Bill86 #WorkerRights #WSIB #Ontario #InjuredWorkers

Full analysis: 3mpwrapp.ca/blog/bill-86-evidence

4. Support Organizations Fighting for Bill 86’s Return

  • Thunder Bay & District Injured Workers Support Group (Rights Don’t Retire campaign)
  • Office of the Worker Adviser (Province-funded, represents injured workers)
  • ODSP/WSIB Denied (Advocacy group for denied claimants)
  • Workers’ Health & Safety Legal Clinic (Legal support for injured workers)

📚 How to Use Bill 86 Text in Legal Arguments

Persuasive Authority:

Even though Bill 86 didn’t pass, you can cite it to show:

  1. Legislative awareness of systemic problems 2 Contrast with current law (what SHOULD be vs. what IS)
  2. Alignment with case law (Bill 86 codifies Pickering, Rehn, J.T.)

Example Citation:

“The proposed Meredith Act (Fair Compensation for Injured Workers), 2025 (Bill 86, 1st Sess., 44th Leg., Ontario, 2025, First Reading December 8, 2025) would have prohibited employers from terminating workers ‘for the sole reason that the injured worker has suffered a workplace injury’ (s. 16(1)). While Bill 86 did not receive Royal Assent, its introduction demonstrates legislative recognition that current practices—including termination shortly after claim filing—constitute claim suppression. This Tribunal should interpret existing law (WSIA s. 24(1), duty to cooperate) in light of Bill 86’s articulated principles, giving workers the benefit of reasonable doubt per s. 124(2) of the WSIA.”

📖 Related Resources

Knowledge Base Guides:

  • Pickering v. Workers’ Compensation Board, 2025 BCSC 376 - Labour relations exclusion “read down”
  • J.T. v British Columbia (WCAT), 2024 BCSC 994 - Procedural fairness, complete information
  • Rehn Enterprises Ltd. v United Steelworkers, 2018 CanLII 116968 - Privacy rights, no direct IME sharing
  • Caron v. Oshawa, 2001 SCC - Duty to accommodate up to undue hardship
  • WCAT A2002265, 2021 BC - Coercion/intimidation definitions

🔗 Definitions

Workplace Disease (Bill 86, Section 1(3)): Disease where working conditions were a “significant contributing factor” + presumption that exposures are additive

Permanently Injured Worker (Bill 86, Section 1(4)): Worker unable to resume same work due to workplace injury/disease effects

Deemed Income (Bill 86, Section 7(3)): Greater of last year’s earnings OR average of past 5 years (used for lost earnings calculation)

Undue Hardship (Bill 86, Section 16(1)): Point at which employer cannot accommodate worker without unreasonable burden (Caron v. Oshawa, 2001 SCC)

Labour Relations Exclusion: Current WSIB/WSIAT practice of denying mental stress claims caused by “employer decisions” (termination, discipline, etc.) - Bill 86 would have eliminated this via Section 1(3)’s “significant contributing factor” test

📞 Need Help?

For appeals assistance:

  • Office of the Worker Adviser: 1-800-435-8980
  • Workers’ Health & Safety Legal Clinic: 1-877-832-6090

For advocacy:

  • Thunder Bay Injured Workers Support Group: tbiwsg@gmail.com
  • 3mpwrApp Community: empowrapp08162025@gmail.com

For mental health support:

  • Ontario Injured Workers’ Helpline: 1-800-661-2347
  • Crisis Services Canada: 1-833-456-4566

Last updated: April 17, 2026
Bill 86 status confirmed: Shut down at 2nd Reading, December 2025
CanLII analysis based on 11,430 WSIAT decisions (2020-2026)