HLDAA Interest Arbitration – Hospitals

April – June 2026

This report summarizes 8 hospital-sector interest arbitration decisions issued between March and June 2026. Each case summary sets out the employer and bargaining unit, the term of the collective agreement, the key provisions awarded, and the board’s rationale.

 

Hospital Sector Trends Analysis

Key observations:

  • ONA Local Issue Awards (2024–2026 agreements): Several hospital awards (London Health Sciences, Queensway-Carleton, Royal Ottawa, West Nipissing, Women’s College) address ONA local issues including scheduling, premiums, reassignment, and operational flexibility language.
  • Service Worker Interest Arbitrations: Hospital service worker awards (Humber River Health, Compass Group at Runnymede) for 2024–2026 agreements tend to track central hospital comparator patterns for wages, with the 3.5% GWI norm for 2025 and 2026 evident.
  • HCSA Implementation: The Participating Hospitals (OHA) v OCHU/CUPE case addresses Health Care Spending Account implementation, a benefit that was introduced in the 2023–2024 round and generated an interpretation dispute.
  • Premium and Scheduling Issues: Hospital local issues in the 2024–2026 agreements frequently involve weekend premiums, shift premiums, responsibility pay, charge pay, and scheduling flexibility.

 

Hospital Case Summaries

1. Humber River Health v National Organized Workers Union

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 25185 (ON LA)

Date: March 16, 2026

Arbitrators

Matthew R. Wilson (Chair)

Irv Kleiner (Employer Nominee)

Jacqueline Watson (Union Nominee)

Employees Covered

Service workers represented by the National Organized Workers Union (NOWU).

Duration of Collective Agreement

October 2024 to October 2026 (two-year renewal agreement)

What Was Awarded

  • General wage increases of 3.0% + 2.25% following the Central Hospital–SEIU pattern.
  • Evening and night shift differentials mirroring the Central Hospital–SEIU agreement rates.
  • Health Spending Account of $100 introduced effective January 2026.
  • Quarantine/isolation language updated.
  • Severance and retirement options maintained with language updates.
  • Letters of Understanding renewed.

Rationale

The board applied the Central Hospital–SEIU collective agreement as the primary comparator for this hospital service unit, consistent with the principle that HLDAA hospital awards should track the central hospital pattern. The 3.0%+2.25% wage structure and shift differentials replicated the SEIU central pattern. The HSA introduction was consistent with the broader hospital sector trend.

Dissents

Both the employer nominee and union nominee dissented.

 

2. The Participating Hospitals v OCHU/CUPE

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 42071 (ON LA)

Date: May 8, 2026

Arbitrators

William Kaplan (Sole Arbitrator)

Employees Covered

Hospital support and service employees represented by OCHU/CUPE at participating hospitals province-wide.

Duration of Collective Agreement

N/A (implementation dispute regarding existing HCSA provision, not an interest arbitration setting new terms)

What Was Awarded

Arbitrator ruled that the Health Care Spending Account (HCSA) is subject to the standard 25% employee cost-sharing contribution requirement applicable to other extended health benefits under the Central Hospital Agreement. Union grievance dismissed. The HCSA operates on the same cost-sharing basis as other employer-provided extended health benefits.

Rationale

The central question was whether the HCSA, introduced as part of the Central Hospital Agreement, was intended to be a fully employer-funded benefit or whether it was subject to the same 25% employee contribution requirement as other extended health benefits. Arbitrator Kaplan found that the HCSA was structured as part of the extended health benefits package and that nothing in the agreement language or negotiating history suggested it was meant to be exempt from cost-sharing.

Dissents

None (sole arbitrator)

 

3. Royal Ottawa Health Care Group v Ontario Nurses’ Association

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 30890 (ON LA)

Date: March 30, 2026

Arbitrators

Colin Johnston (Chair)

Philip Abbink (Union Nominee)

Brett Christen (Employer Nominee)

Employees Covered

Registered nurses and nurse practitioners represented by the Ontario Nurses’ Association at the Royal Ottawa.

Duration of Collective Agreement

April 2025 to March 2027 (two-year term, local issues only; central issues governed by ONA Central Hospital Agreement)

What Was Awarded

Local scheduling issue determined: part-time nurse scheduling categories established as two distinct types – Regular Part-time nurses and Casual Part-time nurses. Casual Part-time nurses may declare non-availability for work on specified days three weeks in advance of posted schedule. This creates a more flexible structure for part-time nursing staffing while providing clarity on availability expectations.

Rationale

The board balanced the hospital’s need for reliable part-time staffing coverage against nurses’ desire for flexibility in managing their availability commitments.

Dissents

Both the employer nominee and union nominee dissented in part.

 

4. West Nipissing General Hospital v Ontario Nurses’ Association

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 30886 (ON LA)

Date: March 30, 2026

Arbitrators

Colin Johnston (Chair)

Philip Abbink (Union Nominee)

Brett Christen (Employer Nominee)

Employees Covered

Approximately 34 registered nurses represented by the Ontario Nurses’ Association at West Nipissing General Hospital.

Duration of Collective Agreement

April 2025 to March 2027 (two-year term, local issues only; central issues governed by ONA Central Hospital Agreement)

What Was Awarded

Two local issues determined: compensation for consecutive tours and premium hours offering language. Awarded language providing premium pay shall be paid ‘on the eighth (8th) consecutive and subsequent tours until such time that one (1) day is scheduled off.  Offering of premium hours language modified to state that ‘a nurse will not be considered for shift(s) if it would result in an enhanced premium position’. This prevents nurses from being called in for additional premium-rate shifts when doing so would place them in an enhanced (double) premium pay position.

Rationale

Board awarded normative language consistent with other northern hospitals.

Dissents

Both the employer nominee and union nominee dissented in part.

 

5. Women’s College Hospital v Ontario Nurses’ Association

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 30885 (ON LA)

Date: March 30, 2026

Arbitrators

Colin Johnston (Chair)

Philip Abbink (Union Nominee)

Brett Christen (Employer Nominee)

Employees Covered

Registered Nurses represented by the Ontario Nurses’ Association at Women’s College Hospital.

Duration of Collective Agreement

April 2025 to March 2027 (two-year term, local issues only; central issues governed by ONA Central Hospital Agreement)

What Was Awarded

Two local issues determined: (1) Scheduling initiative language: provisions governing nurse scheduling programs and the conditions under which they may be implemented and modified. (2) Part-time additional shifts distribution (Article D.7): updated language stipulating that Employer not required to offer tours which would result in overtime premium.

Rationale

Board awarded normative language consistent with other hospitals.

Dissents

Both the employer nominee and union nominee dissented in part.

 

6. London Health Sciences Centre v Ontario Nurses’ Association

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 30888 (ON LA)

Date: March 31, 2026

Arbitrators

Colin Johnston (Chair)

Philip Abbink (Union Nominee)

Brett Christen (Employer Nominee)

Employees Covered

Registered Nurses represented by the Ontario Nurses’ Association at London Health Sciences Centre.

Duration of Collective Agreement

April 2025 to March 2027 (two-year term, local issues only; central issues governed by ONA Central Hospital Agreement)

What Was Awarded

One local issue determined: consecutive weekend premium language. Awarded: ‘A nurse will not receive consecutive or subsequent weekend premium if entitlement to such premium results directly or indirectly from an exchange of shifts with another nurse.’

Rationale

The central issue was whether the consecutive weekend premium should apply when a premium-eligible shift results from a nurse voluntarily exchanging shifts. The board found that the Hospital raised a genuine need to address the issue of rising premiums in this area.

Dissents

The union nominee dissented, arguing the language improperly limits nurses’ entitlements and was inconsistent with the principle of replication.

 

7. Queensway-Carleton Hospital v Ontario Nurses’ Association

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 30889 (ON LA)

Date: March 31, 2026

Arbitrators

Colin Johnston (Chair)

Philip Abbink (Union Nominee)

Brett Christen (Employer Nominee)

Employees Covered

Registered Nurses represented by the Ontario Nurses’ Association at Queensway-Carleton Hospital.

Duration of Collective Agreement

April 2025 to March 2027 (two-year term, local issues only; central issues governed by ONA Central Hospital Agreement)

What Was Awarded

One local issue determined: nurse reassignment consecutive tours provision extended. Under Article J-12(c), the maximum number of consecutive tours to which a nurse may be reassigned increased from 2 to 4, providing the hospital with greater operational flexibility for managing nurse reassignments during staffing shortages.

Rationale

The board found that extending the consecutive reassignment limit from 2 to 4 tours was operationally necessary to address staffing challenges at this hospital, particularly given the ongoing nursing shortage. The change balanced the hospital’s need for flexible staffing deployment against the union’s concern about the burden placed on individual nurses through reassignment.

Dissents

The union nominee dissented, arguing that extending reassignment to four consecutive tours places an unreasonable burden on nurses and goes beyond what is justified by operational need.

 

8. Compass Group at Runnymede Healthcare Centre v SEIU, Local 1 Canada

CanLII Citation: 2026 CanLII 38528 (ON LA)

Date: April 24, 2026

Arbitrators

Jesse Kugler (Chair)

Graeme Imrie (Employer Nominee)

Simran Prihar (Union Nominee)

Description of Employer

Compass Group, a food services contractor operating at Runnymede Healthcare Centre, a complex continuing care hospital in Toronto, Ontario.

Employees Covered

Food services employees (dietary aides, retail associates, kitchen staff) represented by SEIU Local 1 Canada at Runnymede Healthcare Centre.

Duration of Collective Agreement

October 2024 to October 2026 (two-year renewal agreement)

What Was Awarded

  • General wage increases of 3.0% in each year. Retail Associate special wage adjustment bringing rate to $23.00/hr.
  • Infectious disease protection language added.
  • Vision benefit increased to $450.
  • Chiropractic and massage benefit increased to $450.
  • Health Spending Account of $100 introduced.
  • Orthodontics coverage increased to $2,000.
  • RRSP employer matching improved from 50% to 100% (maximum 4% of earnings).
  • Weekend premium increase to $3.14/hr.

Rationale

Board applied the well-established criteria set out in ss. 9(1.1) of the HLDAA, as well as the principles of replication, comparability, demonstrated need, and total compensation.

Dissents

The union nominee dissented on the RRSP issue, stating that the HOOPP was the appropriate sector norm.

 

Webinars

Our complimentary webinars address the practical and legal issues for Canadian employers.

View our Webinars