Salamh v Alberta Health Services
June 11, 2026
Alberta Health Services faces a certified class proceeding alleging systemic violations of employment standards for internationally trained physicians working as Clinical Assistants. In Salamh v Alberta Health Services, 2026 ABKB 442, Justice C.D. Simard certified the action, finding all five elements of the certification test were met – though emphasized this says nothing about the merits of the underlying claims.
Background
Mena Salamh trained as a cardiologist in Egypt and immigrated to Canada in 2013. She works for Alberta Health Services (AHS) as a “Clinical Assistant” (now called “Associate Physician”) – a designation for internationally trained physicians who are not independently licensed to practise in Alberta. Salamh alleged AHS breached the Employment Standards Code by failing to properly pay Clinical Assistants for overtime, failing to provide required rest periods, failing to compensate for “patient handover” work at shift end, and requiring excessively long shifts – allegedly done knowingly, in bad faith, and with misrepresentations about entitlements.
Salamh applied to certify the action as a class proceeding on behalf of all Clinical Assistants employed by AHS since August 12, 2013.
The Decision
Justice Simard applied the five-part certification test under the Class Proceedings Act: (1) a cause of action is disclosed; (2) an identifiable class exists; (3) common issues arise; (4) a class proceeding is the preferable procedure; and (5) the representative plaintiff is adequate. All five elements were satisfied.
The Court emphasized that certification does not test the merits of the underlying claims – it determines only whether the procedural requirements for a class action are met. The action was certified and Salamh was appointed representative plaintiff.
Key Takeaway
Large health-sector employers employing internationally trained professionals under uniform policies should be aware of class action exposure where employment standards compliance is alleged to be systemically deficient. Certification is a procedural step, not a merits finding, but it opens the door to significant liability and reputational risk. Employers should proactively audit overtime, rest period, and shift-end compensation practices – particularly for employee categories that may be vulnerable to exploitation due to their immigration or licensing status.