'The goal is that employers will hopefully feel more seen and heard,' says lawyer outlining takeaways for HR
A new Employment Insurance appeals body is expected to give employers a more direct voice in the process — and may prompt more of them to challenge EI decisions they disagree with.
The federal government launched the EI Board of Appeal (EI BOA) on April 1, 2026, replacing the Social Security Tribunal's General Division as the body responsible for hearing first-level EI appeals. The EI BOA will provide clients with their choice of hearing format and is promising timelier, same-day decisions, except in specified circumstances.
"The process is supposed to be more streamlined and balanced and regionally focused,” says Alex Norris, partner at Carbert Waite in Calgary. "As with any change, it is a bit of a wait-and-see."
Being able to process these claims and appeals in a quick and expeditious manner is critically important, according to Bea Bruske, president of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC).
“This means the difference between people being able to meet their needs and pay their bills in a situation where they're without a job for a period of time or not being able to do that,” she says.
“I'm hopeful that this is going to mean quicker resolution of outstanding issues.”
Back to tripartite panel
The central structural change is a shift from single-member decisions to three-person panels. Under the previous system, appeals went first to Service Canada for reconsideration and then to the Social Security Tribunal, where one person made the determination.
"I think involved parties felt that this person may not have appreciated all sides of the dispute," says Norris. "Things were bogged down. People weren't considering workplace realities or regional realities."
The new tripartite model ensures that appeal decisions are made by panels comprised of a presiding member appointed by the Governor in Council, and an employer representative and worker representative.
“I think the goal is that employers will hopefully feel more seen and heard,” she says and the overall process should be quicker.
“The goal is for it to be faster. They're promoting more timely decisions, including same-day decisions in many cases.”
Alongside the EI BOA launch, the government is also eliminating the "leave to appeal" requirement for second-level EI appeals, which previously required parties to seek permission from an Appeal Division member before their case could proceed to that level.
What it means for employers
Employers have 30 days from a Service Canada reconsideration decision to file an appeal with the EI BOA.
While EI appeals are most often initiated by claimants, the new structure creates a more explicit role for employers, according to Norris. With a dedicated employer representative on each panel, companies that disagree with a Service Canada reconsideration decision may be more inclined to challenge it.
"That may make employers feel participation in appeals is more worthwhile," she says. "They may say, ‘If I'm actually going to have someone who thinks about my side of the case, I do want to participate in this appeal and make my views known,’ whereas before they may have just thought, ‘It’s not worth it.’"
A common scenario involves terminations for cause. If an employer notes just cause on a Record of Employment (ROE), Service Canada may initially deny the worker’s EI claim — but then reverse that decision on reconsideration.
"An employer might say, ‘Well, no, we disagree with that and we want to take a stand. We want this to go to the EI Board of Appeal and we want a bit of a hearing to present our case, so to speak, about why there was just cause here,’" says Norris.
Other situations where employers might weigh in include cases where an employee characterizes a departure as constructive dismissal, or where an employer believes a resignation or job abandonment is being misrepresented.
“It's usually where there's an employee left voluntarily and the employee is saying, ‘Well, no, I believe I was constructively dismissed’ or an employee wasn't available for work and now they're trying to claim EI and the employer wants to make clear what they say happened,” she says.
Regional representation with EI appeals
A key feature of the new board is its regional structure, with appeal decisions made by a panel of individuals who have ties to the same region as the worker, taking the reality of local communities into account.
The Canadian Chamber of Commerce welcomed the change, saying it was "particularly encouraged by the focus on regional representation and more timely decisions, which will provide greater certainty for employers and employees alike," according to president and CEO Candace Laing.
Presiding members are being appointed from across the country, rather than a centralized decision-maker, says Norris, citing as an example someone based in Calgary.
"That person, when they're hearing decisions or applications or reconsideration issues, they can speak to what's going on in Calgary, what they're seeing on the ground in terms of what's happening in the workplace, what's happening in industry, what's happening in Calgary or in Alberta."
Bruske says regional context matters especially for workers in smaller or single-industry communities.
"There are regional realities and different industries and sectors of the economy right now that a broad-based, decision-making body doesn't necessarily have the comprehension or the fine understanding of," she says.
“If workers want to have trust in the system that they're going to have a fair shake at for an appeal, then they need to also see that there's some somebody from their region that understands the issues that they're navigating.”
EI changes needed: CLC
While the appeals board changes are appreciated, there are many more things that the CLC would like to see altered when it comes to employment insurance, says Bruske. Just 50% of workers qualify for EI when they apply, and even fewer among young workers, she says.
"The last time our EI system was changed in a significant way was 1996, and I'll tell you that the world of work certainly has changed since 1996,” she says, citing the need for changes around eligibility requirements, longer benefit periods, caps on combining benefits and clawbacks.
