Murray Wood: Who's hot... and who's not
Every Friday, Murray Wood takes a look back at the week's news and decides who's hot... and who's not. This week's list ...
MONTRÉAL — The Federal Court of Appeal has ruled that it’s unconstitutional to deny employment insurance job loss benefits to women who recently received maternity and parental benefits.
The three-judge panel ruled in favour of a group of Quebec women who were denied EI after being laid off shortly before, during, or just after their maternity leaves.
The court sided with a lower tribunal, which had found that some provisions of the Employment Insurance Act violate the section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms that guarantees equal rights for men and women.
Initially, the workers had won their case before the Social Security Tribunal’s general division, but the decision was overturned on appeal.
A summary of the decision says the existing rules create a sex-based distinction that disproportionately affects women because they are the ones who give birth and take the majority of parental leave.
The court has declared the contested provisions of the Employment Insurance Act invalid, but suspended its decision for one year to give the federal government time to adjust the program.
The six female workers mounted a legal case after being told they had not accumulated enough insurable hours to receive EI benefits due to having taken maternity or parental leave close to the time they were laid off.
A summary of the decision says the impact of the EI rules, as written, were discriminatory to women even though they apply to both sexes. That’s because “only women can become pregnant and give birth,” and most people who receive parental benefits are women, it noted.
“The court also found that denying EI job loss benefits to women who have recently received maternity and parental benefits perpetuates the long-standing economic disadvantage associated with pregnancy and motherhood by diminishing unemployment protection available to women precisely because they bear children and assume childcare responsibilities after giving birth,” the decision summary read.
“Under the EI Act, the price for receiving maternity and parental benefits is the loss of job loss benefits for those in the applicants’ situation, and this price is disproportionately paid by women.”
The women had all testified in court that their job loss and EI denial created financial problems that forced them to use savings, rely on their partners, or borrow from loved ones. They also testified on how they felt the provisions of the EI law discriminate against women who have children.
The Mouvement Action-Chômage de Montréal, an advocacy organization that led the challenge on behalf of the plaintiffs, welcomed the decision but noted the federal government has 60 days to indicate whether it will try to bring the case to the Supreme Court of Canada.
“At MAC, we believe it would be shameful for the Carney government to appeal this ruling, as its predecessor did. It would be a slap in the face to the six women we have supported for the past seven years, but also to the hundreds, if not thousands, of others across Canada who are currently awaiting this decision because they find themselves in the same situation,” said Fanny Labelle, a mobilization and community engagement coordinator, in a social media post.
A spokesperson for Employment and Social Development Canada said the federal government would carefully review the decision before deciding on its next steps.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 4, 2026.
Lia Lévesque, The Canadian Press
