In autumn 2021, the Canadian federal government directed federally-regulated employers to implement mandatory vaccination policies requiring their employees to receive injections of a COVID-19 vaccine.
Many employees across the country refused to be vaccinated and were subsequently fired or suspended without pay. When these employees applied for Employment Insurance (EI) benefits from the federal government, their applications were denied on the government’s stated basis that refusal to be vaccinated constituted “misconduct” pursuant to the Employment Insurance Act (“EI Act”).
The Social Security Tribunal of Canada (SST) and the courts have upheld the government’s denial of EI in cases of employee firings and suspensions for refusing vaccination.
In November 2021, Joseph Hickey was suspended without pay from his job as a Data Scientist at the Bank of Canada for refusing to receive a COVID-19 vaccination.
After being suspended without pay for refusing vaccination, Hickey applied to the federal government for EI benefits. The Canada Employment Insurance Commission (CEIC) rejected Hickey’s application, deciding that his refusal to be vaccinated constituted “misconduct” under the Employment Insurance Act, thus disqualifying him from EI.
Hickey appealed the CEIC’s decision to the SST and subsequently to the Federal Court.
This page links to key documents in Hickey’s case.
Canada Employment Insurance Commission (CEIC)
2021-11-22: Hickey is suspended without pay for refusing vaccination by his employer the Bank of Canada.
2021-11-25: Hickey applies for EI benefits to Service Canada.
2022-04-04: Canada Employment Insurance Commission (CEIC) denies Hickey’s application for EI benefits on the basis that he “voluntarily left work without just cause” pursuant to the EI Act.
2022-05-03: Hickey requests a reconsideration of the CEIC’s decision of April 4, 2022.
2022-06-17: The CEIC upholds its decision to deny Hickey EI benefits but changes the reason for its decision from “voluntarily left work without just cause” to “misconduct” pursuant to the EI Act.
Social Security Tribunal (SST)
2022-07-15: Hickey appeals the CEIC’s decision of June 17, 2022 to the SST General Division. In his appeal to the SST, Hickey includes a Notice of Constitutional Question challenging the constitutionality of the “misconduct” provisions of the EI Act.
2023-01-23: Hickey files an Amended Notice of Constitutional Question challenging the constitutionality of the “misconduct” provisions of the EI Act.
2023-04-07: SST General Division decision barring Hickey’s constitutional challenge without ever hearing the legal arguments.
2023-09-12: SST General Division hearing of Hickey’s appeal of denial of EI benefits.
2023-11-23: SST General Division decision denying Hickey EI benefits (decision on merits).
2024-04-30: SST Appeal Division decision granting Hickey leave to appeal the SST General Division’s April 7, 2023 decision not to hear his constitutional claim.
2024-09-27: Hickey files his Amended Application for Leave to Appeal the SST General Division’s November 23, 2023 decision to deny EI benefits.
2025-04-28: SST Appeal Division decision dismissing Hickey’s appeal of the SST General Division’s decision of April 7, 2023 barring Hickey’s constitutional challenge of the “misconduct” provisions of the EI Act.
2025-05-07: SST Appeal Division decision denying leave to appeal the SST General Division’s decision of November 23, 2023 denying Hickey EI benefits.
Federal Court
2025-05-28: Hickey files his Notice of Application for judicial review of the SST Appeal Division’s decision of May 7, 2025.
2025-10-08: Hickey’s Memorandum of Fact and Law for his judicial review.
2025-11-04 The Respondent (Attorney General of Canada)’s Memorandum of Fact and Law in Hickey’s judicial review.
2026-02-23: Hearing of Hickey’s judicial review at the Federal Court in Ottawa. A copy of the text of Hickey’s oral submissions at the hearing is available here. The official audio recording of the hearing produced by the Court is available here.
2026-03-06: Federal Court Justice Simon Fothergill’s decision dismissing Hickey’s judicial review of the SST’s decision to deny him EI benefits.
