Barely a quarter of employers have a specific return-to-work policy for employees who develop cancer, and only 7% say they have a structured program for a phased return tailored to this disease. The majority operate on an individual and reactive basis, without an organizational framework specific to cancer.

This is the finding that emerged from the research conducted by Christine Maheu, RN, PhD, Associate Professor at the Ingram School of Nursing, within the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences at McGill University. She also holds a Clinical Scientist position with the Cancer Survivorship Program at Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto.

Together with her colleagues Maureen Parkinson and Naomi Dolgoy from the Cancer and Work resource and collaborators at the Coalition Priorité Cancer au Québec, in partnership with Desjardins, she published the white paper Cancer and Work Employer Study | Employer & Organizational Practices and Experiences: Evaluating worksite capacity to support employees returning to and sustaining work after cancer last January.

This study aims to identify current practices in companies when employees are diagnosed with cancer. It is based on a sample of 150 employers and organizational representatives, the majority of whom are from Quebec and Ontario.

Maheu presented these findings during the panel discussion Cancer and Work: Overcoming Obstacles at the Congrès collectif organized by the Insurance Journal Publishing Group and held on February 26, 2026, at the Palais des congrès de Montréal.

14 out of 100 employees will be diagnosed with cancer

Cancer in the workplace is not a rare occurrence, she demonstrated, backed by statistics. It is estimated that in Canada, 600,000 people of working age are living with cancer. In an organization of 100 employees, approximately 14 will be diagnosed with cancer before retirement.

Following the end of cancer treatment, many individuals report various symptoms: persistent fatigue, brain fog, chronic pain, anxiety and distress, and increased sensitivity to stress. This results in reduced concentration, difficulty keeping up with the pace of work, inconsistent performance, and a need for frequent adjustments.

Returning to work after cancer is a non-linear process, marked by fluctuations in energy and unpredictable side effects, she notes.

Maheu’s study reveals that approximately 24% of organizations have a cancer-specific return-to-work policy. 

If companies do not adapt their practices, she underlined during her presentation, the result is more prolonged absences and, ultimately, more job terminations and burnout among managers. 

Organizations can no longer afford to treat cancer as an isolated event, she adds. It is a governance issue, not just a human resources (HR) or strictly medical problem.

The ability to work after cancer

She explains that the ability to work after cancer is not determined solely by the employee’s health. Other factors include: 

  • the impact on the person’s functioning, the diagnosis, the type of treatment, and pre-existing health conditions;
  • how the individual perceives the impact of cancer on themselves, their attitude toward returning to work, and their new priorities;
  • support, particularly medical, community, and financial support;
  • working conditions.

The study shows that the main organizational challenges identified by employers when an employee with cancer returns to work are: cognitive impairments (56%), fatigue and physical limitations (51%), as well as emotional and psychological needs (43%). 

Most companies not equipped to deal with cancer

Only 7% of the companies surveyed reported having a structured program for a phased return to work tailored to their employee’s clinical condition. The majority, 54%, operate on a case-by-case basis, individually and reactively, without a specific organizational framework for this disease.

Managers want to support their employees who are affected, says Maheu. The willingness is there, but the tools are lacking. The lack of specialized training to deal with this disease is glaring, she says. Fewer than 11% of organizations offer training to their supervisors on the impact of cancer on job performance.

Employers have expressed uncertainty about the long-term effects of cancer; a fear of legal missteps, particularly regarding accommodation obligations; difficulty initiating sensitive conversations on the subject; and, finally, a significant emotional and decision-making burden borne by managers, often without structured support.

68% of employers want tailored tools

The study highlights a strong desire among employers to support their employees affected by cancer, she says, but also that there are numerous shortcomings.

“First, the values are there, but formalized capabilities remain very limited,” says Maheu. “Second, structured support mechanisms are virtually nonexistent, still rarely implemented, or insufficiently evaluated. “Third, 68% of respondents want tools tailored to the reality of cancer. Currently, only 10% offer specific training on this subject.”

“Our results,” she summarizes, “reveal a need for structuring.”

Proactive coordination

The key to a successful return to work is not just medical, but organizational, Maheu points out. When well-coordinated, returns to work go more smoothly, there is less tension, a better experience for the employee, and cases are handled more efficiently. 

Conversely, what prolongs these situations is often not the medical condition, the type, or the stage of the cancer, but organizational interfaces.

A practical tool: the ten-step pathway

The Cancer and Work website (cancerandwork.ca/), developed by Maheu and her colleagues, offers a ten-step pathway to guide the return to work after cancer. 

In the coming months, her team will propose four levers to ensure a more sustainable approach: 

  • formalize a cancer-specific pathway;
  • equip front-line managers;
  • integrate clinical partners and insurers;
  • establish follow-up mechanisms that will allow organizations to learn what works for their employees.

“Organizations are ready,” says Maheu. “The will is there: 57% of respondents say that the cost of accommodations is not the problem. The challenge is more structural and organizational.”