Questions sometimes arise about whether teachers can or should provide medical services or administer medication to students. While these situations often stem from genuine concern for students’ well-being, they also raise important legal, professional, and safety issues.

The Alberta Teachers’ Association’s Position

The Alberta Teachers’ Association (Association) has a clear and long-standing position on this matter: teachers should not be responsible for providing medical services or administering medication to students on a regular or ongoing basis. These responsibilities are not part of educational duties and require specialized medical training, dedicated time, and appropriate supports.

Medical services in schools should be delivered by trained and competent health-care personnel, with suitable systems in place to ensure continuity, backup support, and safe administration.

Legal Framework: Education Act and Responsibilities

Under the Education Act, students in Alberta have the right to access education. In some cases, this may require school divisions to ensure that necessary medical supports are provided so that a student can attend and participate meaningfully in school.

However, it is critical to distinguish responsibilities:

• School divisions (employers) might need to provide medical supports when necessary to ensure access to education.
• Teachers, under the act, are responsible for instruction and supervision, including carrying out assigned duties; however, providing medical care is not an instructional function.

This distinction is fundamental. The obligation to ensure access to education may be present— but it is the responsibility of the school division, not individual teachers.

Duty of Care and Legal Risk

Canadian case law, including cited decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, establishes that teachers owe students a “reasonably careful parent” standard of care, tailored to a student’s specific needs.

The following are critical points:

• When teachers assume responsibility for students with medical needs, the standard of care naturally increases.
• This increased responsibility requires being more vigilant in preventing and responding to foreseeable medical issues.
• If a teacher becomes involved in administering treatment or managing a medical regime, they might face extra legal liability. In practical terms, this creates a significant risk exposure when teachers take on roles for which they are neither trained nor employed. Emergency Versus Ongoing Medical Care There is a significant legal difference between emergency and ongoing medical care:
• In an unforeseen emergency, teachers are expected to act reasonably, as any prudent person would. Good Samaritan protections (for example, under emergency aid legislation) may apply. However, having certification in a specific area, such as first aid, could increase the level of accountability since the member has received training and is expected to use it reasonably.
• Ongoing or foreseeable medical needs entail greater liability, particularly when a known condition requires planned intervention, monitoring, or medication.

What Should a Teacher Do?

When a teacher is directed or expected to provide medical services, they should follow these steps:

1. Raise concerns with the principal about the suitability of the assignment.
2. Request that qualified personnel be assigned to address the student’s medical needs.
3. Contact Teacher Employment Membership Support (TEMS) if the issue remains unresolved or if further guidance is needed.
4. Where necessary, clarify the scope of responsibility, especially if appropriate medical supports are not available.

Minimizing Risk and Liability

Teachers can lessen exposure by

• avoiding involvement in administering medication or medical treatment unless properly trained, supported and directed within an appropriate framework;
• ensuring that clear protocols, training and consent are in place where any involvement is expected; and
• recognizing that accepting responsibility, whether explicitly or implicitly, may heighten legal obligations and expectations of care.

WORTH SHARING

Teachers are dedicated to supporting students, but providing medical care is not part of their professional responsibilities. Although school divisions may be responsible for ensuring students have access to education, including arranging necessary medical supports, this duty does not fall on teachers.

When teachers perform medical duties, even informally, they may be subject to a higher legal standard of care and face increased liability. The Association’s position is clear: medical services should be provided by trained health professionals, with appropriate supports in place. Teachers asked to carry out such services should raise concerns and seek help through TEMS (1-800-2327208) to ensure both student safety and their own professional protection.

Read the full Worth Knowing.
#WeAreATA 

The collective agreement aims to encompass all members of a bargaining unit and ensure they receive fair provisions. Sometimes, clauses within the agreement require decision making and may necessitate an arbitrator to interpret the language. These clauses can cause issues, especially if they lead to conflicts among members of the same bargaining unit by limiting their entitlements under the agreement. 

In a school setting, the principal holds a significant level of responsibility, as they oversee the school’s operation. In general, or in unionized environments, those in high-responsibility roles typically make decisions about their employees’ working conditions, rather than just implementing relevant policies. However, such a “manager” role is not consistent with the collegial environment that should be promoted in Alberta schools. In a school setting, school leaders (including principals, vice-principals, and assistant principals) can be seen as having a similar role since they oversee the school’s operations. Nevertheless, school leaders are teachers’ colleagues, not their managers.

While school leaders play a key role in guiding decisions about their schools, being the final decision maker can put them in a tough position, potentially causing conflicts with other bargaining unit members because of their role as agents of the division.

A common area where this occurs is with leaves of absence. Inclement weather language is a specific example. It is not uncommon to find language that states “in the opinion of the teacher” or “after making reasonable efforts” in clauses that require members to assess their situation and make decisions. While some language grants full autonomy to the teacher, other clauses specify that the final decision rests with someone else.

While the language of the collective agreement will specify who makes the decision on an entitlement, as previously mentioned, it should not have bargaining unit members making sole entitlement decisions for other members of the same bargaining unit. Even in cases where the language delegates authority, that delegation should not place a school leader in the role of manager and sole decision maker. 

The Association has an arbitration award from an Edmonton Public grievance regarding leave of absence decisions that supports this stance. The main responsibility of a school leader should be to inform the decision, not to act as the final authority on entitlement. However, some agreements include language that gives the administrator a more prominent decision-making role than is ideal.

If the language clearly states that the decision maker is the superintendent or other central office personnel, but they have arbitrarily assigned that responsibility to an administrator, this process should be challenged. If the language identifies the “Superintendent or designate” as the decision-maker and an administrator has been appointed as the final decider, the Edmonton Public arbitration decision should be submitted to the employer, and efforts should be made to resolve the issue based on the award. When the language explicitly lists the administrator as the decision maker, we must adhere to that language until it can be negotiated out of the collective agreement. 

​No matter who the decision maker is, they act as an agent of the division and must make decisions reasonably. The grievance-arbitration process is available to address any clause in the collective agreement where a breach is believed to have occurred, regardless of who made the decision.

WORTH SHARING

Collective agreement language details entitlements and provisions for teachers. Whenever possible and when the language requires, the employer should make decisions. School leaders should inform staff of their decisions but should not be responsible for final decisions on entitlements for colleagues because colleagues are not managers. Members with concerns should contact Teacher Employment Membership Support at 1-800-232-7208. 

Read the full Worth Knowing.
#WeAreATA 

​Members who disagree with an Alberta School Employee Benefit Plan (ASEBP) decision have access to two formal but distinct appeal processes: Total Disability and Policy Appeals. Each applies in different circumstances and has specific procedural limits. An infographic of the processes is attached at the end of this Worth Knowing for your reference and is also available here.

Total Disability Appeals

These appeals involve decisions on Extended Disability Benefits (EDB) concerning whether a member is considered totally disabled. They are often based on different interpretations of existing medical information. While the appeal primarily concerns the member, teachers may, if they wish, access support from Teacher Employment Membership Support (TEMS) to prepare for and present their appeal.

You may appeal if your EDB application is denied or your claim is terminated. The appeal involves reviewing your claim file (which will be shared with you), and you have the right to attend the hearing and bring a representative.

Appeals must be filed within 60 calendar days of the decision. While extensions may be granted in certain limited cases, timelines are important.

A key limitation is that new medical information cannot be directly added to an appeal. Any new evidence must first be reviewed by your adjudicator or case manager. If the decision stays the same, the appeal continues with the updated file.

Decisions are final. ASEBP does not provide reasons for appeal outcomes.

Policy Appeals

Policy appeals concern coverage and claims unrelated to Total Disability. Only the covered member is allowed to appeal, even if the issue concerns one of their dependants. Appeals are typically considered when there is disagreement with how evidence was interpreted (eg, medical information or eligibility criteria), or when a member can demonstrate both medical necessity and extenuating circumstances that lead to hardship.

Requests must be submitted within 60 calendar days. ASEBP will decide if the situation qualifies as a Policy Appeal and what information is needed.

Important Consideration

ASEBP appeals are structured and limited. They are not forums for introducing entirely new arguments at the appeal stage and outcomes are not accompanied by detailed explanations. Members considering an appeal should act promptly, ensure their documentation is complete and seek advice if needed. TEMS can assist with understanding the process and next steps.

Worth Sharing

ASEBP offers two appeal pathways—Total Disability and Policy Appeals—that must be initiated within 60 days and are mostly based on existing information. Members can participate and provide representation, but new evidence must be reviewed before an appeal can proceed, and decisions are final without detailed explanations. Acting promptly and understanding these limits is crucial. An infographic summarising the appeal processes is available here and can be shared as needed. If you have questions, contact Teacher Employment Membership Support and speak with one of our duty officers at 1-800-232-7208.

Read the full Worth Knowing.

#WeAreATA 

Employee and Family Assistance Programs (EFAPs) are a vital part of teachers’ overall compensation and wellness support. These programs offer confidential, professional services to assist teachers and their dependants in managing personal, family, financial and mental health issues.

While EFAP services are available across Alberta school divisions, they are not provided by a single supplier. Most Alberta teachers access EFAP services through the Alberta School Employee Benefit Plan (ASEBP), which partners with GreenShield. However, teachers in Calgary Public, Calgary Catholic and Fort McMurray Catholic school divisions access EFAP services through different providers. Although these programs aim to offer similar support, the specific services and access points might differ. Members in these divisions should check directly with their employer’s EFAP provider for details.

For teachers covered by ASEBP, EFAP services are provided through GreenShield and available to both the member and their dependants. These services aim to offer timely, confidential support across a wide range of needs.

For ASEBP coverage, a dependant includes both eligible children and a spouse or partner. A spouse or partner must be either legally married to the member or in an adult interdependent relationship. Eligible children must be registered under a parent’s provincial health care plan and meet specific criteria. This includes children under age 21 who are unmarried and financially dependent on a parent (including adopted children, eligible foster children and wards of the court), as well as children under age 25 who are unmarried full-time students enrolled in three or more courses per semester. Coverage may also extend to adult children who are unmarried, unemployed and dependent due to a mental or physical disability. Members who are unsure about eligibility should confirm their specific circumstances with ASEBP.

ASEBP and GreenShield EFAP Services

A key feature of the ASEBP EFAP is that it offers free access to a variety of professionals, with service hours that reset each year on January 1. This includes support from mental health experts, dietitians, financial advisors, legal professionals and other wellness practitioners.

Mental health support is a vital part of the program. Members and their dependants can access short-term counselling for issues like anxiety, depression, burnout and personal stressors. This includes individual counselling, as well as couples and family counselling. If more help is needed beyond the available EFAP hours, members can continue treatment with the same provider and seek reimbursement through their extended health benefits, according to plan rules.

Alongside traditional counselling, the EFAP offers targeted supports such as culturally appropriate counselling services for Indigenous members and families, specialized children’s mental health programs and structured digital tools like cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT) modules and resilience-building programs.

Beyond mental health, the program offers what can best be described as “total health and life services.” Members can access professional advice and coaching on nutrition, career planning, major life transitions and overall wellness. Financial and legal consultation services are also available, often on an unlimited or expanded-access basis, providing practical guidance on debt management, retirement planning, estate matters and family law.

GreenShield provides crisis support at all times, ensuring immediate help is available 24/7.

Accessing EFAP Services

ASEBP-covered members can access EFAP services by registering through the GreenShield platform or by contacting their support line directly. To get started, visit https://asebp.ca/efap/. Once registered, members can choose providers, book services and explore supports tailored to their needs. ASEBP-covered members can contact ASEBP at 1-877-431-4786 or email [email protected], and a benefit specialist will assist you.

Members who are not covered by ASEBP should access EFAP services through their employer specific provider:

• Calgary Public Schools:: Telus Health 
by going to https://one.telushealth.com or
by calling 1-833-754-3702

• Calgary Catholic School Division: Employer-managed EFAP 
on the Intranet, by selecting Departments > Human Resources > Employee Benefits > Employee & Family Assistance Program or,
by calling the EFAP administrator at 403-500-2774

• Fort McMurray Catholic Schools: Homewood Health
by going to https://homewoodpathfinder.com/employee-assistance-program/ or 
by calling 1-844-959-2917

Because service models vary, members in these divisions should confirm their coverage details directly with their provider.

WORTH SHARING

EFAP services are a valuable but often underused benefit for teachers. They aim to offer early, preventive support, helping members resolve issues before they become more serious and require extended leave or medical care.

At the same time, it is important to recognize that EFAP services are short-term, solutionfocused supports. They are not meant to replace ongoing clinical care when more intensive or specialized treatment is necessary.

Teachers with questions about accessing EFAP services, available supports or coverage details should contact their EFAP provider directly.

Teachers who require guidance on how EFAP services interact with their benefits, or who need support navigating ASEBP or other group health benefit providers, are encouraged to contact Teacher Employment Membership Support (TEMS) at 1-800-232-7208.

Read the full Worth Knowing.
#WeAreATA 

A recent copyright infringement letter received by one of our locals highlights an issue that is becoming increasingly common and enforceable. In this case, a law firm acting for a copyright owner claimed that an image on a local website had been used without permission. The firm sought financial compensation to resolve the matter. The letter referenced potential statutory damages of up to $20,000 under the Copyright Act and offered to settle the matter for a lower amount if the matter were resolved promptly.

These types of letters are not scams. They form part of a legitimate and expanding enforcement system. Copyright owners and their representatives, often collaborating with rights management agencies, now employ automated and artificial intelligence (AI) tools to scan websites and detect unauthorized use of their images. While pursuing full legal action can be expensive, this approach relies on handling many cases with smaller settlements. As a result, these issues should not be overlooked, as they pose real legal and financial risks and can escalate if left unaddressed.

Understanding Copyright in Canada

Under Canada’s Copyright Act, the creator of an original work—including photographs and images—has the exclusive right to reproduce, publish and distribute that work. The fundamental principle is simple: content available online is not free to use unless permission has been granted or a clear exception applies.

Classroom Use versus Public or Commercial Use

For teachers, the main difference is between using such material in the classroom and in public or for commercial purposes.

In the classroom, teachers benefit from “fair dealing” provisions, which permit limited use of copyrighted material for purposes such as education, research, and private study. Practically, a teacher may display or use an image as part of instruction without needing permission, as long as the use is directly related to teaching and not shared beyond that context.

However, fair dealing is limited and specific to its purpose. It does not apply to wider or publicfacing uses.

When a teacher works outside the classroom, such as contributing to a local website, posting materials online, or creating resources for sale, the legal context changes. These activities are considered public and often commercial. In these cases, fair dealing will almost never apply, and permission or proper licensing is required.

Risks most often occur in these situations. Many teachers switch between classroom and organizational roles without fully understanding that the rules for material use differ. An image that is completely suitable for a lesson might lead to legal issues if published on a publicly accessible website.

A Clear Guideline for Practice

Locals and members should operate on a clear and practical assumption:

If an image is being used outside of direct classroom instruction, it should be assumed that permission or a valid licence is required for its use, unless it is explicitly marked as free to use.

Use outside of direct classroom instruction includes but is not limited to

• local or division websites;
• newsletters, reports or publications;
• social media accounts;
• conference or presentation materials shared publicly; and
• resources created for sale or distribution.

In these situations, the safest approach is to use properly licensed images, images obtained through approved subscriptions, or materials explicitly marked as open to use (such as certain Creative Commons resources with proper attribution). Sometimes, it may not be clear who owns the rights to an image. A third party might claim to represent the rights holder and, although they may give “permission for use,” they might not be authorized to do so. It’s always best to have documentation of any approval received.

Why This Matters Now

The enforcement landscape has changed. AI tools now enable copyright owners to quickly and widely identify unauthorized use, even for content that has been online for years. Once an image is publicly available, removing all its copies can be difficult, which increases the likelihood of detection.

This increases the chance that unauthorized use, particularly on websites and public-facing materials, will lead to a demand letter like the one mentioned above.

Practical Takeaway

Teachers can continue to rely on fair dealing for classroom instruction. However, when operating in any public, organizational, or revenue-generating setting, a different standard applies. The most secure and justifiable approach is to assume permission is required unless it is explicitly proven otherwise.

WORTH SHARING

A recent copyright infringement letter to a local highlights that while teachers can use images in their classrooms under fair dealing, these rules do not cover websites, social media, or materials that are shared publicly or sold. Copyright holders are increasingly using AI to detect unauthorized online use of images and to pursue settlements through volume-based enforcement. These claims are legitimate and should not be ignored. 

The main point is that classroom use is considered different from public or commercial use, and any image used outside the classroom should be assumed to require permission or a valid licence. If you or your local office receive a demand letter or other communication related to copyright, it is advisable to contact Teacher Employment Membership Support for assistance at 1-800-232-7208. 

Read the full Worth Knowing.

#WeAreATA