Canada’s nonprofit sector is facing a quiet mental health crisis. A 2024 YMCA surveys show that 71 per cent of nonprofit leaders report experiencing burnout, along with 58 per cent of non-executive employees.

The human and economic costs of workplace mental health failures are well established: burnout, anxiety and chronic stress drive turnover, disability claims and lost productivity across the economy.

What deserves closer scrutiny — particularly in a city like Ottawa — is why these pressures are so acute in civil society organizations.

Ottawa is home to hundreds of national charities and associations.

These organizations form a critical part of Canada’s civic infrastructure. In the National Capital Region alone they employ thousands of people responsible for delivering programs, managing partnerships and sustaining national missions.

Yet inside many of these institutions the operational reality is stark.

Most run with small staff teams overseen by volunteer boards whose members are spread across the country. In principle, boards do not manage the day-to-day work of these organizations. But they are expected to set the tone, direction and expectations under which that work takes place.

Their role is to set strategy, align mission with resources, provide oversight of management and manage risk. In short, they define the governance environment in which staff operate.

When governance provides strategic clarity and facilitates operational alignment, organizations can thrive even with limited resources.

When it does not, the consequences are predictable.

And that is where the problem lies: in smaller organizations, volunteer boards often lack the knowledge and understanding of best practices needed to fulfill their duties.

In organizations this small, workplace mental health is not a peripheral issue. It is an operational and legal risk — exactly the kind of issue that should be at the top of every board’s docket.

Burnout rarely appears overnight. It grows in organizations where direction is unclear, goals are unrealistic and success is defined by constantly shifting markers.

Yet Canada’s statutory framework governing nonprofits offers little practical guidance about the responsibilities of boards when workplace mental health begins to deteriorate.

Thousands of nonprofit organizations operate under the federal Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act, which came into force in 2011. The Act requires directors to act honestly, in good faith and with reasonable care.

Those duties matter. But they are written in broad terms and say little about the board’s responsibility when governance itself becomes a source of workplace harm.

In many sectors of the economy, employment law evolves through litigation. Disputes reach the courts, judges interpret statutory duties and over time a body of case law emerges that helps employers and employees understand their obligations.

The nonprofit sector works differently. Most organizations are small, mission-driven and financially fragile. Public litigation can threaten donor confidence and reputational trust, while the costs of prolonged legal battles can quickly overwhelm limited budgets.

As a result, many disputes are settled quietly before they ever reach a courtroom.

The result is a legal catch-22: workplace harm exists, but expedience is often favoured over adjudication. The broad workplace safety duties written into the Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act are therefore seldom interpreted in ways that allow the law to evolve and provide practical guidance to boards.

Prevention would not only protect employees, it would also strengthen the sector itself.

Clear governance reduces costly staff turnover and stabilizes leadership. It preserves institutional knowledge and improves program continuity. It forces organizations to align their ambitions with the resources they actually have.

In a sector responsible for delivering public goods, that kind of clarity improves services for the communities these institutions exist to serve.

Now, more than a decade after Parliament adopted the new rules, it is reasonable to ask how well they have served the sector — and the people who work within it.

The Canada Not-for-profit Corporations Act should be amended to make explicit that boards are responsible for overseeing workplace health and safety, including psychological health and psychosocial risks.

Mandatory governance training for directors of federally incorporated nonprofit organizations should also become standard.

None of this is about blaming volunteer board members. Most serve with dedication and good intentions. But in small organizations, governance failures and shocks are not absorbed by systems. They are absorbed by people.

Charities and nonprofit organizations play a vital role in Canada’s civic life. Ensuring that the boards that lead them understand and can fulfill their responsibilities for workplace health is not regulatory overreach.

It is basic stewardship of institutions the public relies on — and a recognition that the people who sustain them are not disposable.