Please consider supporting the Declaration and Call to Action for Workforce Safety, Labour Protections, Governance Accountability, and Practitioner Representation For BC RMTs.

This declaration is the result of months of research, stakeholder outreach, workforce analysis, contract review, safety advocacy, and discussions with practitioners across the profession.

It calls for action on workforce safety, worker classification, labour protections, safe reporting and anti-retaliation protections, governance accountability, transparency, and meaningful practitioner representation. 

We cannot simultaneously acknowledge the realities of harassment, sexual violence, retaliation, false allegations, unsafe working conditions, and professional vulnerability while defending workforce structures that leave practitioners without many of the labour protections, reporting mechanisms, and accountability systems available to workers in virtually every other regulated healthcare profession.

These issues do not exist in isolation. They are interconnected structural issues that shape how responsibility, control, accountability, and risk are distributed throughout the profession. The consequences are reflected in practitioner safety, inconsistent worker protections, barriers to reporting, fear of retaliation, workforce instability, and gaps in accountability.

If therapist safety matters, workforce structure matters.

If worker protection matters, classification matters.

If accountability matters, responsibility must follow control.

These are not separate conversations.

If you support meaningful action on these issues, please read, share, and sign.

Longer Version: 
Workforce Safety, Labour Protections, Governance Accountability, and Practitioner Representation in Massage Therapy

We, the undersigned Registered Massage Therapists, students, educators, former practitioners, patients, and supporters of the profession, make the following declaration.

The current workforce model within massage therapy is failing to adequately protect practitioners, support workforce sustainability, provide meaningful representation, and ensure clear accountability for workplace safety.

The massage therapy profession currently operates within a system where workforce safety risks, contractor classification practices, and institutional conflicts of interest in workforce representation intersect, creating conditions that obscure accountability, discourage reporting, and limit meaningful practitioner voice. 

These issues are not isolated.

They are structural.

They have been identified repeatedly through practitioner surveys, workforce reports, contract analysis, direct practitioner accounts, advocacy efforts, and decades of lived experience within the profession.

The concerns are known.

The evidence exists.

The profession has spent years studying these issues.

The challenge is no longer identifying the problems.

The challenge is acting on what is already known.

The time for acknowledgement has passed.

The time for action has arrived. 

Why This Declaration Exists
For years, practitioners have raised concerns regarding:

• Workplace violence and harassment
• Sexual harassment and sexual violence
• Contractor classification practices
• Workforce sustainability
• Labour protections
• Reporting barriers
• Professional silencing and retaliation
• Governance accountability
• Practitioner representation

Information packages, safety analyses, contract reviews, workforce reports, and recommendations have been provided to regulators, government ministries, professional associations, labour organizations, occupational safety bodies, and other stakeholders.

The responses have been familiar.

Acknowledgement.

Redirection.

Deferral.

Jurisdictional uncertainty.

Fragmented responsibility.

The issues remain.

This Declaration exists because practitioners can no longer rely on fragmented institutions to solve problems that cross institutional boundaries.

What We Have Learned
Through practitioner experience, workforce surveys, contract analysis, safety reviews, stakeholder engagement, and direct advocacy, we have learned the following:

Workforce Safety Cannot Be Separated From Workforce Structure
Repeated Canadian and provincial survey findings identify persistent patterns of workplace sexual harassment, sexual assault, sexual violence, and treatment-room sexual boundary concerns affecting massage therapists within clinical practice environments.

Across multiple jurisdictions and years, recurring themes include treatment-room risk exposure, inadequate workplace safeguards, unclear reporting pathways, fear of retaliation, insufficient training and support systems, and uncertainty regarding responsibility for practitioner safety and response.

These findings establish a persistent occupational safety concern within the profession.

These issues are not unique to any single clinic, organization, province, or individual. The recurring nature of these findings across jurisdictions indicates a systemic problem requiring systemic solutions.

Workforce classification is not solely a tax or business structure question. It directly influences access to labour protections, workplace safety systems, reporting pathways, accountability mechanisms, and practitioner supports.

The workforce structure and classification model influences access to protections, reporting systems, accountability pathways, and institutional responsibility for prevention, protection, and response when these risks occur within regulated healthcare environments.

When practitioners experience workplace violence, harassment, sexual violence, unsafe working conditions, environmental hazards, retaliation, or other workplace concerns, there is often no clear answer to fundamental questions:

Who investigates?

Who protects the worker?

Who is accountable?

The absence of clear answers is itself evidence of systemic failure.

The profession has spent years discussing individual incidents while failing to adequately examine the structures that produce them.

Meaningful Employment Pathways Have Effectively Disappeared
The dominant workforce model within massage therapy has normalized contractor classification to such a degree that meaningful employment pathways have effectively disappeared from the labour market.
As a result, many practitioners spend entire careers without access to:

• Employer-paid CPP contributions
• Employment Insurance eligibility
• Paid vacation
• Paid sick leave
• Maternity and parental leave protections
• Extended health and disability benefits
• Pension contributions
• Overtime protections
• Premium pay structures
• Career advancement opportunities
• Leadership pathways
• Safe reporting mechanisms
• Effective workforce representation

At the same time, practitioners remain responsible for professional licensing, liability insurance, continuing education, regulatory compliance, record keeping, and the physical and psychological demands of clinical practice.

Unlike many healthcare professions, massage therapy offers few structured pathways for career advancement, leadership development, pay progression, or lateral professional mobility.

For many practitioners, clinic ownership represents the primary route to increased income, influence, or advancement within the profession.

The profession has normalized a workforce model in which practitioners assume the risks and obligations of self-employment while clinics retain substantial operational control over the conditions under which work is performed.

At the same time, many clinics assume little or no responsibility for employer-paid benefits, Employment Insurance, CPP contributions, paid leave, workplace safety systems, labour protections, human resources functions, reporting mechanisms, or other obligations commonly associated with exercising that degree of workplace control.

Responsibility without control.

Control without accountability.

The result is a workforce model in which authority remains concentrated elsewhere while risk is disproportionately transferred to individual practitioners.

It is the separation of authority from responsibility and the transfer of risk onto practitioners.
Those exercising significant control over the work should not be insulated from responsibility for the consequences of that control.

Practitioners assume the financial, legal, professional, and personal risks of self-employment while often lacking access to labour protections, workplace safety mechanisms, reporting pathways, benefits, career advancement opportunities, and meaningful workforce representation.

This imbalance has become normalized.

It should not be.

Workforce Sustainability Is a Public Interest Issue
A regulated healthcare profession cannot remain sustainable when practitioners are expected to assume increasing professional responsibilities while lacking labour protections, career advancement opportunities, meaningful representation, and effective mechanisms for addressing workplace concerns.

The consequences extend beyond individual practitioners.

Workforce instability affects recruitment, retention, professional longevity, continuity of care, patient access, and the long-term sustainability of healthcare services.
Workforce sustainability is not solely a practitioner issue.
It is a public interest issue.

Practitioner Voice Is Missing
The inability of frontline practitioners to meaningfully influence the systems governing their work is one of the central issues facing the profession.

• Workforce safety concerns.
• Contractor classification concerns.
• Labour protection concerns.
• Workplace concerns.
• Governance concerns.
• Workforce sustainability concerns.
• Education and competency concerns.

These issues persist because practitioners have limited influence over the structures responsible for addressing them.

Frontline practitioners often have limited influence over decisions affecting workplace standards, workforce policy, professional priorities, competency development, educational frameworks, curriculum modernization, entry-to-practice requirements, and the future direction of the profession itself.

The profession cannot continue to rely on individual practitioners to identify, document, report, and solve systemic problems while lacking meaningful representation in the decisions that affect them.

A profession cannot effectively address workforce challenges when those most directly affected have limited ability to influence policy, governance, workplace standards, safety initiatives, educational frameworks, competency development, workforce planning, or organizational priorities.

Meaningful practitioner representation is not a symbolic issue.
It is a prerequisite for accountability.
It is a prerequisite for workforce safety.
It is a prerequisite for workforce sustainability.
It is a prerequisite for professional legitimacy.

Without independent practitioner representation, workforce concerns remain dependent upon the priorities, resources, and willingness of institutions whose mandates, incentives, or interests may not align with those of frontline practitioners.

Professional Silencing Is a Structural Problem
Across jurisdictions and practice settings, practitioners report reluctance to raise concerns regarding workplace conditions, safety issues, business practices, governance concerns, or professional conduct due to fear of retaliation, reputational harm, loss of employment opportunities, professional isolation, or legal threats.

A profession cannot effectively identify or address systemic problems when practitioners perceive personal or professional risk in speaking openly about them.

Professional silencing is not merely a communication issue.

It is a governance issue.

It is an accountability issue.

It is a workforce safety issue.

When practitioners fear the consequences of speaking, systemic problems remain hidden, unresolved, and normalized.

Professional silencing impairs the profession's ability to identify risks, correct harmful practices, and address systemic problems.

Institutional Conflicts of Interest in Workforce Representation Exist
Many organizations that claim to represent practitioner interests operate under governance structures substantially influenced by individuals whose financial interests are connected to clinic ownership, educational enterprises, contractor business models, or other commercial interests within the profession.

This creates institutional conflicts of interest in workforce representation.

When workforce protections, labour conditions, contractor classification, practitioner mobility, workplace safety, and reporting structures are under discussion, practitioners deserve confidence that their interests are being represented independently.

Employer-dominated governance within member-funded organizations raises serious concerns regarding whose interests are represented, whose priorities are advanced, and whose voices are heard.

This is not a question of individual character.

It is a question of governance.

It is a question of accountability.

It is a question of whether the profession has an independent workforce voice. 

What We Believe
We believe practitioner safety and patient safety are inseparable.
We believe workforce sustainability is a public interest issue.
We believe meaningful practitioner representation is necessary for effective governance.
We believe transparency and accountability are essential to maintaining trust in a regulated healthcare profession.
We believe systemic problems require systemic solutions.
We believe workforce concerns cannot be solved through individual effort alone.
We believe practitioners deserve meaningful influence over the systems governing their work.

We Demand Action
1. Independent Workforce Safety Review
An independent review of workforce safety conditions within massage therapy, including workplace violence, harassment, sexual violence, environmental safety concerns, reporting barriers, retaliation concerns, and practitioner supports.

2. Review of Contractor Classification Practices and Labour Protections
A comprehensive review of contractor classification practices within massage therapy and their alignment with workplace realities, labour protections, occupational safety frameworks, and established principles of worker classification.

This review must examine whether the current workforce model appropriately protects practitioners and whether existing structures provide meaningful access to workplace protections, reporting mechanisms, labour rights, and occupational safety systems.

3. Clear Reporting Pathways and Anti-Retaliation Protections
The establishment of clear, accessible reporting pathways for workplace concerns, including protections against retaliation for practitioners who report unsafe conditions, harassment, violence, unethical conduct, or workplace safety concerns.

4. Governance Transparency and Accountability
Public disclosure and review of governance structures, board composition, conflict-of-interest policies, recusal processes, representation models, and decision-making structures within organizations claiming to represent practitioner interests.
Practitioners should have access to sufficient information to assess whether workforce interests are being represented independently and whether institutional conflicts of interest are being appropriately identified, disclosed, and managed.
Governance accountability is essential to meaningful practitioner representation and public trust.

5. Independent Practitioner Representation
The establishment of independent practitioner-led representation structures capable of advocating for workforce concerns, labour protections, workplace safety, and professional sustainability without institutional conflicts of interest.

6. Workforce Sustainability Strategy
Development of a profession-wide workforce sustainability strategy addressing:

• Labour protections
• Workforce retention
• Career advancement pathways
• Practitioner wellbeing
• Professional longevity
• Recruitment challenges
• Access to care for patients

7. National Collaboration
A coordinated national effort involving practitioners, regulators, professional associations, educators, occupational safety bodies, labour organizations, policymakers, and other stakeholders to address workforce safety, labour protections, practitioner representation, and long-term professional sustainability.

8. Practitioner Participation in Professional Decision-Making
Meaningful frontline practitioner participation and voting influence in decisions affecting workforce policy, competency development, educational frameworks, curriculum modernization, entry-to-practice standards, governance reform, and long-term professional planning. 

What Happens If Nothing Changes
If these issues remain unaddressed, the profession will continue to experience practitioner attrition, workforce instability, barriers to reporting, diminished practitioner wellbeing, reduced access to care, and increasing difficulty attracting and retaining qualified practitioners.

The consequences will not be limited to practitioners.

Patients, communities, healthcare systems, and the public will be affected as workforce sustainability continues to deteriorate.

The cost of inaction is already being paid. 

Continued inaction risks further normalizing unsafe working conditions, fragmented accountability, and the transfer of risk onto individual practitioners. 

Our Commitment
We will continue to document, educate, organize, advocate, collaborate, and speak openly about these issues until meaningful action is taken.

The future of the profession cannot be built on silence, fragmented responsibility, institutional conflicts of interest, and the absence of practitioner voice.

This Declaration is an invitation to every practitioner, educator, regulator, policymaker, organization, and stakeholder who believes the profession can do better.

We stand together in support of a safer, more accountable, more sustainable future for massage therapy.

We invite others to stand with us.