3 ways companies can prioritize employee mental health
Mental health concerns were front and center for office workers adjusting to fully remote work environments at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Between feelings of isolation, a never-ending news cycle, and the stress of staying safe, people sought support from their workplaces. A Society for Human Resource Management survey noted that employee benefits such as stress management, life coaching, and meditation programs increased in 2020. But, for many, it still wasn't enough. As the pandemic waned, industries that didn't give employees enough independence when it came to their work locations and how they allotted their time (such as dine-in restaurants, sporting events, and music concerts) saw the most employee exits, leading to the Great Resignation, Professor Dr. Isabell Welpe at the Technical University of Munich, told the World Economic Forum.
Even today, employers are still working to restructure their approach to mental health support to boost morale and retention. In many cases, workers are recognizing those changes. The American Psychological Association's 2022 Work and Well-being Survey found that 71% of people think their employer is more concerned about their mental health now than in the past.
But even with good intentions, employers are still falling short in providing a workplace environment that prioritizes well-being and meets their workers' needs. Mental Health America's 2023 Mind the Workplace survey found that 81% of employees who experienced work stress in 2022 felt it impacted their mental health compared to the 78% who reported the same thing in the year prior. To support building better workplaces, WorkTango analyzed academic research and news coverage to explore ways companies can prioritize employee mental health.
For some, the root of workplace stress begins with managers. SHRM's survey of 1,400 employees in 2024 cited poor management as one of the major stressors for employees, along with workload and understaffing. For others, it can mean things such as toxic workplace behavior, ambiguity in their role, and interpersonal conflict, according to McKinsey Health Institute's survey of 30,000 employees in 30 countries. Self-efficacy, purpose, and belonging can help offset these feelings.
Since the pandemic, companies have invested in employee wellness programs, a practice that market research company MarketsandMarkets projects to be worth $94.6 billion globally by 2026. However, many of these programs, which incorporate elements like meditation apps and online therapy, take a one-size-fits-all approach that overlooks broader and systemic workplace issues, according to an article published by the Harvard Business Review.
Christine Nicholl, founder of HR consulting company People X, told Stacker that in order to cultivate a psychologically safe workplace, offering programs that address mental health can only go so far. "You can have the best benefits in the world, but if somebody's burnt because their manager isn't leading effectively … they're probably going to go find somewhere else to work," she said. Keep reading to learn how companies can help their employees' mental health.
In Ashley Kera's eyes, there's still a stigma surrounding mental health. The founder and principal consultant at Kera Coaching & Consulting advises companies to take time to invest in making actionable changes.
"Rather than be reactive to employee issues, be proactive," she told Stacker. "How can you cultivate those cultures and provide systems and policies to really support them?"
Over the years, workers have spoken up on the policies and programs they want. When given the option to select from a list of 12 types of support they'd like to receive, the APA's 2022 survey found the top four chosen included flexible work hours (41%), a culture where time off is respected (34%), an option for remote work (33%), and a four-day work week (31%).
Experts caution companies not to fall into the trap of "carewashing" policies, an approach Harvard Business Review authors describe as "superficial care initiatives that workers may perceive as failing to tackle root causes" of workplace concerns. Instead, McKinsey Health Institute recommends a "holistic health" framework encompassing an employee's "physical, mental, social, and spiritual health." From there, companies can start to make changes for people individually, at the job level, within a team, and organizationally.
With flexible work arrangements becoming the norm in recent years, employees may need remote, hybrid, or in-person accommodations based on their role, workflow, and personal responsibilities. The APA advises companies to evaluate staff requirements and business goals before presenting various options for workers so employees can determine which options best suit their circumstances.
In her 2024 research for the SHRM, Daroon Jalil found that while 73% of employees said their companies claim to care about mental health, almost half said those workplaces don't take actions that support this sentiment. She notes one way to cultivate a workplace environment that benefits mental health is for leaders to be positive models. For example, a leader telling colleagues they're taking a few days off to unwind after a lengthy work project is modeling good mental health care practices.
Companies can create work-life balance through four-day work weeks to help employees manage stress and productivity. Trials of the model in other countries have led to more productivity and a boost in mental and physical health, according to the World Economic Forum. It's also important for company leaders to proactively encourage workers to take advantage of the benefits available to them. Almost 70% of workers are unaware of what their employer offers, according to the SHRM. In Nicholl's experience, this information will sometimes exist on a company's intranet, an internal network where a business disseminates information to its workers, often without further advertisement.
"Sometimes you have a really great program that just sits on the shelf because nobody knows it's there," she said.
New programs and policies don't become successful overnight. This process requires leaders to learn more viable ways to support workers, effectively train managers, and listen to employee feedback.
Kera advises companies to step back, listen, and get to know their employees instead of making assumptions about their needs. That can start with collecting feedback through anonymous surveys, suggestion boxes at town hall meetings, or conducting focus groups.
"What's the data telling you? What do they want? What's feasible?" she said.
Managerial training is also crucial to creating a more psychologically safe workplace. For example, a previous company Nicholl worked at focused on the role of managers because of their multiplier effect within an organization. The thought process was, "Take care of the manager, and they'll take care of everybody else," she explained.
Taking the time to improve a manager's interpersonal skills has proven to reduce turnover by 60%, according to a 2021 analysis published by the National Bureau of Economic Research. And it makes a difference on a day-to-day level. Those who have a supportive manager are not only more comfortable asking for support, but they're also more confident in providing feedback, according to Mental Health America's survey.
Restructuring an organization's mental health approach can seem daunting, but establishing goals and metrics, creating a plan to streamline them into existing workflows, and actively following up on its progress can leave a lasting impact on an employee's perception of the company. A 2023 Deloitte survey found that reporting on how well a company is doing when it comes to the health of its employees could build trust between employees and companies.
"I'm a big believer [that] if you invest in the people, it's going to benefit your brand, bottom line," Kera said.
Story editing by Carren Jao. Additional editing by Elisa Huang. Copy editing and photo selection by Kristen Wegrzyn.
This story was produced by WorkTango and was produced and distributed in partnership with Stacker.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
'I refuse to give up': Michigan researchers, health officials grapple with funding cuts
'I refuse to give up': Michigan researchers, health officials grapple with funding cuts Show Caption Hide Caption Video: MSU breast cancer researcher Jamie Bernard talks about funding uncertainty MSU breast cancer researcher Jamie Bernard talks about federal funding uncertainty on Thursday, May 8, 2025, at her lab in East Lansing. Michigan public health officers say they've had to cut services and lay off workers after the Trump administration slashed funding, affecting their ability to work to stop the spread of disease. Scientists from the University of Michigan and Michigan State University say federal cuts to their research could halt development for new cancer treatments and eviscerate the scientific workforce. Using words like "devastating," "heartbreaking," and "shortsighted," Michigan public health leaders and researchers at the state's largest universities described the effects of President Donald Trump's efforts to slash federal government spending — through executive orders, cuts to federal grants, and stop work orders — and the wide-reaching fallout. Some local health departments have laid off workers and cut back on the services they can provide at regional laboratories and at community and in-school health clinics, and have seen disruptions in their ability to stop the spread of infectious disease, said Norm Hess, executive director of the Michigan Association for Local Public Health. When the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services revoked $11.4 billion in COVID-19-related grants in late March, the effects were felt across Michigan in ways that might not have been anticipated, he said. 'While everyone agrees the emergency response phase of COVID-19 is over, the funding streams created for pandemic response have been supporting laboratories monitoring other diseases around the state, from legionella to tuberculosis to measles, as well as water quality inspections and other sampling work,' Hess said. 'Federal leaders rescinded those grants, clearly thinking it was a responsible way to recover money that was being misspent. Instead, it's a great example of unintended consequences. Everyone agrees government should spend public dollars efficiently and effectively, but it appears they did not check to see what they were actually eliminating when cutting grants that had 'COVID' on the label.' Although Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel has joined other states in challenging many of the Trump administration's cuts to federal public health and university research funding, including the $11.4 billion in COVID-19-related grants, Hess said it's too risky for local health departments to count on money that may or may not be awarded to them in the end. "You can't turn it off, and then if money comes, turn it back on," he said. Cuts hit research on the science of aging When he took office, Trump pledged to eliminate waste, fraud and abuse in federal spending, and "make America healthy again" by shifting priorities of the nation's top health agencies and taking aim at research and programs that focused on diversity, equity and inclusion. But medical researchers at Michigan State University and the University of Michigan say his administration's abrupt cuts to funding for scientific studies, clinical trials and training programs have all but gutted their life's work and could halt the development of new treatments for diseases like cancer as well as eviscerate the future scientific workforce. University of Michigan psychology professor Toni Antonucci lost the $13 million federal grant that supported her research on health disparities among aging Americans. It focused on minority populations, including African Americans, and comes at a moment in history when the U.S. population is older than it ever has been and is growing increasingly diverse. "I have never thought that politics should be involved in research, and, unfortunately, this is clearly the case here," said Antonucci, who has worked at U-M since the 1970s. "We were focusing on our most vulnerable populations, and I think that's the reason that the money was ... rescinded. "It shows a kind of shortsightedness and, in a way, vindictiveness. ... My focus was on ... how can the social relations that people have improve their health? What kinds of relationships are positive for people or negative for people? How do we increase the positive, and reduce the negative? "What are the kinds of things that universally predict better health, longer longevity? ... The point is, if you know what's influencing different groups, it gives you some insight on how to intervene both with that group and with other groups." Now, she said, that data will be lost. "If a government has policies that they want to enact, regardless of the data, then this is what you do," Antonucci said. "You just make sure there are no data. But just because you don't collect the data, that doesn't mean the association isn't still there." U-M professor: Slashed grants suggest 'you just don't matter' Gary Harper, a U-M professor of health behavior and health equity, learned in late March that his nearly $1.15 million five-year grant from the National Institutes of Health had been rescinded. "It's devastating," said Harper. "I am an openly gay man, and have been involved in activism, research, clinical work, and policy work in the HIV field for 40 years, starting out in 1985 as an old-time activist at a time when we were burying our friends every week. ... This is the first time in the history of my academic career that I've been without federal research or training funds." Harper is co-director of the SOAR at U-M, which stands for Student Opportunities for AIDS/HIV Research. It's a two-year intensive mentoring program that provides HIV-related research opportunities to undergraduate students, propelling them toward graduate school, and, eventually, the HIV research workforce. Many of those students are LGBTQ+ themselves, have disabilities, or come from low-income backgrounds, he said, but Harper noted that the program is open to anyone. "I'm a strong believer that we need to be making sure that we mentor researchers who reflect the communities that are most impacted," Harper said. More: Federal research cuts would rock Michigan economy, halt clinical trials, those affected say More: Trump's budget cuts could cost Michigan universities more than $200 million Discovering that the NIH canceled SOAR's grant funding "ripped me apart," Harper said. "We have one more cohort to get through their senior year." He said he won't let the Trump administration win and cancel the program before they graduate. "Basically, what they're saying is, 'We don't want to spend any money on you because you just don't matter,' " Harper said. " 'Your life has no value.' ... Well, I refuse to give up on them." Harper and SOAR's co-director are scrambling together the money themselves to pay for the final year of the program. Slowly, he said, that is coming together, but his other work through the Adolescent Medicine Trials Network (ATN) for HIV/AIDS Intervention has also been targeted by the federal cuts. A study on transgender youths was canceled, he said, and funding for the leadership group that oversees equity and inclusion in all ATN studies also was eliminated. He also lost grant funding to study gay and bisexual men in Kenya living with HIV. Still, he said, "I'm not going to let this get me down. "I try and show power and strength and resilience to the students, to give them hope that this, too, shall pass. This is a moment in time, but this is not your entire life. ... Your lives do matter. You are special and you are perfect, just the way you are." Breast cancer prevention studies in limbo The Trump administration isn't taking aim solely at research that fits its definition of DEI, said Jamie Bernard, an associate professor of pharmacology and toxicology at Michigan State University. "What I don't really think is being well communicated is that cancer research is also being threatened," said Bernard, who began studying interventions to prevent breast cancer in 2016, when her mother, Pamela O'Brien, was diagnosed with the disease at 61 years old. "This is something that Democrats and Republicans have always supported. In fact, we've come so far in the treatment of breast cancer due to federal funding, we diagnose women earlier. There's lots of options for treatment, and really, this research has saved a lot of lives and brought health care costs down." Her work is now focused on the environmental and lifestyle factors that can increase a woman's risk of getting aggressive breast cancers. "Not all breast cancers are curable, so that's what I really set off to focus on," she said, explaining that her work involves understanding how to kill cancer cells that are resistant to treatment and discovering new drug therapies. Earlier this year, she applied to renew a $2.07 million federal grant funded by the National Institutes of Health along with a new, $2.79 million grant, but both have been held up for months in a cloud of uncertainty. The initial reviews of her grants were postponed but eventually got through the first stage of the process; they now await the second step of review. There remain no guarantees. "How are they going to choose what they fund?" she said. "I don't know what's going to happen, really. So, we are in a time of uncertainty. Grant funding has always been uncertain. It's always been competitive, but there's always been a process and an infrastructure that researchers have relied on." Bernard runs a research lab at MSU, where a team of scientists are working to 'stop breast cancer from ever starting in the first place or prevent it so much that you've delayed it and you die of some other natural cause before you have to deal with cancer," she said. "I am in a place where I don't know if I should be accepting students in the fall. What's my next move? Am I still allowed to study what I've been studying? So it's a confusing time, a frustrating time, a time of high anxiety in our department of pharmacology and toxicology.' Bernard said the NIH canceled a grant for a graduate student from Puerto Rico who is Hispanic, and had applied through a mechanism that provided funding for predoctoral students who are disabled, identify as Black, Hispanic, American Indian or Alaska Native, or who are from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. "Just simply because she was a minority, the grant mechanism that she applied with, they withdrew it," Bernard said. "The white woman in my lab, her grant is going to be reviewed. ... It's so awful." The work they're doing, she said, "really should be bipartisan, nonpartisan — not even partisan. It's freaking cancer research." Ph.D. student reexamines future in scientific research The political climate is chasing Alex Chapman, a Ph.D. student at MSU who is studying migraines and pain, away from a career in academia. Chapman, 24, who is originally from Richmond, Virginia, secured a federal grant studying a neuropeptide that's upregulated in people with migraines, before Trump took office in January. Many of her friends and colleagues haven't been so lucky. "Science is being so vilified that I'm considering careers in other places or different avenues because it's just hard to see a future in a place that doesn't value science at all," she said. "It's heartbreaking. ... My career options are kind of dwindling, and the more time that passes, the more fellowships and different opportunities just keep becoming defunded," Chapman said, noting that a fellowship she was eyeing through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has been axed. She considered shifting toward public policy work, helping government leaders understand "why we should fund pain research," but then she attended a symposium and heard a woman who works in public policy speak about the cuts there, too. "She was like, 'This is a great fellowship. It's been defunded. This was an awesome fellowship. It's been defunded,' " Chapman said. When entrepreneur Elon Musk, who headed the new Department of Government Efficiency early in the Trump administration, criticized the use of federal dollars on scientific studies of legumes and aggression in hamsters, Chapman said, it showed that he couldn't see the full impact of the work. "If you just simplify it like that, maybe it does seem silly, but you're looking at the small picture," she said. "The point of research is to zoom out and look at the bigger picture. When you understand the best process of planting beans or why certain strains of corn are more susceptible to different fungi, you help people more effectively and efficiently plant food. This will help us in the face of climate change. "If you understand why a hamster is aggressive after ingesting a certain substance, you understand the role of that substance and how it could potentially affect humans." That small-picture view — and the cuts made because of it — could have generational impacts on the United States and the world, Chapman said. "This isn't just shutting down one study that focuses on hamsters fighting," she said. "It's preventing a new generation of scientists from coming into the (field), which is going to stunt our growth as a nation, which is going to prevent new ideas from happening, which is going to lead to ... horrible damage that would take years, if not decades, to recover. "People are afraid to come out and criticize this because of the way the government has treated them, especially foreign students. When it gets to the point where the government can strike fear in your heart if you speak out against them, especially about something regarding science, it's a very scary place to be." Local public health departments rattled, services cut Nick Derusha, the director and health officer of the LMAS District Health Department, which also includes Luce and Mackinac counties, said his part of the eastern Upper Peninsula has been rattled by a Trump administration stop-work order that means there's no money to run clinics that provide medicine like methadone to help people wean off opioid drugs and reduce the risk of overdose deaths in Alger and Schoolcraft counties. "We take a really holistic approach to that program," Derusha said. "We're not just providing medication-assisted treatment. We have peer recovery coaches. We have community health workers. We have a lot of staff that are there to support them in many other ways, not just the medication. "When funding is abruptly eliminated like that, we can't just drop people off the caseload. We needed to find a way for them to be able to continue to receive services or some type of off-ramp. We worked with the local hospital, and we agreed for three more months, which is kind of nearing the end here, to continue to provide those services, absent the funding. But the long-term ability of us to do that is not likely." In addition, Derusha said the LMAS department lost $512,000 a year to pay for a courier system for its laboratory services. Because the district is so sprawling — it covers four U.P. counties — when test samples need to be shipped to the regional lab in Luce County, ordinary mail often doesn't get them delivered quickly enough. Without the courier system, it means slower results for important public health testing, he said, which could delay treatments and lead to poorer outcomes. The LMAS District Health Department isn't alone. The Mid-Michigan Health Department, which includes Clinton, Gratiot and Montcalm counties, announced in April it will no longer investigate or treat latent tuberculosis infections because of "funding cuts and workforce limitations." Mental health services for school-age children are being cut, too, said Andrea Cole, president of the Ethel and James Flinn Foundation, a Detroit-based nonprofit dedicated to improving the quality, scope, and delivery of mental health services in Michigan. A $1 billion grant was terminated through the Department of Education in late April to pay for in-school social workers, counselors and other mental health professionals — even though 70% of children who receive mental health services get them through their schools, she said. "A lot of the federal cuts were to the most vulnerable and underserved populations," Cole said. "Schools are faced with the possibility of laying off those people that they hired under that grant if they don't have funding to continue it." And the students will be left without that critical mental health support when "they need it more than ever," Cole said. Hess said all of these cuts, along with proposed legislation — the Big, Beautiful Bill Act, which has passed the U.S. House of Representatives and now is under consideration in the U.S. Senate — that would slash Medicaid and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, and a state Senate budget proposal that also seeks to trim funding even more, public health in Michigan could dramatically change. More: Whitmer: Trump's 'big, beautiful bill' could cost Michigan $900 million a year for food stamps More: 700,000 Michigan residents could lose health insurance under Medicaid cuts, report shows "We don't want to give the impression that the sky is falling, and that public health is going to pack up and go home," Hess said. "We've been here for 100 years, and we've seen ups and downs over the years. Health officers are used to kind of making things work, but this is sort of a unique situation. "Community residents are really going to feel this if all of these things that we are watching come to fruition. Public health will not look the same in their communities, in most places." Contact Kristen Shamus: kshamus@ Subscribe to the Detroit Free Press.
The Hill
21 hours ago
- The Hill
Hundreds of pharmacies are set to close: How it could impact you
(NEXSTAR) — Several retail pharmacy chains have shuttered some of their stores this year, with more on the way for others, like Rite Aid, which filed for bankruptcy in May. It could create what some refer to as 'pharmacy deserts,' areas in which drugstores and the additional services they provide may not be available for miles. And in areas where other pharmacies are picking up the slack, it could have an impact on current customers. 'Closures of major chain pharmacies often create ripple effects across the community,' E. Michael Murphy, an assistant professor of clinical pharmacy at The Ohio State University, told Nexstar via email. Nearby pharmacies, independent or part of a chain, can see 'a sudden increase in patients,' he explained, which could 'lead to longer lines, and increase strain on the health care team.' It could also disrupt your medical care. Shuttering pharmacies in larger cities, like New York City and Philadelphia, may have limited impacts. Take, for example, a Rite Aid located in Philadelphia that has been designated for closure. A three-minute walk down the road will take you to a Walgreens and a local pharmacy. Within smaller communities, that may not be the case. Customers may need to drive to a nearby town to pick up their prescriptions, which 'could have some negative consequences on their adherence to their medication,' Lucas A. Berenbrok, an associate professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Pharmacy, explained to Nexstar. 'For those without reliable transportation, especially older adults or people with disabilities, traveling even a few extra miles can be a serious barrier,' Murphy said. That could lead to delayed access to prescriptions and missed dosages. Closing pharmacies also reduces health access points for people. In addition to filling prescriptions, pharmacies are able to provide vaccines, chronic disease management, urgent consultations, over-the-counter treatments, and certain health tests. 'There's a lot more going on at the pharmacy now than ever before,' Berenbrok explained, outlining how pharmacists helped to administer the COVID vaccine during the pandemic, for example, and the additional services they can provide in some states. He went on to explain that while online pharmacies can help fill the void of shuttered drugstores, they're largely unable to accommodate the additional services pharmacies provide. 'They also assume reliable internet access, digital literacy, and stable housing, which are barriers for many vulnerable patients,' Murphy said. 'For communities losing local pharmacies, online options may fill part of the gap but cannot replace the full range of services a community pharmacist provides.' Berenbrok agreed that mail-order pharmacies have 'a time and place' because of their convenience, but they require planning ahead, which may not be useful for certain medications like antibiotics. If your pharmacy is closing soon, Murphy recommended being proactive and asking your pharmacist where your prescriptions are being sent and whether that pharmacy has your insurance and medication history. He also encouraged asking for a 90-day supply or mail-order option for prescriptions if transportation is a concern. Chains poised to take on former Rite Aid clients, like CVS and Walgreens, say they're prepared to welcome new customers. Even if your prescriptions are not moving to a new pharmacy, you may want to make sure your prescription is being filled a day or two before you need it rather than the same day that your current supply runs out, Berenbrok said. Then, if you're short on time and facing a long line, you won't miss a dose. Murphy also suggested contacting elected officials and urging them to take action. 'While pharmacists are committed to stepping up to meet the need, without adequate state and federal policy changes to address the broken business model that caused the pharmacy to close in the first place, we will continue to see pharmacies close and patients having to navigate the loss of their trusted health care professional.'
Hamilton Spectator
a day ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Who makes decisions for public health is changing in Hamilton
Community members are now at Hamilton's public health decision-making table after long-awaited governance reform got the green light from the province. 'I think it's so vitally important to have those voices there,' Coun. Cameron Kroetsch said in an interview with The Spectator. 'I think, also, it just frankly gives the community more confidence that we have both councillors and health experts who can give a balanced perspective.' Public health policy will no longer be decided by the 16 members of Hamilton's city council after legislative changes passed third reading on June 3 and received royal assent on June 5 as part of Bill 11 , More Convenient Care Act. Instead, six appointed community members , with health expertise or lived experience, will work alongside six city councillors and one education representative to oversee public health. Coun. Cameron Kroetsch says it is 'vitally important' to have community voices on the board of health. The Progressive Conservative government made the required amendments to the City of Hamilton Act at council's request. 'The community pushed really hard for this,' Kroetsch said. 'It's been a long journey.' City council will provide one final approval at its meeting on June 18 but the vote is considered a formality. The new board is expected to meet for the first time on July 7 — over four years after calls for change started in March 2021 when COVID-19 brought inequities, related to social determinants of health, to the forefront as some groups fared better than others during the pandemic. Advocates — including doctors, social workers and academics — argued for a board of health that better reflects Hamilton's diversity, including racialized residents and those with disabilities. 'We didn't have that kind of community voice available to respond to issues of public health in our city and so I think this is going to be great,' Kroetsch said. 'Having these key people around the table, we learned during COVID, would have made things so much better … I just can't say enough about how important I think it is for community voices to be at the table.' The changes bring Hamilton more in line with about two-thirds of the province's public health units that are overseen by autonomous boards. Hamilton's board will be semi-autonomous as decisions related to the budget, the annual service plan and the appointment of medical officers of health will still be approved by city council. Toronto and Ottawa also have semi autonomous boards. However, policy decisions would no longer need any further approval so the board's vote would be binding. 'There's not really a way for council to override the board of health,' Kroetsch said. 'We've given over that autonomy.' The governance reform initially had the unanimous support of council in January 2024. While awaiting the legislative changes, a public health subcommittee was created that will now become the board of health. Up until now, its decisions needed to be approved by city councillors. But opposition to the changes flared up in May after a disagreement over how restrictive the city should be about drinking on municipal property revealed a divide between councillors and the subcommittee. The proposed changes to the municipal alcohol policy were passed with almost no discussion by the subcommittee. In stark contrast, councillors voted 13-1 against it after a charged debate and an in-camera session to get legal advice. It raised questions about what would happen in the future when the semi-autonomous board of health no longer needed councillors' approval for such policy decisions. The subsequent vote went from unanimous to passing 9-5 on the makeup of the future board of health. But Kroetsch, who has been chairing the subcommittee, expects the transition will now be smooth. 'It's just going to be a new day for Hamilton in terms of having that expert advice from the community on the board of health to be able to weigh in on matters that are important,' Kroetsch said. 'We're talking about something that has literally a life and death impact for people. Public health is one of those areas of municipal governance that can impact people's day to day lives.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
