When Emily Chung stepped into the role of President and CEO of the Automotive Industries Association of Canada, she made it clear that her first priority would be listening. After years as a mechanical shop owner, an instructor at Georgian College and a journalist covering the automotive aftermarket, Chung brings firsthand industry experience to the role.
Chung, a qualified technician herself, understands the business from the shop floor up. She has managed technicians, invested in equipment, navigated training requirements and seen firsthand how quickly vehicle technology is changing the demands placed on repairers.
While her background is rooted in mechanical, she is now immersing herself in the distinct realities of collision—an environment shaped by OEM procedures, advanced safety systems and increasing complexity. In this conversation Chung shares what she is learning, how she views the evolving Right to Repair discussion and why the collision repair industry’s growing technological and training demands must be part of the conversation around attracting and developing the next generation of repair professionals.
Darryl Simmons: You’ve described your first few months as a time of listening, testing assumptions and understanding stakeholder appetite. What have you learned so far about the collision repair sector?
Emily Chung: There are both similarities and differences between the mechanical and collision sectors. Many members are eager to have a strong national voice. Another similarity is that rapid advancements in vehicle technology are significantly impacting how vehicles are repaired. In addition to that, the absence of compulsory trade certification in some provinces creates inconsistencies in repair standards and expectations for repair completion.
It is also clear that the collision sector involves more intricate nuances in customer management and business relationships. There are distinct challenges related to control over repairs, including access to information, parts procurement, payment processes, adherence to proper repair procedures and the delivery of customer satisfaction.
DS: Right to Repair is often discussed as a single issue, but you’ve noted that collision experiences it somewhat differently than mechanical. How do you define Right to Repair in 2026, and what parts of that conversation do you believe need to evolve?
EC: In 2026, Right to Repair still means equal access to repair and diagnostic information between original equipment manufacturers and the auto care sector, and preserving the consumer’s choice of where to service their vehicle. We are not seeking free or proprietary information, but the ability to repair vehicles properly and safely. The conversation must evolve to address workforce development. Without access to information, shops cannot train technicians, and trade schools cannot properly prepare apprentices, worsening labour shortages. Voluntary frameworks such as CASIS have significant limitations and do not cover newer vehicles, underscoring the need for a modern legislative solution.
DS: Access to OEM repair information does not automatically translate into the ability to repair a vehicle safely or properly. How can AIA help the industry navigate the distinction between information access, liability, tooling, training and real-world execution?
EC: The first step is securing access to OEM information. Without it, the distinctions between liability, tooling, training and execution are irrelevant. Access enables shops to understand required procedures, risks and equipment. However, proper execution depends on having the right tools, appropriate training and clear accountability. AIA Canada can support the industry through continued education, practical guidance and ongoing advocacy with government and stakeholders.
DS: You’ve outlined four pillars for collision under AIA Canada’s evolving vision. How do you see those pillars working together to deliver measurable value?
EC: AIA Canada’s four pillars—advocacy, workforce development, member engagement, and innovation and insight—are interconnected and mutually reinforcing. Workforce development strengthens technical competency and career pathways. Member engagement creates space for collaboration and shared learning. Innovation and insight provide data and forward-looking initiatives. Advocacy amplifies these efforts across government, insurers, OEMs, educators and consumers.
Together, these pillars build a stronger, more informed and more sustainable collision ecosystem.
DS: Mechanical labour rates often exceed collision labour rates despite increasing complexity. What would it take to move toward parity?
EC: Keeping up with vehicle complexity and OEM requirements requires significant investment in tools, training, equipment and software. Administrative demands have also increased. Collision repairers are competing with other trades for talent. The industry may need to establish a reasonable minimum return on investment and pool data to determine if parity is required, then negotiate from a solid financial foundation.
DS: If we look ahead 10 or 20 years, what would you hope the industry says about your impact?
EC: I would hope they say I genuinely cared about the industry and used the association to meaningfully advance the collision sector. That we delivered on our pillars in a way that equipped shops with the knowledge, tools and resources to excel, and that we strengthened alignment across the industry.
