PRESIDENT & CEO, AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION OF CANADA
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 Executive Vision conversation with publisher Darryl Simmons, 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.
COLLISION REPAIR ASKED A FEW KEY QUESTIONS — HERE’S WHAT EMILY CHUNG HAD TO SAY
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 (OEMs) 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 the real-world execution of modern OEM repair procedures?
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 to align access, standards, and workforce readiness.
DS: You’ve outlined four pillars for collision under AIA Canada’s evolving vision: training (I-CAR Canada), events, government advocacy and thought leadership. How do you see those pillars working together to deliver measurable value to the broader collision ecosystem?
EC: AIA Canada’s four pillars — advocacy, workforce development, member engagement, and innovation and insight — are interconnected and mutually reinforcing.
Workforce development, including I-CAR Canada training, strengthens technical competency and career pathways. Member engagement, through forums such as CCIF, creates space for collaboration, shared learning, and business improvement. Innovation and insight provide data and forward-looking initiatives that help shops adapt and compete. Advocacy amplifies these efforts by representing the sector not only to government, but also to insurers, OEMs, educators, and consumers. Together, these pillars build a stronger, more informed, and more sustainable collision ecosystem.
DS: Mechanical labour rates in many markets significantly exceed collision labour rates, despite the increasing technical complexity, safety implications and OEM-driven requirements in collision repair. Historically there were reasons for that gap — but do those reasons still apply? And from your perspective, what would it take to move collision labour rates closer to parity with mechanical, if parity is warranted?
EC: Keeping up with vehicle complexity and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) repair and certification requirements requires large investments in tools, training, equipment, software and access to information. At the same time, keeping up with insurer and consumer service demands has increased administrative burdens, requiring increases in nonproduction staffing. Further, collision repairers are competing with other high paying trades to retain current technicians and attract new entrants to the industry. The industry may be well advised to establish a reasonable minimum return on investment (ROI) required for a shop that meets the AIA Canada statement on National Minimum Standards for Collision Repair to remain sustainable, pool data resources to establish if parity is required, and start any necessary negotiations on a solid financial foundation.
DS: If we fast-forward 10 or 20 years, what would you hope collision repair professionals say about your impact on AIA and on the industry?
EC: In 10 or 20 years, I would hope collision repair professionals say that I genuinely cared about the industry and used the association to meaningfully advance the collision sector. That under my leadership, AIA Canada delivered on its four pillars in a way that equipped shops with the knowledge, tools, and resources to excel. I would also hope they say we strengthened alignment across the industry, reducing tension and reinforcing a more united automotive sector, both collision and mechanical.
