No country, however rich, can afford the waste of its human resources. Demoralization caused by vast unemployment is our greatest extravagance. Morally, it is the greatest menace to our social order. -Franklin D Roosevelt On a recent visit to Washington, I visited the Roosevelt Memorial. Although I do not sympathize with President Roosevelt's interpretation of constitutional rights, I was struck by some of the values he championed, and I've quoted one of the most inspiring inscriptions as the epigraph to this editorial. This quotation suggests that unemployment and work should be a national concern-that we should all attend to its effects. Roosevelt was referring to the national effects of the Great Depression; the recently released report of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology (the Kirby and Keon Commission) highlights, among other areas, the effects of clinical depression and other mental disorders on the Canadian workforce.1 The Commission's report supports a national strategy to address mental health and addictions in the workplace. With this report, Canada joins many other industrialized nations searching for a strategy to tackle this issue. However, the question of protecting worker health and safety is not as straightforward as it has been in the past. During the industrial revolution, when workers moved from agricultural trades to factories, books such as The Jungle1 exposed the horrendous conditions endured by many and called for workplace reform to protect workers' physical health and safety. Currently, we live in a technological revolution. This revolution has, in the last decade, introduced globalization, new modes of communication, and changes in workforce demographics that have created new occupational health challenges.3 5 In this age, rather than using their physical strength and risking physical injury, workers are increasingly called on to use their minds. Instead of toiling in sweatshops, workers have been increasingly exposed to stressful work environments characterized by tighter deadlines and increased production targets set with seemingly little consideration for individual workloads,6-8 at the same time as companies downsize and restructure.4,5 Further, stress associated with work is compounded by the additional stress of other life events, and reactions to all these stressors are influenced by other underlying risk factors. Herein lies the difficulty in finding an answer. According to a traditional occupational disease model, worker health is jeopardized by continuous exposure to hazardous employmentrelated conditions.9 However, the most advanced etiologic models of adult mental illness include not only factors related to work environment but also genetic vulnerability, developmental factors, neurobiological factors, childhood experiences, life events, chronic situations (such as a stressful home life), and the presence of other disorders.10 Each dimension's relative weight, and how the dimensions interact, is not yet understood. Consequently, we have a complex picture with no clear focus. Nevertheless, we are not without hope. In her paper published in this issue's In Review section, Dr Krupa1 ' reviews the current state of the evidence for interventions. She begins by emphasizing the importance of recognizing the complexity of work activities and demands. She also stresses the importance of distinguishing between disorder-related symptoms and the ability to fulfill work responsibilities; the answers to these questions will not be found solely in medical treatment. Her discussion focuses on interventions at the individual, employer, and workplace-organization levels. She notes that interventions aimed at both workers and employers offer the most promise. It appears that, globally, countries are seeking to implement complex strategies for a complex problem by balancing the role of public benefits (that is, financial supports), programs, health services, and legislation with the role of the workplace and the worker. …