DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against
Quintino Bordonali, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Brent Hamelin, OCT, Chair Robert Ryan, OCT Pauline Smart
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS Eli Mogil, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, for Ontario College of Teachers, assisted by Jennifer Robinson, Law Clerk
- and –
QUINTINO BORDONALI (CERTIFICATE #246731) Amanda Wojcik, Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP, for Quintino Bordonali
Richard Steinecke, Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, Independent Legal Counsel
Heard: July 14, 2010
REASONS FOR DECISION, DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on July 14, 2010 at the Ontario College of Teachers (“the College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing, dated July 16, 2009 was served on Quintino Bordonali, requesting his presence on September 21, 2009 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for July 14, 2010.
Quintino Bordonali was in attendance.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against Quintino Bordonali in the Notice of Hearing, (Exhibit 1) dated July 16, 2009, are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Quintino Bordonali is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in section 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), in that:
(a) he failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) he abused a student or students physically, sexually, verbally, psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
(c) he failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, including section 264(1)(c) thereof, or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);
(d) he committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18); and
(e) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
At the hearing on July 14, 2010, College counsel sought to withdraw the allegation of professional misconduct in paragraph (c), namely that the Member failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, including section 264(1)(c) thereof, or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15). The Committee agrees that this allegation shall be withdrawn.
Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced a Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest and Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 2), which provides as follows:
STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS
Quintino Bordonali (the “Member”) is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information respecting the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) and was a teacher at the Grades 4/5, 5/6 and 7 and 8 levels in Core French, and Grades 7 and 8 in Drama, at King [XXX] School (the “School”), in Toronto, Ontario.
During the 2006/2007 academic year, the Member engaged in inappropriate conduct and made inappropriate comments, which included the following:
(a) The Member used inappropriate language in his French as a Second Language assignments such as, “you’re lousy”, “you suck”, “you’re a reject” in worksheets containing French and English translations, and “loser”, “you stink”, “fatso” and “shut up, you’re a drag” in a script;
(b) The Member used profanities in the presence of his students, such as “shit”, “bullshit”, and, about the character Puss in Puss ‘N Boots, “Puss is such a son of a bitch”;
(c) The Member, in an effort to encourage confidence in a female student, set up an exercise in which he laughed in a dramatic and deliberate fashion at the student during her drama performance. The exercise embarrassed the student. The Member then repeated the exercise;
(d) The Member told students to “shut up” on occasion; and
(e) The Member, as part of a poetry unit, played love songs for the class, which contained lyrics such as, “I can’t wait till I make love to you”.
In or about March 2007, the Member left an opened bottle of alcohol in a closet in his classroom.
On or about May 7, 2007, by discipline letter to the Member from the Principal of the School, the Member was told he would receive a 15-day suspension, be placed in an interim assignment for the remainder of the 2006/2007 academic year; be administratively transferred to another school for the 2007/2008 year; and receive boundary and sensitivity training. A copy of the May 7, 2007 letter is attached as Exhibit “B”.
As a result of a grievance regarding the discipline, the Member’s suspension was reduced to 5-days and the discipline letter was amended to exclude reference to any perception of sexually suggestive behaviour. A copy of the amended discipline letter is attached as Exhibit “C”.
Following the resolution of the grievance, no boundary or sensitivity training was arranged for the Member.
PLEA OF NO CONTEST
By this document, the Member admits, for the purposes of this proceeding only, the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 7 above (the “uncontested facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the uncontested facts referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 above constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7 - verbal abuse), 1(18) and 1(19).
By this document the Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations against him;
(b) he understands that by signing this document he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the uncontested facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading no contest to the allegations, he is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against him and the right to have a hearing;
(d) he understands that depending on the penalty ordered by the Discipline Committee, the decision of the Committee and a summary of its reasons, including reference to his name, may be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) he understands that any agreement between his counsel and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed in this document does not bind the Discipline Committee;
(f) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel.
The Member provides this plea of no contest pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter E. 23, for the purpose of this proceeding under the College of Teachers Act 1996, chapter 12, and for no other purpose. The Member’s plea of no contest does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.
In light of the uncontested facts and circumstances, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
- The Ontario College of Teachers and the Member jointly submit that the appropriate penalty to be imposed by the Discipline Committee in these matters would be that the Committee directs:
(a) that the Member appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers;
(b) the Registrar to impose a term or condition on the Member’s certificate that:
(i) the Member is to enrol in and complete, at his own expense, within three (3) months from the date of an Order of the Discipline Committee, a course of instruction in work place boundaries / professional boundaries and student sensitivities with particular emphasis on the recognition and protection of same, pre-approved by the Registrar;
(ii) within thirty (30) days of his completion of the course outlined in (i) above, shall provide to the Registrar a written Certificate from the Course Provider stating:
A. that he or she has reviewed a copy of the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest and Joint Submission on Penalty document made an exhibit at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and
B. that the Member has successfully completed the course, and
(c) that there be publication of the findings and Order of the Committee in summary form in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. The parties have not agreed on whether or not the publication should include reference to the Member’s name, and submissions will be made to the panel on this issue.
DECISION
Having examined the Exhibits filed, and based on the plea of no contest, the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest and Joint Submission on Penalty, and the submissions made by counsel for the College and counsel for the Member, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that Quintino Bordonali committed acts of professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7 -verbal), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 7 (the “uncontested facts”) of the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest, and Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 2). He acknowledged that the uncontested facts referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 above constitute conduct that is professional misconduct and pleaded no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct. The Committee accepted the Member’s plea of no contest and the facts in the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest, and Joint Submission on Penalty.
During the 2006-2007 academic year, the Member used inappropriate language such as, “you’re lousy”, “you suck”, “you’re a reject” in worksheets containing French and English translations, and “loser”, “you stink”, “fatso” and “shut up, you’re a drag” in a script in his French as a Second Language assignments.
In the presence of students, the Member used profanities, such as “shit”, “bullshit”, and “Puss is such a son of a bitch” about the character “Puss” in “Puss ‘N Boots”.
The Member embarrassed a student by laughing in a dramatic and deliberate fashion during her drama performance. He told students to “shut up” on occasion and as part of a poetry unit, played love songs for the class which included lyrics such as “I can’t wait till I make love to you”.
In or about March of that same year, the Member left an opened bottle of alcohol in a closet in his classroom.
By this conduct, the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession and crossed the accepted boundaries of student teacher relations as practised by the teaching profession, and thereby committed acts of professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7 -verbal), 1(18) and 1(19).
SUBMISSIONS ON PUBLICATION
The Committee received submissions from both counsel with respect to publication of the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession, which was not expressly dealt with in the joint submission.
Counsel for the College argued that the Member’s name should be published and that there were no good reasons not to publish the name of the Member. He reminded the Committee that hearings are open to the public and that resulting decisions are publicly accessible. In order to support the transparency of the proceedings, publication of the Member’s name should follow. Counsel for the College pointed out the sexually suggestive nature of some of the language and having opened alcohol in the classroom, while not the most serious of allegations, was not minor in nature either and warranted publication. He provided a previous decision of a Discipline Committee (Brawn) with allegations of a less serious nature that led to publication with name. College Counsel stated that this decision resulted in publication but students were not involved, nor was there an open bottle of alcohol and suggested that the issues were less problematic in comparison to the case before the Committee.
Counsel for the Member submitted that publication of the Member’s name was inappropriate as the Member had taught for over twenty years with two different school boards and that these events occurred over one school year, almost 4 years ago, and was in her opinion, a minor event in terms of the conduct and comments by the Member. Counsel for the Member pointed out that the Member has retired and is pursuing another career but is considering putting his name on an occasional teacher list. Counsel for the Member stated that there is no presumption of publication; it is discretionary and that the reprimand and course provides enough of a deterrent to the Member. Counsel for the Member stated that publication of the Member’s name would be an excessive penalty on the Member. Publication of the events, including the reprimand and boundaries course, provides a general deterrent to the profession and publication without name under these conditions would also satisfy the public interest.
With respect to the Brawn case, Counsel for the Member opined that the conduct was more serious, involved students and staff, with physical boundary violations and the Member was terminated. She also noted that there was no reprimand in the Brawn case, just a course of instruction and that Brawn was an occasional teacher at several different schools and the incidents occurred over several years.
Counsel for the Member provided a previous decision of a Discipline Committee (Musial), which in her opinion, involved more serious conduct, which occurred over two school years, involved physical contact with students and epithets and there was no publication of the Member’s name.
College Counsel, in reply, pointed out that, in his opinion, the Musial case involved much less serious conduct, with no sexually suggestive comments or alcohol involved. Musial had also received a satisfactory performance appraisal just prior to the hearing. Counsel repeated that the nature of the Member’s comments, “shit”, “bullshit”, the presence of an opened bottle of alcohol in the closet in his classroom warrants publishing the Member’s name. Counsel also had concerns with the fact that the Member may be returning to the classroom as an occasional teacher and this supported the need for publication of the Member’s name.
PENALTY
The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:
(a) The Member is required to appear before the Committee to be reprimanded, with the fact of the reprimand to be recorded on the Register;
(b) The Registrar is directed to impose the following term or condition on the Member’s certificate of qualification and registration:
(i) the Member is to enrol in and complete, at his own expense, within three (3) months from July 14, 2010, a course of instruction in work place boundaries/professional boundaries and student sensitivities with particular emphasis on the recognition and protection of same, pre-approved by the Registrar;
(ii) within thirty (30) days of his completion of the course outlined in (i) above, shall provide to the Registrar a written Certificate from the Course Provider stating:
A. that he or she has reviewed a copy of the Statement of Uncontested Facts, Plea of No Contest and Joint Submission on Penalty document made an exhibit at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and
B. that the Member has successfully completed the course, and
(c) Pursuant to Section 30 (5) (3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, the findings and order of the Committee shall be published in summary, with the name of the Member in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The reprimand of the Member by his peers in respect of his inappropriate conduct serves to emphasize the necessity to maintain appropriate professional standards. It will further remind the Member to uphold the standards of the profession and to not engage in conduct unbecoming a member. The fact that the reprimand will be recorded on the Register also serves as a specific deterrent to the Member.
Members of the profession must be aware of expectations regarding professional behaviour and not engage in unprofessional conduct. The Member’s behaviours indicated a lack of understanding of professional boundaries and student sensitivities. The course in workplace boundaries / professional boundaries and student sensitivities with particular emphasis on the recognition and protection of same, will clarify for, and reinforce for the Member the need to maintain appropriate professional conduct and student boundaries. The course will assist in the process of remediation of the Member.
Publication of the decision and findings of the Committee, with the name of the Member serves to inform the public that the College will deal with members of the profession who conduct themselves in an inappropriate and unprofessional manner.
The Committee considered the submissions of College Counsel and Counsel for the Member with respect to publication of the Member’s name. The Committee ordered publication of the findings and order with the name of the Member for the following reasons:
The Member’s use of profanity in the presence of students, the presence of alcohol in the classroom, embarrassing a student and telling other students to shut up on numerous occasions and his choice and use of sexually suggestive materials warrants publication with name.
Publication of the Member’s name will serve as a specific deterrent and remind the Member not to repeat his actions.
The Member’s counsel advised that the Member was putting his name forward to be an occasional teacher. Given this information, the Committee believes it is appropriate that the Member’s name be published to ensure transparency, to protect the public interest, and to inform others in the educational community.
Publication of the Member’s name will serve as an added deterrent to all members of the profession by reminding them of the level of professionalism that is expected of teachers and that this type of behaviour will warrant publication.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and serves to protect the public interest.
Date: July 14, 2010
Brent Hamelin, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Robert Ryan, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Pauline Smart Member, Discipline Panel