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
Stephanie Marie Vaillancourt, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Monika Ferenczy, OCT, Chair Pauline Smart Wes Vickers, OCT
BETWEEN: ) Shane D’Souza, ) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers, ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Daniela De Bartolo, ) Law Clerk
- and – ) STEPHANIE MARIE VAILLANCOURT ) Heather McConnell, (CERTIFICATE #265808) ) Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP, ) for Stephanie Marie Vaillancourt ) Marc Spector, ) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: April 14, 2014
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on April 14, 2014 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated February 21, 2012 was served on Stephanie Marie Vaillancourt (the “Member”), requesting her presence on March 8, 2012 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for April 14, 2014.
The Member was not in attendance at the hearing.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated February 21, 2012 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Stephanie Marie Vaillancourt is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in subsection 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) in that:
(a) she failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);
(b) she abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(c) she failed to supervise adequately a student or students, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(11);
(d) she failed to comply with the Act and the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1)(c) thereof or the Regulations made under those Acts, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(14) and 1(15);
(e) she 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
(f) she engaged in conduct unbecoming a Member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
Counsel for the College requested the withdrawal of allegation (b), namely subsection 1(7.2) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Committee granted this request, and the allegation was subsequently withdrawn.
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced an Agreed Statement of Facts, and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides as follows:
Stephanie Marie Vaillancourt (the “Member”) was at all material times, 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 Algoma District School Board (the “Board”) as a Grade [XXX] teacher at [XXX] (the “School”) in [XXX], Ontario.
During a Grade [XXX] class trip that took place between the approximate dates of June 8, 2010 to June 11, 2010, the Member slept in her sleeping bag in the cabin where she was supervising five (5) female students. Each of the cabins had an adult chaperone present.
During the Grade [XXX] class trip, the Member allowed students to leave the cabin and go outside, unsupervised, in the early morning hours to go to the trampoline, which was in an open field, for a short period of time.
After the Grade [XXX] class trip, the Member posted pictures of her students, from the trip, on her personal Facebook page, without parental permission to do so.
The Member was given a five (5) day suspension without pay by the Board.
By this document, the Member admits, for the purposes of this proceeding only, the truth of the facts and the exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 6 above (the “Agreed Facts”).
GUILTY PLEA
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Agreed Facts referred to in paragraphs 4 to 6 above, constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, and pleads guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against her, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(11), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18-unprofessional) and 1(19).
By this document the Member states that:
(a) she understands fully the nature of the allegations against her;
(b) she understands that by signing this document she is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Agreed Statement of Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) she understands that by pleading guilty to the allegations, she is waiving the right to require the College to prove the case against her and the right to have a hearing;
(d) she 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 her name, may be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) she understands that any agreement between counsel for the College and herself with respect to the penalty proposed in this document does not bind the Discipline Committee;
(f) she understands and acknowledges that she is executing this Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel.
- In light of the agreed facts, circumstances and plea of guilt, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee find the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
DECISION
Having considered the evidence, onus and standard of proof, 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 Stephanie Marie Vaillancourt committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(11), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18 - unprofessional) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 6 (the “Agreed Facts”) of the Agreed Statement of Facts, and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2). She acknowledged that the Agreed Facts referred to in paragraphs 4 to 6 above, constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and pleaded guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct. The Committee accepted the Member’s guilty plea and the facts in the Agreed Statement of Facts, and Guilty Plea.
While on a Grade [XXX] class trip in June 2010, the Member allowed students to leave the cabin and go outside, unsupervised in the early morning hours to go to the trampoline, for a short period of time, which was in an open field. Further, after the class trip, the Member posted pictures of her students, from the trip, on her personal Facebook page, without parental permission to do so.
Based on the above conduct, the Committee finds the Member to be guilty of professional misconduct as alleged, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(11), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18 - unprofessional) and 1(19).
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Counsel for the College and counsel for the Member submitted a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 4) indicating the following:
The Ontario College of Teachers and the Member jointly submit that the appropriate penalty to be imposed by the Discipline Committee in this matter would be that the Committee:
directs that the Member appear before the Committee within four (4) months of the date of the Order of the Committee to receive a reprimand and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”). The reprimand will be delivered in person at the offices of the College, 101 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario;
directs the Registrar to impose the following terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such terms, conditions, or limitations to be recorded on the Register until such time as they are fulfilled:
(i) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding appropriate boundaries;
(ii) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the course outlined in (i) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the course provider stating that:
A. he or she has reviewed a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts, Guilty Plea and Joint Submission on Penalty documents made exhibits at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and
B. the Member has successfully completed the course.
- directs 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 Member’s name should be included and submissions will be made on that issue.
SUBMISSIONS ON PUBLICATION WITH OR WITHOUT NAME
Submissions of College Counsel
Counsel for the College submitted that the Member’s name should be published in the College’s official publication Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession to achieve specific and general deterrence. Counsel stated that once a member has been found guilty of professional misconduct, then the norm is to publish the member’s name. Counsel stated that this is not an exceptional case and therefore the member’s name must be published. Counsel also stated that the proceedings are open to the public and there is no reason to withhold the name of the member. Publication with name would give greater weight to the finding of professional misconduct and is expected by the public. College Counsel stated that it was ironic that privacy is requested by the Member when one of the agreed facts is that she breached student privacy. The Member’s breach of supervision and student privacy warrants publication; each fact on its own is enough to warrant publication with name.
Submissions of Member’s Counsel
Counsel for the Member submitted that the Member’s name should not be published in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. Counsel indicated that the public does not demand publication of name. Counsel’s position was that the public interest is served by the publication of the summary and the penalty itself and meets the Committee’s and the College’s goals for general and specific deterrence. Counsel stated that the misconduct is minor on the spectrum and that the Member has pled guilty and will be sufficiently punished. Counsel indicated that the Member teaches in a small community, has worked without incident for the last four years and has worked hard to rebuild her professional reputation. Counsel stated that the Member has moved on and “publication would take her back and knock her down” and undo what she has accomplished. Counsel further stated that the penalty satisfies specific deterrence and publication of the findings is sufficient to convey the conduct and how it will be addressed, therefore satisfying general deterrence.
Counsel stated that there would be no further purpose served in publishing the Member’s name and that there is no presumption of publication, and is at the discretion of the Committee, pursuant to subsection 30(5)(3) of the Act. Counsel stated that the Committee should balance the rights of the Member, the public and the profession in making their decision.
Counsel stated that College Counsel did not state specific reasons why to publish the Member’s name. Counsel asked the Committee to consider “what reason, purpose or fact exists to tip it to the side of publication, and is it fair and reasonable.” Counsel stated College counsel has failed to show grounds for publication and it is not up to the Member to make a case for non-publication.
Reply Submission of College Counsel
In response to the submissions of Member’s counsel, counsel for the College disagreed that the misconduct was on the low end of the spectrum and stated “what if something happened to the students” while left unattended, “is that not serious enough?” Counsel submitted that the College does not have two standards, one for small communities versus big cities, and to find otherwise would be a bias towards leniency towards teachers in small communities. Counsel further stated that there was no evidence before the Committee on the impact on the Member, should her name be published.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:
The Member is required to appear before the Committee within four (4) months from April 14, 2014 to receive a reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the College Register.
The Registrar is directed to impose the following terms, conditions, and limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such terms, conditions, or limitations to be recorded on the Register until such time as they are fulfilled:
(i) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding appropriate boundaries;
(ii) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the course outlined in (i) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the course provider stating that:
A. he or she has reviewed a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts, Guilty Plea and Joint Submission on Penalty documents made exhibits at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and
B. the Member has successfully completed the course.
- The findings and order of the Committee shall be published in summary form, with the name of the Member, in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 4), having determined that the proposed sanction is appropriate in the circumstances and proportional to the misconduct committed by the Member. In this case, a reprimand is required and acts as a specific deterrent. The recording of this reprimand on the Member’s certificate will function as a general deterrent to the profession.
The professional boundaries course will address improving professional judgment and decision making for the Member to avoid such errors in judgment as seen in this matter.
Publication with name is necessary to give weight to this finding of professional misconduct. This standard applies to all teachers, whether in small communities or larger cities. It sends a clear message that breaches in student supervision and student privacy will not be tolerated in the profession. The protection and safety of students, on or off school property, must be upheld at all times. The Committee agrees that the Member should not be entitled to personal privacy, while being found guilty and admitted to breaching student privacy. The Committee further noted that no evidence was provided to substantiate the claim that, should the Member’s name be published, it would have a negative impact on her professional career.
The principle of general deterrence is respected through publication with name, which demonstrates that behaviour such as this is not acceptable. Publication also guarantees that the public trust will be maintained through the demonstration of appropriate penalty and transparency of process.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and serves and protects the public interest.
Date: April 14, 2014
Monika Ferenczy, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
Pauline Smart
Member, Discipline Panel
Wes Vickers, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel