Ontario College of Teachers v. Welland, 2014 ONOCT 110

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Welland, 2014 ONOCT 110

Date: 2014-10-14

IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) and the Regulation (Ontario Regulation 437/97) thereunder;

AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against

Aidan Elizabeth Welland, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

PANEL: Christine Bellini, OCT, Chair Irene Dembek, OCT Pauline Smart

BETWEEN: ) David Leonard,

) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Daniela De Bartolo,

) Law Clerk

• and – )

AIDAN ELIZABETH WELLAND ) Heather Ann McConnell,

(CERTIFICATE # 431351) ) Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP,

) for Aidan Elizabeth Welland

) Rebecca Durcan,

) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel

) ) Heard: October 14, 2014

DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS

This matter came on before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on October 14, 2014 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing dated August 13, 2013 was served on Aidan Elizabeth Welland (the “Member”), requesting her presence on September 5, 2013 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for October 14, 2014.

The Member was in attendance at the hearing.

THE ALLEGATIONS

The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated August 13, 2013 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that Aidan Elizabeth Welland 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 released or disclosed information about a student to a person other than the student or the student’s parent, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(6);

(c) she failed to comply with the Education Act, Revised Statutes of Ontario, 1990, chapter E.2, and specifically subsection 264(1) thereof or the Regulations made under that Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15);

(d) 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,

(e) she engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).

Counsel for the College requested the withdrawal of allegations (b) and (c), namely subsections 1(6) and 1(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Committee granted this request, and the allegations were 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:

1. Aidan Elizabeth Welland (the “Member”) is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached as Exhibit “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information respecting the Member.

2. At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) as an Elementary teacher.

3. Student No. 1 was a [XXX] student of the Board. [XXX].

4. On or about December 13, 2011, the Member used a pseudonym and sent emails to the Principal of the school attended by Student No. 1 (“the School”), falsely alleging that the Member’s [XXX] had been bullied by Student No. 1 at the School and insisted that a “Bill 157” reporting form be completed.

5. The Member also falsely alleged in the email to the Principal that Student No. 1’s teacher had ignored the bullying and failed to protect her [XXX]. A copy of the email exchange with the Principal is attached hereto as Exhibit “B”.

6. Contrary to the allegations contained in the email, the Member did not have a [XXX] enrolled at the School. The Member did not teach at the School, nor had she had any opportunity to observe the behaviour of Student No. 1 at the School.

7. On or about December 19, 2011, the Member used a pseudonym and sent an email to the mother of Student No. 1 (“the Parent”), falsely alleging that Student No. 1 was constantly bullying her [XXX] at the School. A copy of the email to the mother of Student No. 1 is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C”.

8. In and around December 2011, the Member posted false comments about the Parent and her [XXX], Student No. 1, on a public website, using a pseudonym. The website was the website for the professional office of the Parent. The comments identified Student No. 1 by his name and as the son of the Parent, and stated as follows:

“Please respond to my email. We need to get the bully situation between [Student No. 1] an [sic] my [XXX] under control. This is the last place I want to sen [sic] it buy [sic] I am out of ideas. We need some real parenting. ”

A copy of the website page is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D”.

9. On December 20, 2011, the Member posted a further false comment on the website, stating:

“Don’t go to[the Parent]. She is a horrible person. Her son has been beating my [XXX] daily for weeks now and she does nothing about it. Horrible person! I wouldn’t be surprised if you see his name in the paper for assault. She refuses to acknowledge my complaints, so I will do it here for all to see.”

A copy of the website page is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “E”.

10. On or about December 19, 2011, the Member used a different pseudonym and sent an e-mail to the Principal of the school where the father of Student No. 1 was a [XXX]. In the email, she falsely alleged that he planned to take several “sick” days off in January in order to take his children on a vacation. A copy of the email is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “F”.

11. If the Member were to testify, she would say that she engaged in the conduct described above because she felt that Student No. 1 had behaved inappropriately to the Member’s [XXX] at [XXX] events.

GUILTY PLEA

12. By this document, the Member admits, for the purposes of this proceeding only, the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1-11 above (the “Admitted Facts”).

13. The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts referred to above constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and admits the allegations of professional misconduct against her, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(18) and 1(19).

14. 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 Admitted 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 her counsel and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed 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.

15. In light of the Admitted Facts and circumstances and the 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 Aidan Elizabeth Welland committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(18) and 1(19).

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Member acknowledged that the Admitted Facts in the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2) constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and pleaded guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against her. The Committee accepts the Member’s guilty plea and the statement tendered by the parties.

The Member, using a pseudonym, sent emails to the Principal of the School attended by Student No. 1, a [XXX] student, falsely alleging that Student No. 1 had bullied her son. However, her [XXX] did not attend the same school as Student No. 1. The Member, using a pseudonym, also sent an email to Student No. 1’s mother, falsely alleging that Student No. 1 was constantly bullying her [XXX]. The Member also posted false comments about the Parent and her son, Student No. 1 on a public website, using a pseudonym. The comments identified Student No. 1 by his name and as the son of the Parent. Further, the Member, using a different pseudonym, sent an email to the Principal of the School where the father of Student No. 1 was a [XXX] and falsely alleged that he planned to take several “sick” days off in January to take his children on vacation. The Member states that if she were to testify she would say that she engaged in the conduct described above because she felt that Student No. 1 behaved inappropriately to the Member’s [XXX] at [XXX] events.

The Member used her position of power and privilege to try and manipulate a Principal by emailing him false accusations regarding Student No. 1. Further, she stated that Student No. 1 had “punched, slapped and bitten several times” her [XXX], who did not even attend that school. The Member also alleged that Student No. 1’s teacher had ignored the bullying and failed to protect her [XXX]. The Member continued to make false allegations by sending an email to Student No. 1’s mother, accusing the student of physically and emotionally abusing her [XXX] at school. She took it one step further by publicly posting these allegations on a public website and naming the student and the parent. Finally, the Member, made false allegations about the Student’s father, who is a [XXX], by emailing his principal and alleging that he planned to take several “sick days” off to take his family on vacation.

The Committee therefore finds the member guilty of professional misconduct as alleged, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(18) and 1(19).

JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY

Counsel for the College and counsel for the Member submitted a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3) 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:

1. directs that the Member appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand which will be delivered in person at the offices of the Ontario College of Teachers, 101 Bloor Street W., Toronto, Ontario, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”);

2. 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:

(a) within six months of the Discipline Committee’s order, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, courses of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding ethics in the workplace and appropriate personal and professional boundaries in the workplace;

(b) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the courses outlined in (i) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from each course provider stating that:

(i) he or she has reviewed a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea 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

(ii) the Member has successfully completed the course.

3. 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

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. College counsel argued that the hearing itself is a transparent proceeding, open to the public and the Member’s name will appear in the Committee’s decision on the College’s website. The public will therefore know the Member’s identity, and it would only make sense to be consistent and publish her name in the College’s magazine.

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, as the penalty meets the four sentencing principles of specific and general deterrence, rehabilitation and the public interest. Member’s counsel further stated that this was not a case that was in the public interest. Counsel stated that the misconduct was at the low end of the scale and that the penalty and publication of the findings without the name of the Member was sufficient to meet both specific and general deterrence. Counsel for the Member stated that the Member took responsibility in admitting that this was a private family matter that she made public and publishing her name would “continue to put her family through the ringer”.

PENALTY DECISION

The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:

1. The Member is required to 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 College register.

2. The Registrar of the Ontario College of Teachers is directed to impose the following terms, conditions or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such terms and conditions and limitations to be recorded on the Register of the College until such time as they are fulfilled:

(a) within six months of the Discipline Committee’s order, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, courses of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding ethics in the workplace and appropriate personal and professional boundaries in the workplace;

(b) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the courses outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from each course provider stating that:

(i) the course provider has reviewed a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea 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

(ii) the Member has successfully completed the course.

3. 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 3), having determined that the proposed sanction is proportional to the misconduct committed by the Member and appropriate in the circumstances.

In this case, a reprimand and course work are required as specific deterrents. The recording of this reprimand on the Member’s certificate will function as a general deterrent to the profession.

Publication with name is necessary in this matter. The Member, on multiple occasions, used pseudonyms to protect her own identity, and made false accusations towards the student, a colleague and another professional. The Member’s disregard for others’ privacy and reputation, forfeits her request that her name not be published.

The principle of general deterrence is respected through publication with name, which demonstrates that behaviour such as this will not be tolerated. Publication, with name, also guarantees transparency and applies consistency to the process of a hearing that is open to the public.

The Committee determined that this decision is appropriate in the circumstances and will serve to protect the public interest.

Date: October 14, 2014

Christine Bellini, OCT

Chair, Discipline Panel

Irene Dembek, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel

Pauline Smart

Member, Discipline Panel