DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act (the "Act") and Ontario Regulation 437/97
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against Salvatore (Sam) Congi, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
COMMITTEE: Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT, Chair Marie-Louise Chartrand Louis Sloan, OCT
BETWEEN: ) ) Christine Lonsdale, ) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) for the Ontario College of Teachers, ) assisted by Annie Lacroix, ) Law Clerk
- and- ) ) Marie-Pierre Pilon, SALVATORE (SAM) CONGI ) Nelligan O'Brien Payne, (CERTIFICATE #179960) ) for Salvatore (Sam) Congi ) Paul Marshall, ) Emond Harnden LLP, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: July 21, 2014
DECISION AS TO PENALTY
On February 5, 2014, a panel of the Discipline Committee (the "Committee") handed down a written decision finding Salvatore Congi ("the Member") guilty of professional misconduct. The Member is accused of engaging in an inappropriate personal relationship with a female student ("Student A") and of having sexual contact with her. After hearing the testimony and reviewing the relevant admissible evidence, and the submissions by counsel, the Committee finds that the evidence fails to prove the allegation of sexual abuse against the Member.
The Committee does, however, find that the Member made an error of judgment and is guilty of professional misconduct. The Member admitted to being alone in his car with Student A on an isolated road. According to the Committee, his conduct was inappropriate and constitutes flagrant disregard of the professional relationship which must exist between a teacher and a student. In view of the Member's actions, the Committee finds Salvatore Congi guilty of professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
A subsequent hearing was held on July 21, 2014 for the Committee to determine the appropriate penalty. The Member was in attendance at the hearing.
The Member's Testimony
The Member testified that he voluntarily signed an undertaking not to work as a teacher until the College had dealt with the complaint filed against him (Exhibit 1). The Member said that he had not taught since signing this document.
In cross-examination, the Member said that after his arrest, he was suspended with pay for two months by his Board. After his first suspension, the Member was suspended for a second time without pay for 22 months. During this suspension, he continued to receive employee benefits. One year after his suspension, the Member began working in the construction sector.
The Member stated that he had not yet taken a course on teachers' professional boundaries. He was not sure whether he wished to go back to teaching or not.
Submissions by Counsel for the College
According to Counsel for the College, the appropriate penalty would include the following:
- a reprimand;
- a course on teachers' professional boundaries;
- a one- to three-month suspension; and
- publication of a summary of the decision and order of the Committee, including the Member's name, in the College's official publication.
Counsel for the College produced a number of previous decisions made by the Discipline Committee as precedents in support of the penalty she recommended.
Counsel for the College contended that the Committee described the Member's actions as serious. In its written decision dated February 5, 2014, the Committee noted that being alone with a student in his car was "highly inappropriate." She also submitted that the Member tried to conceal his actions from the constable who discovered him in a car with Student A.
According to Counsel for the College, the matter required a suspension, in view of the lack of mitigating factors. The Member, in fact, failed to acknowledge his professional misconduct at the hearing on the merits of the case and had not enrolled in a course on teachers' professional boundaries.
Counsel for the College further maintained that publication of the Member's name in the summary of the matter in the College's official publication was necessary to uphold the transparency of the Discipline Committee's proceedings.
Submissions by Counsel for the Member
According to Counsel for the Member, the appropriate penalty would include the following:
- a reprimand;
- a course on teachers' professional boundaries (to be completed within 120 days of the order made by the Committee); and
- publication of a summary of the decision and order of the Committee, without the Member's name, in the College's official publication.
Counsel for the Member produced a number of previous decisions made by the Discipline Committee as precedents in support of the penalty she recommended.
Counsel for the Member submitted that a suspension would be an excessive disciplinary measure in the circumstances. In light of the agreement entered into by the Member, the teacher's Certificate of Qualification and Registration had already been suspended for five years. In the opinion of Counsel for the Member, an additional suspension would be excessive and would not assist the Committee in promoting public awareness.
Counsel for the Member urged the Committee not to publish the Member's name in the summary of the matter in the College's official publication, noting that the teacher's criminal trial had been highly publicized and the decision to administer a reprimand would be published in the College's public register. According to Counsel for the Member, the College's objectives with respect to transparency had already been achieved.
Counsel for the Member also drew attention to the mitigating factors in the case: the isolated nature of the incident in the car with Student A, the absence of previous or subsequent incidents and the five-year suspension served by the teacher. She argued that these factors pointed to the aptness of the penalty recommended by the teacher: a reprimand, a course on teachers' professional boundaries and the publication of the decision and order of the Committee, without the Member's name.
Response from the College
In her response, Counsel for the College emphasized the impact of the events on Student A. Even though the Committee had not found that the Member had sexually abused Student A, the teacher's actions clearly had negative repercussions for her.
Counsel for the College stated that the Member might return to teaching, which made it necessary to publish his name in order to inform the public and the school boards of his professional misconduct, and that there had not been any recurrence because the Member was not a classroom teacher.
Counsel for the College submitted to the Committee members that the jurisprudence produced at the hearing ought to serve as an indication of appropriate penalties in similar cases and that it was important to note the dates of the decisions. Some decisions produced by Counsel for the Member were not representative of current practice as to publication of the teacher's name.
Decision as to Penalty
The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:
(a) The Member is to appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing to receive a reprimand. This decision is to be published in the College's public register of members.
(b) The Committee directs the Registrar to impose the following conditions and limitations on the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and to publish this decision in the public register:
(i) Within 120 days of the date of this order, the Member must enrol, at his own expense, in a course, approved in advance by the Registrar, on maintaining appropriate boundaries.
(ii) Within 30 days of completion of the aforementioned course, the Member must provide the Registrar with written proof of successful completion of the course.
(c) The Committee directs the Registrar to suspend the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration for one month as of July 21, 2014. This decision is to be published in the College's public register.
(d) The decision and order of the Committee are to be published in summary form, including the Member's name, in the next regular issue of Professionally Speaking/ Pour parler profession.
Reasons for the Decision as to Penalty
The Committee carefully considered the arguments made by both sides. The College and the Member are in agreement as to the basic elements of the penalty: a reprimand, successful completion of a course on maintaining professional boundaries and publication in the College publication. The Committee used its discretion to add the following two elements to the penalty: suspension and publication of the Member's name.
In the Committee's estimation, a reprimand is a penalty proportionate to the misconduct, which will serve as a specific deterrent for the Member and impress upon him the seriousness of his misconduct. The fact that the reprimand will be published in the College's public register of members will serve as a general deterrent and will also demonstrate to the public that the College continues to take such misconduct very seriously.
In the Committee's opinion, the Member must enrol in a course to thoroughly familiarize himself with and apply the professional standards governing relationships with students. This course serves both an educational and a rehabilitative purpose.
The one-month suspension sends a clear message to the Member and to the members of the teaching profession that such conduct is taken very seriously and will not be tolerated. Nevertheless, while taking into consideration the fact that the Member has not been in the classroom for five years, it is important to underscore the seriousness of his actions by imposing an appropriate penalty. The one-month suspension, to take effect on July 21, 2014, will deter the Member from repeating his mistake.
The Committee takes seriously its responsibility to hand down decisions which act as a general deterrent. With respect to the publication, the only way to make the members of the teaching profession aware of the seriousness of such misconduct is to publish the most comprehensive information possible, and particularly the name of the Member. Accordingly, the Committee believes that the publication of the Member's name is appropriate and constitutes an important element of the penalty.
The Committee finds that the penalty is appropriate, preserves the integrity of the teaching profession, maintains public confidence in the teaching profession and serves and protects the public interest.
July 21, 2014
______________________________
Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT, Chair, Discipline Committee
______________________________
Marie-Louise Chartrand, Member, Discipline Committee
______________________________
Louis Sloan, OCT, Member, Discipline Committee