Ontario College of Teachers v. Cridland, 2014 ONOCT 27

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Cridland, 2014 ONOCT 27

Date: 2014-07-22

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

Charles Murray Cridland, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

PANEL: Pauline Smart, Chair Irene Dembek, OCT

Vicki Shannon, OCT

BETWEEN: ) ) Ava Arbuck,

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

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Daniela De Bartolo,

) Law Clerk

• and – )

) David Bloom,

) Cavalluzzo Shilton McIntyre

) Cornish LLP,

CHARLES MURRAY CRIDLAND ) for Charles Murray Cridland

(CERTIFICATE # 266438) )

) Marc Spector,

) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: July 22, 2014

DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS

This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on July 22, 2014 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing dated March 22, 2011 (Exhibit 1) was served on Charles Murray Cridland (the “Member”), requesting his presence on May 3, 2011 to set a date for a hearing and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for July 22, 2014.

The Member was in attendance at the hearing.

THE ALLEGATIONS

The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated March 22, 2011 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that Charles Murray Cridland is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in section 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act (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, and specifically 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).

STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS

Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced a Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 2), which provides as follows:

1. Charles Murray Cridland (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.

2. At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) and was an [XXX] teacher at [XXX] School, (the “School”), in Toronto, Ontario.

3. Student #1, Student #2 and Student #3 were male students at the School and were [XXX] during the 2006/2007 academic year.

4. On or about June 5, 2007, the Member pulled or held the ear of Student #1.

5. On one occasion between February 1, 2007 and February 28, 2007, the Member held the arms of Student #2.

6. On one occasion between January 1, 2007 and January 31, 2007, the Member touched or squeezed Student #3 in or about his neck area.

7. On or about June 15, 2007, the Member was charged with three counts of assault contrary to s. 266 of the Criminal Code of Canada.

8. The charges of assault were withdrawn against the Member and on April 29, 2008, the Member entered into a Recognizance to Keep the Peace, and undertook to have no contact with Student #1, Student #2 and Student #3. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the Recognizance to Keep the Peace.

9. By letter dated June 19, 2008, the Member was advised by the Board of the imposition of a 30-day suspension without pay, from June 20, 2008 to October 6, 2008; of his transfer from the School to another school of the Board pursuant to the requirements of the above-referred to peace bond; and to his required attendance at and completion of anger management counselling. Attached as Exhibit “C” is a copy of the letter from the Board to the Member.

10. The 30-day suspension was grieved by the Member and reduced to twenty (20) days.

11. If called to give evidence at a contested hearing, the Member’s evidence would be that:

(a) he may physically have separated Students #1 and #3 as there were a number of physical confrontations between these two students, and that any contact made with the students was brief, without force and the Member in no way intended to cause harm;

(b) he may have spoken sternly to Student #2 about this student’s interactions with other students on several occasions and he may have physically separated Student #2 from another student with whom Student #2 was fighting, or to get Student #2’s attention although any physical contact made with Student #2 was brief, without force, and in no way intended to cause harm to Student #2;

(c) following an appreciation of the concerns expressed by these students that he was angry with them on occasion, he recognized that he needed to develop further classroom management capabilities and strategies;

12. The Member has engaged in and successfully completed the following courses:

(a) a 20-hour professional development course about classroom management run by the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario on July 31, August 1 and August 2, 2007, a copy of the certificate of which is attached as Exhibit “D”;

(b) short-term counselling in stress and anger management issues with Shepell.FGI on March 5, 2008, March 18, 2008, April 1, 2008 and April 14, 2008. Attached as Exhibit “E” is a copy of a letter from Barry Brown, EAP Counsellor, dated April 10, 2008, verifying the Member’s participation in this short-term counselling.

PLEA OF NO CONTEST

13. 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 12 above (the “Uncontested Facts”).

14. The Member hereby acknowledges that the Uncontested Facts referred to in paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 above constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).

15. 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.

16. 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.

DECISION

Having considered the evidence, onus and standard of proof, and the submissions made by College Counsel and Counsel for the Member, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that Charles Murray Cridland committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 12 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 2) and acknowledged that the facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct. The Committee accepts the Member’s plea of no contest and the statement tendered by the parties.

The Committee finds that the Member’s physical mistreatment of students on three occasions constitute acts of professional misconduct, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 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:

1. 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 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”)

(b) the Registrar to impose the following term, condition or limitation on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such term, condition or limitation to be recorded on the Register of the College until such time as it is fulfilled:

(i) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete, at his own expense, within three (3) months from the date of the Order of the Discipline Committee, a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar in handling of contentious situations;

(ii) the Member shall deliver directly to the Registrar written confirmation from the course provider that he or she has received a copy of this Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest marked as an exhibit at this hearing, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and

(iii) the Member shall deliver directly to the Registrar, within thirty (30) days of completion of the course, a written confirmation that the Member has successfully completed the course;

(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 publication should include reference to the Member’s name, and submissions will be made to the panel on this issue.

SUBMISSIONS ON PUBLICATION

Submissions of College Counsel

Counsel for the College submitted that the name of the Member should be published in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.

Counsel stated that the intent of the penalty is to provide specific deterrence, general deterrence, rehabilitation, remediation and the protection of the public. The reprimand and the course in handling contentious situations serve as specific deterrents, and deliver the message that the Member is guilty of professional misconduct and that future misconduct will not be tolerated.

Counsel submitted that publication with name denounces the Member’s actions, acts as a specific and general deterrent, and advises the profession that the College will not shield its members from such misconduct.

Counsel submitted that publication with name ensures transparency and openness of the process and restores public confidence. Counsel stated that the profession and the public have a right to know how the College deals with professional misconduct. Counsel concluded that in the absence of a good reason not to publish with name, the name of the Member should be published.

Submissions of Member’s Counsel

Counsel for the Member submitted that there be publication of the findings, without the Member’s name. The Member had been teaching for the same board since 2001. Counsel maintained that publication without name is supported by no involvement of Children’s Aid Society (CAS), criminal charges were dropped, and the incidents occurred more than seven years ago. Member’s Counsel outlined the measures taken by the Member to insure similar incidents would not occur, including the 20-hour course on classroom management, and the Member’s participation in short-term counselling for anger management issues. Counsel drew attention to the Statement of Uncontested Facts (Exhibit 2, paragraph 11) which described the Member’s contact with the students as “brief, without force, and not intended to cause harm”.

Counsel for the Member noted that transparency and the public interest are served by clear notification of the penalty on the Member’s certificate, which is available to the public on the College website with a hyperlink to the discipline decision.

Counsel for the Member also pointed out that the Member had insight and recognition into his behaviour, and the principle of rehabilitation is satisfied by the Member agreeing to take an additional course in handling contentious situations.

Counsel reminded the Committee that they had the discretion to order publication without name and should base their decision on the circumstances of this case, not being held by “rigid policies” that there is a presumption of publication with name.

Both counsel submitted case law in support of their submissions regarding publication.

PENALTY DECISION

The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:

(a) The Member is directed 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 Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”)

(b) The Registrar is directed to impose the following term, condition or limitation on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, the fact of such term, condition or limitation to be recorded on the Register of the College until such time as it is fulfilled:

(i) the Member shall enroll in and successfully complete, at his own expense, within three (3) months from the date of the Order of the Discipline Committee, a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar in handling of contentious situations;

(ii) the Member shall deliver directly to the Registrar written confirmation from the course provider that he or she has received a copy of this Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest marked as an exhibit at this hearing, and the Decision and Reasons of the Discipline Committee; and

(iii) the Member shall deliver directly to the Registrar, within thirty (30) days of completion of the course, a written confirmation that the Member has successfully completed the course;

There shall be publication of the findings and Order of the Committee in summary form with the name of the Member in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.

REASONS FOR PENALTY

The Committee determined that the Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3) was proportionate to the misconduct committed by the Member and appropriate in the circumstances. Therefore, the Committee accepted the proposed penalty presented by the parties.

With regard to the contentious issue of publication of the findings and order of the Committee, in summary, with or without the name of the Member, in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession, the Committee carefully considered the submissions and case law presented by the parties.

The Committee determined that publication with name was appropriate in the circumstances. The Member’s actions were serious enough to warrant a discipline letter from his board detailing previous mistreatment of students, a 20-day suspension, and the issuance of a Recognizance to Keep the Peace. The Member’s professional misconduct also had a significant impact on the young students under his trust and care. This is evidenced by the Recognizance to Keep the Peace, which removed the Member from the school and from having any further contact with the students. This conduct is completely unacceptable, and brings the profession into disrepute.

The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances, and serves and protects the public interest.

Dated: July 22, 2014

______________________________ Pauline Smart

Chair, Discipline Panel

______________________________ Irene Dembek, OCT Member, Discipline Panel

Vicki Shannon, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel