DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
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
Tricia Halliday, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Alexander (Sandy) Bass, OCT, Chair Irene Dembek, OCT Pauline Smart
BETWEEN: ) David Leonard, ) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers, ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Bev Hodsdon, ) Law Clerk
- and – ) TRICIA HALLIDAY ) Vaino Poysa, (CERTIFICATE #404483) ) Ontario Secondary School Teachers ) Federation, ) for Tricia Halliday ) Rebecca Durcan, ) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: August 27, 2014
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on August 27, 2014 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated January 10, 2014 was served on Tricia Halliday (the “Member”), requesting her presence on February 4, 2014 to set a date for a hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for August 27, 2014.
The Member was in attendance at the hearing.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated January 10, 2014 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Tricia Halliday 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 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);
(c) 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
(d) she engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
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:
Tricia Halliday (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 with respect to the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Algoma District School Board (the “Board”).
The Member has a daughter who was diagnosed with health issues at the beginning of the 2012-2013 academic year. The Member was having difficulty coping – both with her child being ill and with the schedule of numerous medical appointments for her child. At her physician’s suggestion, the Member took stress leave from November through to early January, 2013.
The Member owned and resided in her own home. She shared her home with a roommate, who paid rent to her. The Member and her roommate were both involved in a recent local [XXX]. Some Board employees and at least one student of the Board were involved in the [XXX].
The Party:
On or about January 5th and 6th, 2013, friends of the Member’s roommate organized a “Dirty Disney” theme party to celebrate his birthday. The party was held at the Member’s residence and the Member was in attendance.
Twelve to fifteen people attended the party. The majority of guests were part of the local [XXX] group. Attendees included two Board employees who were also part of the [XXX] group.
One of the guests was a [XXX]-year old female student (the “Student”) of the Board. The Student and her mother had known the Member for approximately five years, having met the Member through the local [XXX] group. The Student had never been taught by the Member, and did not attend the School where the Member taught.
The Student and the Member’s roommate recently [XXX] and had become good friends. She attended his birthday party with her parents’ permission. The Member acknowledges that she was aware of and permitted the Student to attend the party at her residence.
Guests brought their own alcohol to the party and drank it in the Member’s home. The Student brought her own alcohol to the party and the Student drank it in the Member’s home during the party. The Member acknowledges that she failed to ensure the Student did not consume alcohol while in her home.
The Student slept overnight at the Member’s home. She awoke in the early afternoon the following day. Following a brief conversation with the Member, the Student left the Member’s home at approximately 1:00 p.m. The Member acknowledges that she showed poor judgment in permitting the Student to attend an adult party at her home, and in permitting the Student to spend the night at her home.
Facebook Page
- During the party, the Member posted a picture of herself on her Facebook page dressed in immodest attire as Minnie Mouse, with a cigarette in her mouth and a wine glass in her hand. The information directly underneath the picture identified the Member as a teacher with the Board. The Member acknowledges that she showed poor judgment in posting the “Minnie Mouse” picture that identified her as a Board teacher on Facebook. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the picture from the Member’s Facebook page.
The Board Investigation:
- On January 7th, 2013, the Board learned that the Member had posted the picture referred to above in paragraph 11. Board administrators met with the Member and her representative on three separate occasions to discuss issues arising out of the party at the Member’s residence on January 5th and 6th, 2013.
Initial Meeting
During their first meeting, the Member provided incomplete information to administrators when asked directly whether other Board employees had attended the party. She acknowledged that other Board employees were part of the [XXX] group, but stated that no Board employees had attended the party. After being shown a picture of one of the Board employees in attendance at the party, the Member acknowledged that the Board employee had attended the party. In fact, the Member eventually acknowledged that two Board employees had attended the party.
The Member also told administrators that the Student who attended the party was [XXX] years old. Later, she admitted to administrators that she knew the Student was only [XXX] years old, and acknowledged it was “stupid” for her to have stated otherwise.
When asked by administrators how late the Student stayed at the party, the Member said she did not know because she went to bed before the party was over, and she believed everyone was gone when she got up the following morning. In fact, the Member knew that the Student had slept over at the Member’s house because the Member spoke to her at approximately 1:00 p.m. the day after the party, before the Student left the house.
At the conclusion of their initial meeting, the Member was advised by Board administrators that they would continue their investigation, and was directed more than once not to speak to anyone about the investigation.
Subsequent Meeting
By the time administrators met with the Member for a follow-up discussion, they had learned that their investigation was no longer confidential. At the outset of their second meeting, the Member admitted to administrators that she had breached confidentiality by sharing information with her roommate following the first meeting, and expressed regret at having done so.
Throughout the remainder of this meeting, the Member answered the questions asked of her, indicating when she had withheld information previously and providing additional information as requested. During this meeting, the Member acknowledged that the Student slept over at her home and did not leave until approximately 1:00 p.m. the following day, and that other Board employees had attended the party.
On January 21st, 2013, the Member was suspended without pay for twenty (20) days. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a copy of the Discipline Letter dated January 16, 2013.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1-19 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
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(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 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 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 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 Tricia Halliday committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 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 19 (the “Admitted Facts”) of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), acknowledged that the Admitted Facts referred to above constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, and admitted the allegations of professional misconduct against her. The Committee accepts the Member’s guilty plea and the statement tendered by the parties.
The Member engaged in inappropriate behaviour with a student. The Member acknowledged that she was aware of and permitted a [XXX] year old student to attend a party at her residence. Furthermore, the student brought her own alcohol to the party and drank it and the Member acknowledged that she failed to ensure that the Student did not consume alcohol while in her home. The student slept overnight at the Member’s home and did not leave until approximately 1:00 p.m. the day after the party. The Member exercised poor judgment in permitting the student to attend an adult party at her home, allowing the student to consume alcohol, and permitting the student to spend the night at her home.
During the party, the Member also posted a photograph of herself on her Facebook page dressed in immodest attire as Minnie Mouse, with a cigarette in her mouth and a wine glass in her hand. There was information contained directly underneath the photograph that identified the Member as a teacher with the Board.
In light of the Member’s behaviour and guilty plea, the Committee finds that the Member committed acts of professional misconduct and, in particular, breached subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional], and 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97.
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:
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”);
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) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, within three months of the date of this Order, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding ethics that addresses issues with respect to boundaries, and the use of social media;
(b) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the course outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the 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.
- 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
The Committee received submissions from College Counsel and from Member’s Counsel with respect to publication of the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. Both counsel submitted case law in support of their respective positions.
Counsel for the College submitted that the Member’s name should be published. College Counsel stated that the publication of the Member’s name would serve as a specific deterrent to the Member and act as a general deterrent to the profession. College Counsel further stated that publication of the Member’s name would promote transparency and foster public confidence in the discipline process.
Counsel for the Member submitted that the Committee should not publish the Member’s name in the official publication of the College and that the principles of specific deterrence, general deterrence and rehabilitation can be met without publication of the Member’s name. Member’s Counsel stated that the conduct was at the lower end of the spectrum, that this was an isolated instance of misconduct, that there does not appear to be a victim in this case, and that the Member has an otherwise lengthy, previously unblemished record. Member’s Counsel further indicated that there was a risk that publication of the Member’s name could harm her career as she had been transferred to a new school.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee makes the following order as to penalty:
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.
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:
(a) the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at her own expense, within three months of August 27, 2014, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding ethics that addresses issues with respect to boundaries, and the use of social media;
(b) within thirty (30) days of her completion of the course outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the 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.
- The findings and orders 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 accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty. The Member allowed a student to attend a party at her home, to consume alcohol in her home, and to sleep over at her home. Furthermore, the Member posted an inappropriate photograph of herself on her Facebook page, identifying herself as an employee of the Board. The Member, when questioned, misled her employer about the circumstances and details of these events which was an additional display of poor judgment and served only to exacerbate the situation.
The reprimand by her peers and on behalf of the profession acts as a specific deterrent to the Member. The fact of the reprimand will remain on the Member’s certificate for a period of three years and will serve as a general deterrent to other members of the profession.
The course work regarding ethics that addresses issues with respect to boundaries and the use of social media will reinforce to the member the need to respect professional boundaries and will teach the Member how to better handle similar situations if they were to arise in the future.
After carefully considering the submissions and case law presented by the parties, the Committee determined that publication with the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession was appropriate in the circumstances. The Member’s actions were serious enough to warrant publication with the Member’s name. The Member allowed the Student to attend an adult party at her home, she did not prevent the Student from consuming alcohol during the party, and she permitted the Student to spend the night at her home. The Member also showed poor judgment in posting inappropriate photographs on Facebook, which identified her as a Board teacher. Moreover, during the Board’s investigation into these incidents, the Member intentionally misled the Board and disclosed confidential information to her roommate, contrary to the Board’s explicit instructions. The Member’s actions were grave enough to warrant a 20-day, unpaid suspension from her Board. Her conduct was completely unacceptable and brings the profession into disrepute.
The Committee determined that the misconduct outweighed the mitigating circumstances presented by Member’s Counsel not to publish the Member’s name. In this case, publication with name provides the transparency expected by the public, acts as a specific deterrent to the Member and serves as a general deterrent to the profession.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and serves and protects the public interest.
Date: October 9, 2014
Alexander (Sandy) Bass, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Irene Dembek, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel
Pauline Smart
Member, Discipline Panel