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
Gregory Horsford, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Shanlee Linton, OCT, Chair
Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT
Marie-Claude Yaacov
BETWEEN: ) Ava Arbuck,
) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Annie Lacroix,
) Law Clerk
– and – )
GREGORY HORSFORD ) Peter Berlingieri,
(CERTIFICATE #108259) ) Berlingieri Law Firm LLP,
) for Gregory Horsford )
) Rebecca Durcan,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel
) ) Heard: September 29, 2015
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on September 29, 2015 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated February 20, 2013 (Exhibit 1) was served on Gregory Horsford (the “Member”), requesting his presence on February 27, 2013 to set a date for hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for September 29, 2015.
Neither Gregory Horsford nor his lawyer was present at the hearing.
THE ALLEGATIONS
IT IS ALLEGED that the Member is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in subsection 30(2) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (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 verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
(c) he failed to supervise adequately a person who is under the professional supervision of the member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(11);
(d) he 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);
(e) 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);
(f) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
At the hearing on September 29, 2015, Counsel for the College requested that the allegation of professional misconduct outlined in paragraph (c) of the Notice of Hearing be withdrawn. The Committee granted the request.
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 3), which provides the following:
At all material times, Gregory Horsford was a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached to Exhibit 2 at Tab “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”) as a teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”).
During the 2010-2011 academic year, the Member taught Grade [XXX] and Grade [XXX] [XXX] at the School.
Between September and late November 2010, the Member often yelled at his classes and, at times, berated students generally. He used inappropriate language in his classes including:
(a) “shit”;
(b) “damn”;
(c) “hell”;
(d) “asshole”;
(e) “idiot”;
(f) “stupid”.
At least one student felt intimidated and uncomfortable in the Member’s class because the member was constantly yelling. Other students confirmed that the Member regularly yelled and used swear words during instruction time on a regular basis.
The Member went on medical leave effective December 13, 2010. He retired from the Board in June 2011.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in the paragraphs above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and pleads guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional], 1(19).
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 Admitted Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading guilty to the allegations, he is waiving the right to require the College to otherwise 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 him and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed 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.
- 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 Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct. In particular, the Committee finds that the Member committed acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 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 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and pleaded guilty to the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Committee accepts that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional], and 1(19).
Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member contravened Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional], and 1(19).
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Through a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 4), Counsel for the College and Counsel for the Member jointly submitted that the appropriate penalty to be imposed by the Discipline Committee in this matter would be that the Committee:
direct that prior to undertaking any teaching position or any other position for which a Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required (collectively referred to as a “Teaching Position”), the Member shall appear before the Committee, on a date to be arranged by the Member, 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”);
direct the Registrar to impose the following terms, conditions, or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and the fact of such terms, conditions, or limitations is to be recorded on the Register until such time as they are fulfilled;
(a) prior to commencing or returning to any Teaching Position, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete, at his own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding anger management in the classroom:
(i) the Member will provide the course provider with a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and Joint Submission on Penalty, documents made exhibits at the hearing of this matter, and the Decision, Reasons for Decision and Orders of the Discipline Committee;
(ii) upon review of the documents noted at paragraph (i) above, the course provider will provide to the Registrar, for approval, a syllabus for the proposed course which specifically addresses the Discipline Committee’s concerns regarding the Member’s professional misconduct. The syllabus proposed by the course provider shall also specify the length of the course to be undertaken by the Member, and the assignments to be completed by the Member;
(iii) the course shall be completed no more than three months before commencing or returning to a Teaching Position;
(b) within 30 days of his completion of the course outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written report from the course provider stating that the Member has successfully completed the course and reporting on the progress of the Member with respect to addressing the outlined goals of the course.
- direct 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 publication with the name of the Member is warranted in this case. Counsel for the College submitted that publication with name will serve the purposes of specific deterrence, general deterrence, transparency and accountability. Counsel for the College further submitted that publication with name demonstrates to the profession that the College will not tolerate the type of conduct in which the Member engaged, and that there are serious consequences for such conduct.
Counsel for the College added that publication with the name of the Member ensures the transparency of the discipline process and accountability to the public. Publication with name informs the public, the Member’s former students and their parents that the College addresses matters of professional misconduct in a transparent manner and that it will not shield its members who engage in acts that constitute professional misconduct.
Counsel for the College referred the Committee to two cases involving inappropriate
professional communications with students: Ontario College of Teachers v. Bryant, 2014 LNONCTD 80 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Ashford-Smith, 2014 LNONCTD 73. College Counsel urged the Committee to consider these cases when determining the issue of publication.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Penalty presented by the parties and makes an order in accordance with its terms, as set out above. With respect to the issue of publication, the Committee directs that there be publication of a summary of the finding and order of the Committee in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession, with the name of the Member.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties. The Committee recognizes that, once it ensures that it has jurisdiction to make the order requested, the law confines the Committee’s role to determining whether the proposed penalty is so unreasonable that accepting it would bring the administration of justice or the discipline process into disrepute. The Committee finds that the penalty proposed in the Joint Submission on Penalty is proportionate to the misconduct committed by the Member and is reasonable given the circumstances of this case.
The Committee finds that the Member’s misconduct warrants a reprimand. The reprimand will serve as a specific deterrent and will allow the College to address its concerns with the Member. The reprimand will also serve as a general deterrent to members of the profession as the fact of the reprimand will be recorded on the Register.
The Committee finds that, should the Member return to teaching, the course of instruction regarding anger management in the classroom will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. Furthermore, the coursework will assist the Member in making better decisions in any future interactions with students including appropriate language and behaviour.
The Committee finds that publication with the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession is warranted. The Member’s continuous use of inappropriate language while yelling at students in his class is unacceptable. Accordingly, publication with name is necessary.
The Committee determined that publication with the Member’s name assures transparency and accountability of the disciplinary process and reinforces the mandate of the College to serve and protect the public interest. Publication with name serves as a general deterrent by reminding the profession that such behaviour is not tolerated. Moreover, publication with name advises the public and the profession that the College does not shield its members when matters of this nature are brought to its attention.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and serves and protects the public interest.
Date: October 6, 2015
Shanlee Linton, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
Jean-Luc Bernard, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel
Marie-Claude Yaacov
Member, Discipline Panel