Ontario College of Teachers v. Boissonneault, 2015 ONOCT 4

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Boissonneault, 2015 ONOCT 4

Date: 2015-06-15

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

AND IN THE MATTER OF discipline proceedings against

Guy Boissonneault, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

PANEL: Monique Lapalme Arseneault, Chair Darlene Mead, OCT Louis Sloan, OCT

BETWEEN: ) ) Dina Awad, ) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers, ) assisted by Annie Lacroix, Paralegal – and – ) ) Danielle Leon Foun Lin, GUY BOISSONNEAULT ) Sack Goldblatt Mitchell LLP, (CERTIFICATE #: 439867) ) for Guy Boissonneault ) Renée Kopp, ) Jones LLP, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) Heard: June 15, 2015

DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDERS

This matter came on before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on June 15, 2015 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing (Exhibit 1), dated December 2, 2014 was served on Guy Boissonneault (the “Member”) requesting his attendance before the Discipline Committee of the Ontario College of Teachers on January 19, 2015 to set a date for the hearing. The hearing was subsequently set for June 15, 2015.

The Member was in attendance.

ALLEGATIONS

IT IS ALLEGED that Guy Boissonneault is guilty of professional conduct as defined in subsection 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 physically, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.1);

(d) he failed to supervise adequately a person who was under his professional supervision, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(11);

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

(f) 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

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

At the hearing on June 15, 2015, Counsel for the College announced that the College was withdrawing one of the above-mentioned allegations of professional misconduct, notably the allegation of failure to comply with Ontario Regulation 437/97 of the Act, subsection 1(7.2), as set out in paragraph (c) above. The Committee agreed to have this allegation withdrawn.

AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS

Counsel for the College advised the Committee that an agreement had been reached on the facts and introduced the document Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (the “Agreement”) (Exhibit 2), which provides as follows:

Mr. Boissonneault (the “Member”) is a member in good standing of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit 2 (Appendix A) is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information respecting the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board as a teacher. During the 2012-2013 and 2013-2014 school years, the Member taught at [XXX] School in Peterborough.
On February 12, 2013, the Member grabbed a Grade [XXX] student and pushed him against the handrail of a portable for a maximum of 15 seconds to put an end to inappropriate behaviour by the student, who continued to hit him in the behind, despite the Member’s repeated directives. The student had been leaning against the handrail just prior to the incident.
The incident was reported as a risk to physical safety to the Kawartha-Haliburton Children’s Aid Society (the “CAS”). On the basis of three students’ testimonies, the CAS concluded that the allegations had been verified. The CAS did not question the Member.
The investigation by the CAS was reported to the Peterborough Lakefield Community Police Service. The Peterborough Lakefield Community Police Service also carried out an investigation. No criminal charges related to the incident were laid against the Member.
On June 26, 2013, the Member brought a group of Grade [XXX] students to his home, located a few minutes by foot from the school, to show them his [XXX] collection. The number of adults required to supervise the students on this outing was insufficient based on the recommendations of the School Board.
On September 19, 2013, the Member failed to provide adequate supervision for the students in a park during a [XXX] game. A parent affirmed that when she arrived to pick up her daughter, the Member was not within view. Other students indicated that they could not find the teacher anywhere.

GUILTY PLEA

By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts that are referred to in paragraphs 1 to 7 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the above-mentioned Admitted Facts constitute professional misconduct, and admits the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7.1), 1(11), 1(15), and 1(18) and 1(19).
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 prove the case against him and his right to have a hearing;

(d) he understands that an agreement between the College and the Member with respect to penalty does not bind the Discipline Committee; and

(e) he understands this Agreement and that he is signing it voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel.

In light of the Admitted Facts described above and the Guilty Plea, the Ontario College of Teachers and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee should find that the Member’s actions constitute professional misconduct.

DECISION

With respect to the Member and in light of the Agreed Statement of Facts, the Guilty Plea and the submissions made by Counsel, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct, and finds the Member guilty of professional misconduct for having breached Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7.1), 1(11), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19), as indicated in the Notice of Hearing.

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Member admitted the truth of the facts referred to in paragraphs 1 to 7 of the Agreement. He acknowledged that the Agreed Facts referred to in paragraphs 3 to 7 constitute professional misconduct. The Committee accepts the Member’s Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea as presented by the parties. The facts presented support a finding of professional misconduct, and the Committee finds the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee believes the incidents that occurred are inappropriate.

The Member’s conduct towards a Grade [XXX] student during an altercation and a lack of judgment concerning student supervision during two field trips are the reasons for his being brought before the Committee.

Members of the College are required to comply with professional standards and to demonstrate conduct becoming of a member of the profession. By grabbing a student and pushing him against a portable or a structure connected to a portable, Mr. Boissonneault committed an act that members would reasonably regard as disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional. As a member of the College, Mr. Boissonneault has a duty to ensure that students under his responsibility feel valued and respected at all times. In this case, the Member failed in his duty to create a safe environment conducive to the student’s development.

Furthermore, the Committee affirmed that the Member’s failure to fulfil his duty as supervisor, which put his students at risk, was also very serious. One of the responsibilities of a teacher is to ensure that students are supervised at all times. During this hearing, the Committee heard that the Member failed in fulfilling this duty:

by bringing a group of Grade [XXX] students to his home, located several minutes by foot from school, to show them his [XXX] collection; and
by not adequately supervising students in a park during a [XXX] game.

Through these acts and omissions, the Member failed to comply with professional standards, abused a student physically and failed to adequately supervise a person placed under his professional supervision. He also failed to comply with the Education Act, committed acts that would reasonably be regarded by members as disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional and engaged in conduct unbecoming of a member.

JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY

The College and the Member jointly affirmed that the penalty that should be imposed by the Discipline Committee is as follows:

The Discipline Committee requires that the Member appear before the Discipline Committee immediately following the hearing, and that the Committee impose a reprimand that will be delivered in person at the College’s offices located at 101 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario, and that this fact be recorded on the public register.
The Committee directs the Registrar to impose the following terms and restrictions on the Member’s teaching certificate, and that they be recorded on the public register:

(a) The Member shall enrol in and successfully complete, at his own expense, within 120 days of the date of this Order, a course pre-approved by the Registrar on boundary issues and on student supervision, subject to the following conditions:

(i) within 30 days of the date of the Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee, the Member will provide a course provider approved by the Registrar with a copy of the Agreed Statement of Facts, the Guilty Plea, and the Joint Submission on Penalty filed as evidence of the hearing in this case, as well as the Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order by the Discipline Committee;

(ii) upon review of the documents mentioned in paragraph (i) above, the course provider will provide the Registrar, for approval, with a program for the proposed course that will specifically address the concerns of the Discipline Committee regarding the Member’s professional misconduct. The program proposed by the course provider must also specify the length of said course, and its goals;

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

(i) the Member has successfully completed the course and explaining the Member’s progress vis-à-vis the goals set out in said course.

The Committee 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 did not reach agreement on the issue of publication of the Member’s name. Representations will therefore be made to the Discipline Committee on this issue.

STATEMENT BY THE COLLEGE REGARDING publication

Counsel for the College argued that the Member’s name should be published in the College’s official publication, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. She argued that publication of his name will serve as a denunciation of his actions, and act as a deterrent on the Member and the profession. Counsel concluded her presentation by stressing that the publication of the Member’s name ensures transparency, preserves public trust in the profession and protects the public interest.

STATEMENT BY THE MEMBER REGARDING publication

Counsel for the Member requested that the Member’s name not be published in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession. She reminded the Committee that it had the discretion not to publish the Member’s name. She also stated that the reprimand and the course which the Member is required to take are sufficient to satisfy the College’s mandate.

PENALTY AND ORDER

The Committee accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following Order:

The Discipline Committee requires that the Member appear before the Discipline Committee immediately following the hearing, and that the Committee impose a reprimand that will be delivered in person at the College’s offices located at 101 Bloor Street West, Toronto, Ontario, and that this fact be recorded on the public register.
The Committee directs the Registrar to impose the following terms and restrictions on the Member’s teaching certificate, and that they be recorded on the public register:

(b) within 30 days following the end of the course described in paragraph (a) above, the Member must provide the Registrar with a written statement from the provider attesting that:

(i) the Member has successfully completed the course and explaining the Member’s progress vis-à-vis the goals set out in said course.

The Committee 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, and directs that the Member’s name be published as it appears on the College’s public register.

REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION

The Committee carefully assessed the parties’ arguments and carefully reviewed the cases cited. The fact that the parties were able to reach an agreement indicates that an appropriate balance of interests was achieved.

The Committee concluded that the Member and the College agreed on the key elements of the penalty, namely a course and a reprimand. The parties also agreed that the summary findings and the Committee’s Order be published in the official publication of the College.

Considering the Member’s actions and given that the proposed penalty satisfies the expectations of the profession in terms of discipline, the Committee supports the Joint Submission on Penalty.

A reprimand by his peers and on behalf of the profession acts as a deterrent on the Member. The reprimand will be included on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration for three years and, as such, will also act as a deterrent on the profession in general.

The course on boundary issues and on student supervision that the Member is required to take targets his behaviour and should help him to better understand the seriousness of his actions and to apply sound classroom management strategies.

Publication of the Member’s name is necessary to give weight to his professional misconduct: it sends a clear message to the Member and to the profession that a lack of supervision and aggressive conduct towards a student cannot be condoned. Publication of a summary of the Committee’s findings in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession with the Member’s name serves the public interest, ensures transparency of the College’s disciplinary process and informs the public that the College acts in a decisive and consistent manner when such conduct is brought to its attention.

In conclusion, the Committee deems that that the penalty is fitting in the circumstances and protects the public interest.

June 15, 2015

Monique Lapalme Arseneault

Chair, Discipline Panel

Darlene Mead, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel

Louis Sloan, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel