DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
IN THE MATTER OF the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) and Ontario Regulation 437/97;
AND IN THE MATTER OF a discipline proceeding against Jacques Tremblay, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Monique Lapalme Arseneault, Chair Vicki Shannon, OCT Louis Sloan, OCT
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS Christine Lonsdale and Alexandre Blanchard, McCarthy Tétrault LLP, for the Ontario College of Teachers
– and –
JACQUES TREMBLAY (CERTIFICATE #218079) Jacques Tremblay was not in attendance at the hearing and was not represented by legal counsel
Renée Kopp, Jones LLP, Independent Legal Counsel
Heard: January 26 and July 7, 2015
DECISION AND ORDER
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on January 26, 2015 at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated November 14, 2013 (Exhibit 1) was served on Jacques Tremblay (“the Member”) requesting his attendance before the College’s Discipline Committee on December 9, 2013 to set a date for a hearing. The hearing was subsequently set for January 26, 2015 and was then adjourned to July 7, 2015.
The Member was not in attendance at the hearing, nor was he represented by legal counsel. He sent the Committee a letter explaining his absence and submitted several comments concerning his case.
ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated November 14, 2013 are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Jacques Tremblay is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in section 30(2) of 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 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) 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
(d) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
At the hearing on July 7, 2015, Counsel for the College announced the College’s intention to withdraw allegations 1(5), 1(15) and 1(18) as set out in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) respectively of the aforementioned Notice of Hearing. The Committee agreed to the withdrawal of these allegations.
ADMITTED FACTS
On July 7, 2015, Counsel for the College informed the Committee that the College and the Member had reached an agreement on the facts, and produced an Agreed Statement of Facts and Plea of No Contest (“the Agreement”) (Exhibit 3), which provides as follows:
Jacques Tremblay (“the Member”) was a member of the College. The Member had been teaching since 1994. He submitted his resignation as a member of the College on or about July 15, 2014. A copy of the information concerning the Member as recorded by the Ontario College of Teachers is attached to this document as Appendix A.
A copy of the Member’s letter of resignation is attached as Appendix B. His letter of resignation reads:
For reasons which are essentially ideological, I no longer wish to be a member of the College. I respect the College’s position concerning the restrictions on its members’ freedom of expression, but my vision of the context of this freedom differs drastically from that of the College…
By surrendering my Certificate, I am making the choice to preserve intact my entire freedom to think and write.
The Sexteens and the Fake Goddess (“The Sexteens”) (Exhibit 5) is a novel of which the Member is co-author. A copy of The Sexteens will be deposited as evidence with the consent of the parties at the hearing and will be part of the evidence before the Committee at the hearing.
The novel The Sexteens is a work of fiction involving fictional high-school-age characters, set partially in a school. All of the events and characters in the novel are entirely fictional. The novel is in no way based on actual events or individuals. If he were to testify, the Member would state that his intention was to present adolescent characters as noble heroes.
The novel The Sexteens includes the following:
(a) sexualized content;
(b) sexualized descriptions of fictional novel characters acting in the roles of secondary school students;
(c) negative and/or stereotypical descriptions of the attitudes and behaviour of certain fictional high-school-age novel characters who play the roles of the heroes’ opponents in the narrative structure;
(d) negative and/or stereotypical descriptions of attitudes and behaviour of fictional novel characters who, in the novel, play the roles of teachers and/or educational administrators.
- Notwithstanding the nature of the novel, the Member did not use a pseudonym as co-author when he published this novel in 2008. In October 2011, an article by a journalist expressing his opinion on the novel created controversy in the school community.
PLEA OF NO CONTEST
By this document, the Member admits the accuracy of the truth of the facts and evidence referred to in paragraphs 1 to 6 above (“the admitted facts”).
Specifically, the Member admits the accuracy of the facts described in paragraphs 1 to 6 and that they constitute professional misconduct, being more particularly a breach of section 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97.
The Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations of professional misconduct against him;
(b) he understands that by signing this document (Exhibit 3), he consents to the production of the evidence as set out in the admitted facts before the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by entering a Plea of No Contest to the allegations, he is waiving his right to require the College to prove the case against him, and his right to have a hearing on this matter;
(d) he understands that any agreement between the College and the Member with respect to penalty is not binding on the Discipline Committee; and
(e) he understands this Agreement and acknowledges that he is signing it voluntarily, unequivocally and with access to the advice of legal counsel.
- In view of the abovementioned admitted facts and the Plea of No Contest, the College and the Member submit that the Discipline Committee ought to find that the Member’s actions constituted professional misconduct.
DECISION
After reviewing the evidence, and based on the Agreed Statement of Facts and Plea of No Contest, on the submissions by Counsel for the College and the Member’s written submissions, the Committee finds that the facts support a finding of professional misconduct and that Jacques Tremblay is guilty of professional misconduct, being more particularly a breach of section 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, as set out in the Notice of Hearing.
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Committee accepts the Agreement reached by the parties and finds that the admitted facts support the finding of professional misconduct. The Member admits the truth of the facts set out in paragraphs 1 to 6 of the Agreement. He acknowledges that the admitted facts, describing the nature of the novel The Sexteens, of which he is co-author, constitute professional misconduct. The Committee finds the Member guilty of professional misconduct.
The Committee finds that the Member showed poor professional judgement. Notwithstanding his intention to depict adolescent characters as “noble heroes” in his novel, The Sexteens contains sexualized content and sexualized, negative and stereotypical descriptions of characters playing the roles of high-school students, teachers and educational administrators. As a member of the College, the Member ought to have reflected before becoming involved in such a project.
A teacher’s behaviour must meet the expectations of the community and the members of the teaching profession. A member must maintain the trust and respect of his or her superiors, peers, students and of the public. The profession and the community expect a member to lead by example. Loss of trust or respect can be detrimental to the perception held by the public and the profession, and can have a damaging effect on its members.
Although the characters in his novel are fictional, the public’s perception of a member of the College who describes sexual scenes involving young students is extremely negative. The novel did in fact stir up controversy in the school community, which resulted in a harmful image of the teaching profession and its members. Consequently, the Committee finds that the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member of the College and that his actions constitute professional misconduct, being more particularly a breach of section 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97.
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Counsel for the College and the Member jointly submitted a recommendation as to penalty (Exhibit 6) stating the following:
The Discipline Committee directs that the Member receive a written admonishment from the Committee, with the fact of the admonishment to be recorded in the public registry;
By means of his letter of resignation and this document, the Member undertakes to:
(a) Refrain from occupying again any position requiring a Certificate of Qualification and Registration from the Ontario College of Teachers;
The Committee directs that the Ontario public registry state that the Member resigned as a member of the Ontario College of Teachers while discipline proceedings were underway, and that he undertakes to refrain from occupying again any position requiring a Certificate of Qualification and Registration from the Ontario College of Teachers, and never to seek reinstatement of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration; and
The Committee directs that a summary of its decision and order, including the Member’s name, be published in the College’s official publication, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.
DECISION AS TO PENALTY
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Penalty and therefore makes an order consistent with the terms of the aforementioned Joint Submission on Penalty.
REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the abovementioned Joint Submission on Penalty. The fact that the parties have reached an agreement reassures the Committee that an appropriate balance of interests has been achieved. The Committee recognizes that the Ontario courts have determined that a joint submission ought not to be rejected unless it is contrary to the public interest or if the penalty would bring the administration of justice into disrepute. The proposed penalty submitted jointly by the parties would not do anything of the kind, and the Committee finds that it is reasonable and acceptable in the circumstances. In view of the seriousness of the Member’s actions and the fact that the proposed penalty addresses the expectations of the teaching profession with respect to discipline, the Committee upholds the recommendation found in the Joint Submission on Penalty.
The admonishment by his peers delivered on behalf of the teaching profession conveys to the Member that his conduct was unacceptable. The fact of the admonishment will be recorded in the public registry of members, which will act as a deterrent with respect to the profession as a whole.
The fact that the Member undertakes to refrain from occupying again any position requiring a Certificate of Qualification and Registration from the College, and never to seek reinstatement of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration protects the public interest.
The Committee finds that the publication of the Member’s name as it appears in the College’s public register is appropriate in this case in view of the Member’s harmful actions and behaviour. The publication of a summary of the decision and order of the Committee, including the Member’s name, in the College’s official publication, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession, serves and protects the public interest and ensures the transparency of the College’s disciplinary proceedings.
The Committee therefore finds that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and that it serves and protects the public interest.
July 7, 2015
Monique Lapalme Arseneault Chair, Discipline Panel
Vicki Shannon, OCT Member, Discipline Panel
Louis Sloan, OCT Member, Discipline Panel