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
Jack Eldon Reed, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
PANEL: Ann Ciaschini, OCT, Chair
Colleen Landers
Ravi Vethamany, OCT
BETWEEN: ) Christine Wadsworth,
) McCarthy Tétrault LLP, ) for Ontario College of Teachers,
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) assisted by Annie Lacroix,
) Law Clerk
– and – )
JACK ELDON REED ) Jack Eldon Reed,
(CERTIFICATE #508570) ) Self-represented )
) Julie Maciura,
) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel
) ) Heard: June 16, 2016
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on June 16, 2016 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated January 12, 2015, (Exhibit 1) was served on Jack Eldon Reed (the “Member”), requesting his presence on February 17, 2015, to set a date for hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for June 16, 2016.
The Member was self-represented but was not in attendance for the hearing.
THE ALLEGATIONS
The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing are as follows:
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 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);
(b) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19); and
(c) he failed to abide by a written undertaking given by the member to the College or by an agreement entered into by the member with the College, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(24).
AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS
College Counsel 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 the following:
Jack Eldon Reed 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.
On or around July 18, 2010, the Member entered into an agreement (the “MOA”) with the College whereby the Member gave an undertaking to the College:
(a) to complete at his own expense, within 24 months of the MOA, at least two courses of instruction pre-approved by the College Registrar, from a specified list of courses;
(b) to provide to the Registrar within 30 days of his completion of the courses, written confirmation from the course providers attesting to the Member’s successful completion of the courses.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the MOA. On or around September 2, 2010, the MOA was ratified by the Investigation Committee of the College. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a copy of the Decision of the Investigation Committee.
As of January 31, 2013, the Member had not completed the required courses or provided the required confirmation to the College Registrar. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a copy of the January 31, 2013 letter from the College’s Dispute Resolution Officer to the Member’s counsel, asking for confirmation of completion of the required courses.
On February 6, 2013, the Member, through his counsel at the time, requested additional time to complete the required coursework.
On or about March 4, 2013, through his counsel at the time, the Member agreed and undertook to:
(a) complete two courses of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar, covering the areas of the Member’s deficiency (namely classroom management, curriculum development and delivery, assessment and evaluation, and organizational skills and communication) within six months; and
(b) to provide to the Registrar within 30 days of the completion of the courses, written confirmation from the course providers attesting to the Member’s successful completion of the courses.
Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “E” is a copy of the e-mails exchanged between the Member’s former counsel and the College, confirming that the Member was to complete the two courses of instruction within six months.
To date, the Member has not completed the two courses of instruction specified. The Member has also failed to provide any confirmation from the course providers.
The Member is no longer teaching and does not intend to do so in the future.
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(18), 1(19) and 1(24).
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 without 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(18), 1(19) and 1(24).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 9 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(18), 1(19) and 1(24).
Paragraphs 1 to 8 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member 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).
Paragraphs 1 to 8 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).
Paragraphs 1 to 8 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member failed to abide by a written undertaking given by the member to the College or by an agreement entered into by the member with the College, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(24).
JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY
Through a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), Counsel for the College and 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 commencing any teaching position in Ontario including in a private school, or any position for which a Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required (collectively referred to hereinafter as a “Teaching Position”), the Member shall appear before the Committee to receive a reprimand, on a date to be scheduled with the Hearings Office, which will be delivered in person at the offices of the Ontario College of Teachers, 101 Bloor Street West, 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 suspend the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member for a period of one month commencing on the date of the Order of the Discipline Committee relating to this matter, and the fact of the suspension is to be recorded on the Register;
direct the Registrar to impose the following terms, conditions or 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) prior to commencing a Teaching Position, the Member shall attend, at his own expense, and successfully complete the following courses, pre-approved by the Registrar:
(i) two Additional Qualification course(s) or Additional Basic Qualification course(s) which cover classroom management, curriculum development and delivery, assessment and evaluation, and organizational skills and communication;
(b) within 30 days of his completion of the courses referred to at paragraph (a) above, and prior to commencing or returning to a Teaching Position, the Member shall provide evidence to the Registrar in writing of his successful completion of same;
- direct that there be publication of the finding 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
College Counsel emphasized that publication of the name is at the discretion of the Committee.
College Counsel submitted that publication with the name of the Member is warranted in this case. Publication with name is one the most important tools within the Committee’s powers to deter members from engaging in professional misconduct. It also sends a strong message to the Member, the profession and to the public that the College will not tolerate the type of behaviour engaged in by the Member. According to College Counsel, it is important to send a message to the teaching profession that the College’s dispute resolution process is to be respected and that breaching the terms of an agreement is a serious offence. In addition, publication with name helps to achieve the penalty objectives of accountability and transparency of the College’s discipline process.
College Counsel noted that, in this case, the Member breached the terms of his agreement by failing to complete the agreed upon coursework within the 24 months of the date of his agreement. The Member was then given a six month extension, but he again failed to meet his obligations under the agreement. To date, the Member has still not fulfilled his undertaking. College Counsel is therefore seeking a more severe penalty than that initially imposed.
College Counsel referred the Committee to two analogous cases involving the failure to comply with an order or to abide by an agreement entered into with the College: Ontario College of Teachers v. Gusita, 2015 LNONCTD 66; and Ordre des enseignantes et des enseignants de l’Ontario c. Joly (21 April 2016). In both cases, the members’ disregard for the College’s authority and their failures to comply with an order or to abide by an agreement entered into with the College resulted in more serious penalties than those initially ordered, and publication with name was ordered. College Counsel urged the Committee to follow these precedents.
PENALTY DECISION
The Committee accepts the Joint Submission on Penalty 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 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 accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties. The Committee is confident that the requirements set out in the Joint Submission on Penalty will achieve the right balance of interests. Specifically, the penalty will serve as a deterrent to the Member and other members of the profession, it will help to ensure the remediation and rehabilitation of the Member, and it respects the public interest and will help to ensure the protection of the public.
The Member’s disregard for the authority of the College and his failure to abide by the agreement that he entered into with the College warrants a reprimand by his peers. The reprimand will allow the Committee to directly address its concerns with the Member and will serve as a specific deterrent. Recording the fact of the reprimand on the Register will serve as a general deterrent to other members of the profession.
The Committee finds that a one month suspension is acceptable in the circumstances and will serve as a reminder to members of the profession that the failure to abide by their agreements entered into with the College will lead to an escalation in the severity of their penalty.
The Committee finds that the courses of instruction described above will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member and will remind him of his obligations as a teacher, should he return to the profession.
The Committee finds that publication with the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession is warranted for the following reasons. The Member’s failure to comply with his undertaking to the College displayed contempt for the College’s authority and its investigation and dispute resolution process even after he had been given an extension. The Committee also considered that the MOA that included the undertaking had been a lenient resolution, which the Member still failed to respect. The Committee determines that these aggravating factors outweigh the mitigation of the Member having entered into an Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and a Joint Submission on Penalty, which saved time, expense and inconvenience for witnesses.
Publication with the name of the Member identifies to the profession the serious nature of the Member’s misconduct and the consequences of such behaviour. Publication with name acts as a specific deterrent to the Member as it holds the Member accountable for his actions. It also serves as a general deterrent by reminding the profession that such behaviour is not tolerated. Moreover, publishing the Member’s name ensures the transparency of the discipline process and reassures the public that the College acts decisively and does not shield its members when matters of this nature are brought to its attention.
Date: June 17, 2016
Ann Ciaschini, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
Colleen Landers
Member, Discipline Panel
Ravi Vethamany, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel