Ontario College of Teachers v. Jordan, 2016 ONOCT 64

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Jordan, 2016 ONOCT 64

Date: 2016-11-11

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

Timothy Jordan, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

PANEL: Robert Gagné, Chair Ann Ciaschini, OCT Vicki Shannon, OCT

BETWEEN: ) ) Zirka Jakibchuk, ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS ) for Ontario College of Teachers – and – ) TIMOTHY JORDAN ) Jerry Raso, (CERTIFICATE #251988) ) Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ ) Association ) for Timothy Jordan ) Robin McKechney ) Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, ) Independent Legal Counsel ) ) Heard: October 14, 2016

DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER

This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on October 14, 2016 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing dated February 8, 2016 (Exhibit 1) was served on Timothy Jordan (the “Member”), requesting his presence on March 1, 2016 to set a date for hearing, and specifying the charges. The hearing was subsequently set for October 14, 2016.

The Member was not in attendance for the hearing but had legal representation.

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 Teacher’s 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 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 contravened a law which is relevant to the member’s suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(16);

(d) 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

(e) he 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 the following:

1. Timothy Jordan was at all material times, 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.

2. At all material times, the Member was employed by the Dufferin-Peel Catholic District School Board (the “Board”) as a teacher.

3. At all material times, Person 1 was the Member’s estranged wife, and Person 2 was the partner of the Member’s estranged wife.

4. On or about September 10, 2012, the Member was charged by McLennan Canadian Mounted Police with, inter alia, assault of Person 1 and Person 2, who reported that at approximately 9:00 p.m. on that night the Member grabbed Person 2 and repeatedly punched him in the face, and then pushed Person 1 when she attempted to pull him off Person 2.

5. On or about December 6, 2012, the Member pled guilty to one count of assault on Person 1 and one count of assault causing bodily harm on Person 2, contrary to sections 265 and 267(b) of the Criminal Code (Canada). The other two charges against the Member were withdrawn.

6. On or about December 6, 2012, the Member was convicted of two counts of assault and given a suspended sentence and 18 months’ probation. The Member was also ordered, inter alia, to perform 50 hours of community service work, to attend at and comply with a treatment program for assessment/counseling, and prohibited from contacting directly or indirectly with Person 1 and Person 2 except through a third party approved by his probation officer or by order of a court. Attached and marked as Exhibit “B” are the Transcript of Proceedings and Reasons for Sentence before the Honourable Mr. Justice Paul at Alberta, dated December 6, 2014 (Provincial Court of Alberta).

7. The Member has not appealed the conviction and/or sentence.

8. As a result of this incident, the Board issued a letter terminating the Member’s employment with the Board effective April 29, 2014. Attached and marked as Exhibit “C” is the letter from the Board dated April 30, 2014.

GUILTY PLEA

9. By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1-8 above (the “Admitted Facts”).

10. 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(15), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19).

11. 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 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 the parties with respect to the penalty proposed in this document 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.

12. 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 and the submissions of the parties, 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(15), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19).

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 8 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(15), 1(16), 1(18) and 1(19).

Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5).

Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member 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).

Paragraphs 5 and 6 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member contravened a law which is relevant to the member’s suitability to hold a certificate of qualification and registration, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(16).

Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 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 4, 5 and 6 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).

JOINT SUBMISSION ON PENALTY

Through a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), 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:

1. direct that the Member receive a reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”).

2. 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 a teaching position or any position for which a certificate of qualification and registration is required, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar, regarding stress and anger management issues;

(b) within 30 days of his completion of the course outlined in (a) above, the Member shall provide to the Registrar a written certificate from the course practitioner stating that:

(i) he or she has reviewed 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 Order of the Discipline Committee; and

(ii) the Member has successfully completed the course.

3. direct that there be publication of the finding and order of the Committee in summary

form, with the name of the Member, in the official publication of the College, Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession.

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. The Committee notes that the reprimand referred to in paragraph 1 of the Joint Submission on Penalty above will be in written form, as agreed to by the parties.

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 penalty proposed by the parties is also within a reasonable range, based on the following analogous cases presented by College Counsel: Ontario College of Teachers v. Andreacchi, 2013 LNONCTD 6 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Valentini, 2012 LNONCTD 54.

The Committee finds that the Member’s unprofessional and criminal conduct warrants a reprimand by his peers. The Member was convicted of two counts of assault. Members of the teaching profession are expected to be positive role models. The Member clearly did not meet this expectation, and through his criminal conduct, he jeopardized the public’s confidence in the teaching profession. The reprimand will allow the Committee to directly address its concerns with the Member and will serve as a specific deterrent. The Committee accepts the parties’ request that the reprimand be in written form, given the parties’ agreement on this issue and the circumstances of this case; namely, that the Member no longer lives or teaches in Ontario and has no intention of returning to teach in the province. 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 the course of instruction regarding stress and anger management issues will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. The coursework will provide the Member with the necessary tools to keep his stress and anger in check and to manage his emotions in a respectful and professional manner. The coursework will help him to make better decisions in any future interactions with others, should he return to the teaching profession.

The Committee finds that publication with the Member’s name in Professionally Speaking/Pour parler profession is warranted. 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.

The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and serves and protects the public interest.

Date: November 11, 2016

______________________________

Robert Gagné

Chair, Discipline Panel

______________________________ Ann Ciaschini, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel

______________________________

Vicki Shannon, OCT

Member, Discipline Panel