DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
DECISION, REASONS FOR DECISION AND ORDER
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
Stephen William Roloson, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
STEPHEN WILLIAM ROLOSON (REGISTRATION #569777)
PANEL: Irene Dembek, OCT, Chair Alicia Nunn, OCT Tom Potter
HEARD: December 10, 2018
Zirka Jakibchuk, for Ontario College of Teachers
Kirsty Niglas-Collins of KNC Law, for Stephen William Roloson
Julie Maciura of Steinecke Maciura LeBlanc, Independent Legal Counsel
PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, no person shall publish the identity of, or any information that could disclose the identity of, any person who is under 18 years old and is a witness in a hearing or is the subject of evidence in a hearing.
This matter came on for hearing before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Committee”) on December 10, 2018 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated April 11, 2018 (Exhibit 1) was served on Stephen William Roloson (the “Member”) inviting him to participate in the scheduling of the hearing and specifying the allegations. The hearing was subsequently set for December 10, 2018.
The Member was in attendance for the hearing and had legal representation. The Committee was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.
THE ALLEGATIONS
IT IS ALLEGED that the Member is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in 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 signed or issued, in the member’s professional capacity, a document that the member knew or ought to have known contained a false, improper or misleading statement, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(12);1
(c) 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);
(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
College Counsel presented the Committee with the parties’ Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:
Stephen William Roloson is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. In May 2009, the Member obtained a Certificate of Qualification and Registration. Attached as Appendix “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 Upper Grand District School Board (the “Board”) as a Geography teacher at Centre Wellington District High School (the “School”) in Guelph, Ontario.
At all material times, the Member was also the owner of a company that specializes in event planning and set-up.
During the 2016/2017 academic year, the Member inappropriately accessed sick leave from the Board on numerous occasions to perform tasks relating to his personal business. Following the Board’s investigation, it was confirmed that the Member did so on February 9, 2017, February 10, 2017 and February 24, 2017.
When the Member was asked about his absences on February 9 and 10, 2017, he told the Board that he was ill on both days. However, he was observed decorating a ballroom at a hotel in London, Ontario, delivering a tote bag to an address in Acton, and driving a white truck to a loading dock at a location in Concord.
When the Member was asked about his absence on February 24, 2017, he stated that he was having medical testing done at a hospital in Toronto and that the tests began at 11:30 a.m. and finished at 2:00 p.m. However, the Member was observed at a warehouse, storage facility and other locations during the times in question. The Member did not attend an appointment in Toronto that day.
The Member resigned from his position with the Board and agreed never to re-apply for employment with the Board, effective June 1, 2017.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document,2 the Member admits the truth of the facts and Appendices referred to in paragraphs 1 to 7 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(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
By signing this document the Member states that:
(a) he understands fully the nature of the allegations against him;
(b) he understands that he is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Admitted Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that he is pleading guilty to the allegations, and 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 the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons shall be published on the College’s website, and that a summary of the Discipline Committee’s decision and reasons, including his name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;
(e) he understands that any agreement between him and the College with respect to the penalty does not bind the Discipline Committee; and
(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
Counsel for the College requested that the allegation of professional misconduct outlined in paragraph (b) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member contravened subsection 1(12) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. The Committee granted this request.
Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Committee rendered an oral decision on December 10, 2018 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
REASONS FOR DECISION
The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 7 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and admitted 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(18) and 1(19).
Paragraphs 4-6 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 4-6 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 4-6 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 4-6 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), the parties jointly submitted that the appropriate penalty to be imposed in this matter would be that the Committee:
direct that the Member appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter 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 be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”); and
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) within 90 days of the date of the Committee’s Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order in this matter, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense a course of instruction, pre-approved by the Registrar, regarding ethical practice, subject to the following conditions:
(i) the Member shall provide to a course provider approved by the Registrar, 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 Committee’s Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order;
(ii) upon review of the documents noted at paragraph (i) above, the course provider shall submit to the Registrar, for approval, a syllabus for the proposed course which specifically addresses the 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; and
(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 provider:
(i) 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.
PENALTY DECISION
In an oral decision rendered on December 10, 2018, the Committee accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty presented by the parties and made an order in accordance with its terms, as set out above.
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 the discipline process into disrepute or be otherwise contrary to the public interest. 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 the parties: Ontario College of Teachers v. Kopylov, 2016 ONOCT 29; Ontario College of Teachers v. Kastner, 2017 ONOCT 1; Ontario College of Teachers v. Grant, 2015 ONOCT 33; and Ontario College of Teachers v. Kosonic, 2015 ONOCT 46.
Reprimand
The Committee finds that the Member’s dishonest conduct warrants a reprimand by his peers. The Member inappropriately used sick days on three occasions to perform tasks relating to his personal, event-planning business. He deceived his Board by telling them that he was either ill on these days or receiving medical tests, which was not the case. Members of the profession are expected to conduct themselves with integrity and to uphold the principles of “truth, justice and loyalty” as set out at subsection 264(1)(c) the Education Act.
By inappropriately accessing sick leave and by repeatedly lying to his Board, the Member demonstrated a lack of professional judgment. 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.
Coursework
The Committee finds that the course of instruction regarding ethical practice will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. The coursework will remind the Member of his obligations as a teacher and provide him with greater insight into the inappropriate nature of his misconduct, which is intended to help him make better decisions in the future as well as to uphold and honour the ethical standards of the teaching profession.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: December 10, 2018
Irene Dembek, OCT
Chair, Discipline Panel
Alicia Nunn, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel
Tom Potter
Member, Discipline Panel