Ontario College of Teachers v Mathews, 2018 ONOCT 69

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Mathews, 2018 ONOCT 69

Date: 2018-12-04

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

Jane Valerie Mathews, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

JANE VALERIE MATHEWS (REGISTRATION #417654)

PANEL: Nicola Powadiuk, OCT, Chair Godwin Ifedi Bill Petrie

HEARD: November 29, 2018

Zirka Jakibchuk, for Ontario College of Teachers

Sheilagh Turkington of Cavalluzzo LLP, for Jane Valerie Mathews

Robin McKechney 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 November 29, 2018 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing dated October 10, 2017 (Exhibit 1) was served on Jane Valerie Mathews (the “Member”), inviting her to participate in the scheduling of the hearing and specifying the allegations. The hearing was subsequently set for November 29, 2018.

The Member attended the hearing via videoconference and her legal counsel attended the hearing in person. 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

The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that Jane Valerie Mathews is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”) in that:

(a) she failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5);

(b) she abused a student physically, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.1);¹

(c) she abused a student psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);²

(d) she failed to supervise adequately a person who is under the professional supervision of the member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(11);³

(e) she 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);

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

STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS

College Counsel presented the Committee with the parties’ Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 2), which provides as follows:

1. Jane Valerie Mathews is a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. In August 1998, the Member obtained a Certificate of Qualification and Registration. In April 2016, the College suspended the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration for non-payment of fees. Attached as Appendix “A” is a copy of the Ontario College of Teachers Registered Member Information with respect to the Member.⁴

2. At all material times, the Member was employed by the Keewatin-Patricia District School Board (the “Board”) as a preparation/planning coverage teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in [XXX], Ontario.

3. On or about September 23, 2015, the Member encountered a grade [XXX] male student who had been acting up with another female student. The Member believed that the male student may have posed a risk to other students and himself because of his behaviour and because he was known to have [XXX].

4. The Member attempted to supervise the male student, but he reacted by falling to the floor. After the male student dropped to the floor, the Member took hold of his wrist to try to raise him up from the floor. The male student squirmed and attempted to free himself from the Member’s hold. According to the Member, the male student kicked his feet and posed a tripping hazard to the Member. The Member then took hold of the male student’s ankle. The Member then slid the male student across the floor a short distance to the School administration office.

5. The Member left the student with the vice-principal. The Member was not angry or upset during her interaction with the male student.

6. As a result of the September 23, 2015 incident, the Board assigned the Member to home with pay pending an investigation.

7. On or about November 9, 2015, the Member began an unpaid leave of absence from the Board. The unpaid leave of absence concluded on June 30, 2017.

8. On or about June 30, 2017, the Member resigned from the Board.

9. The Member has no intention of returning to teaching.

PLEA OF NO CONTEST

10. By this document,[^5] the Member pleads no contest, for the purposes of this proceeding only, to the truth of the facts and Appendix referred to in paragraphs 1-9 above (the “Uncontested Facts”).

11. The Member hereby acknowledges that the Uncontested Facts at paragraph 4 constitute conduct which is professional misconduct as defined in the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 and pleads no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against her, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional] and 1(19).

12. By signing this document the Member states that:

(a) she understands fully the nature of the allegations against her;

(b) she understands that she is consenting to the evidence as set out in the Uncontested Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;

(c) she understands that by pleading no contest to the allegations, she is waiving the right to require the College to otherwise prove the case against her and the right to have a hearing;

(d) she understands that the Discipline Committee can accept the Uncontested Facts as correct and can accept that those facts constitute professional misconduct;

(e) she 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 her name, shall be published in the official publication of the College;

(f) she understands that any agreement between her and the College with respect to the penalty does not bind the Discipline Committee; and

(g) she understands and acknowledges that she is executing this Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally and with the advice of legal counsel.

13. The Member provides this plea of no contest pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter E. 23, for the purposes of this proceeding under the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996, chapter 12, and for no other purpose. The Member’s plea of no contest does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding.

14. In light of the Uncontested Facts and circumstances and the plea of no contest, 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 allegations of professional misconduct outlined in paragraphs (b), (c) and (d) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member contravened subsections 1(7.1), 1(7.2) and 1(11) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. With respect to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, College Counsel requested that the Committee find that the Member’s conduct was unprofessional only (and not disgraceful or dishonourable). The Committee granted these requests.

Having considered the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and the submissions of the parties, the Committee finds that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional] and 1(19).

REASONS FOR DECISION

The Member did not contest the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 9 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and pleaded no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against her. She acknowledged and the Committee accepts that the Uncontested Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(15), 1(18) [unprofessional] and 1(19).

Paragraph 4 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest demonstrates that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(5).

Paragraph 4 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest demonstrates 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).

Paragraph 4 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest demonstrates that the Member committed acts that, having regard to all the circumstances, would reasonably be regarded by members as unprofessional, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(18).

Paragraph 4 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest demonstrates 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:

1. direct that the Member appear before the Committee immediately following the hearing of this matter to receive a reprimand which will be delivered via videoconference from 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”).

PENALTY DECISION

In an oral decision rendered on November 29, 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 College Counsel: Ontario College of Teachers v. Lolli, 2017 ONOCT 87; Ontario College of Teachers v. Parent, 2017 ONOCT 61; and Ontario College of Teachers v. White, 2017 ONOCT 26.

The Committee notes that, as of November 15, 2018, the status of the Member’s teaching certificate with the College is “cancelled-resigned” (see Exhibit 2A). Accordingly, the Member may no longer teach in publicly funded schools in Ontario. This assures the Committee that the public interest will be adequately protected even though the penalty ordered in this case consists only of a reprimand.

The Committee finds that the Member’s misconduct warrants a reprimand by her peers. Members of the profession must conduct themselves in a composed and professional manner, without resorting to the inappropriate use of physical force against students, even under challenging circumstances. The Member failed to meet this expectation by sliding the student across the floor by his ankle instead of using a more appropriate classroom management strategy. The reprimand will allow the Committee to directly address its concerns with the Member. Recording the fact of the reprimand on the Register will serve as a general deterrent to other members of the profession by informing them that there are consequences for engaging the type of behaviour at issue in this case.

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 4, 2018

Nicola Powadiuk, OCT

Chair, Discipline Panel

Godwin Ifedi

Member, Discipline Panel

Bill Petrie

Member, Discipline Panel

Footnotes

1. 1Allegation withdrawn.
2. 2Allegation withdrawn.
3. 3Allegation withdrawn.
4. 4During the hearing on November 29, 2018, College Counsel presented the Committee with the most current version of the Registered Member Information regarding the Member, which indicates that the status of the Member’s teaching certificate as of November 15, 2018 is “Cancelled-Resigned” (see Exhibit 2A).
5. 5For the purposes of paragraphs 10 and 12, this “document” refers to the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest.