DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Turner 2019 ONOCT 24

Date: 2019-04-24

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

Joseph Keith Turner, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

JOSEPH KEITH TURNER (REGISTRATION #245305)

PANEL: Alicia Nunn, OCT, Chair

Shanlee Linton, OCT

Jonathan Rose

HEARD: April 8, 2019

Ava Arbuck of McCarthy Tétrault LLP, for Ontario College of Teachers, assisted by Annie Lacroix, Law Clerk

Mark Wright of Goldblatt Partners, for Joseph Keith Turner

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 April 8, 2019 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.

A Notice of Hearing dated August 18, 2017 (Exhibit 1) was served on Joseph Keith Turner (the “Member”), inviting him to participate in the scheduling of the hearing and specifying the allegations. The hearing was subsequently set for April 8, 2019.

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

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 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 abused a student or students verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);

(d) he abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);

(e) 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);

(f) 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

(g) he engaged in conduct unbecoming a member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(19).²

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:

Joseph Keith Turner 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 respecting the Member.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) as a teacher at [XXX] School in Toronto, Ontario.
At all material times, the Student was a Grade [XXX] female student in the Member’s class.
During the 2014-2015 school year, the member embarrassed the Student in front of the class when she could not solve a [XXX] problem.
On or about February 24, 2015 the Student was wearing a [XXX] on her wrist and had difficulty writing as a result. The Member took the [XXX] on the Student’s wrist in his hand to see how hard it was. He squeezed it to the point that the Student could feel it compress inwards. This made the Student feel uncomfortable and she thought that the Member had broken the [XXX].
The Member commented on the flexibility of the Student’s [XXX] and suggested she should be able to write with the [XXX] on. This also made the Student feel uncomfortable.
On or about March 25, 2015 the Member was charged with assault. Ultimately, the charge was withdrawn in exchange for the Member agreeing to write an apology to the Student and to take an Anger Management course. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the written apology by the Member to the Student dated September 14, 2015. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a copy of a letter dated September 3, 2015 describing the Anger Management course completed by the Member.
As a result of the incident with the Student, the Member was administratively transferred to another school for the 2016-2017 academic year. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a copy of the discipline letter dated June 1, 2016.
The Member retired from the Board on or about June 30, 2017.

GUILTY PLEA

By this document,³ the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 9 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and admits the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(15), and 1(18).
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 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 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.

In light of the Admitted Facts 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 allegations of professional misconduct outlined in paragraphs (c) and (g) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member contravened subsection 1(7.1) and 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. The Committee granted these requests.

Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Committee rendered an oral decision on April 8, 2019 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(7.2), 1(15) and 1(18).

REASONS FOR DECISION

Before granting the College’s request to withdraw the allegation that the Member engaged in conduct unbecoming a member (subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97), the Committee sought additional submissions from the parties to clarify the types of misconduct that fall within the ambit of subsections 1(18) and 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. College Counsel submitted that misconduct alleged under subsection 1(19) typically involves a Member’s off-duty conduct, whereas misconduct alleged under subsection 1(18) typically involves a Member’s conduct while on-duty. In the matter before the Committee, all of the misconduct occurred while the Member was performing his instructional duties. The Committee accepted College Counsel’s submissions and therefore granted College Counsel’s request to withdraw the allegations set out above.

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 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(7), 1(7.2), 1(15), and 1(18).

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). Members are required to maintain professional relationships with students that demonstrate a commitment to student welfare and learning. The Member failed to demonstrate care, respect and sensitivity to the factors that influence student learning by embarrassing the Student in front of the class and by making her feel uncomfortable.

Paragraphs 4 and 6 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member abused a student or students verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7). The Member abused the Student verbally when he made unsupportive comments that embarrassed the Student in front of her peers.

Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2). The Member’s conduct was distressing to the Student. He inappropriately squeezed the Student’s [XXX] to the point that she thought the Member broke it. He also embarrassed her in front of the class when she could not solve a [XXX] problem.

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 the Act, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(15). As part of the duties of a teacher, members are expected to act as role models for students and to encourage students in the pursuit of learning. The Member failed to meet these expectations by embarrassing the Student in front of the class when she could not solve a [XXX] problem.

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). The Member’s inappropriate interactions with the Student set out above demonstrate a lack of professionalism.

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 is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (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 or resuming any teaching position or any position for which a Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required (a “Teaching Position”), the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding appropriate boundaries, subject to the following conditions:

(i) the Member will provide to the course practitioner 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 Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee;

(ii) following review of the documents noted at paragraph (i) above, the course practitioner will provide to the Registrar, for approval, a syllabus for the proposed course which specifically addresses the Discipline Committee’s concerns regarding the Member’s professional misconduct. The syllabus proposed by the course practitioner shall also specify the length of the course to be undertaken by the Member, and the assignments to be completed by the Member;

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

(i) confirms that the Member has successfully completed the course and reports on the progress of the Member with respect to addressing the outlined goals of the course.

PENALTY DECISION

In an oral decision rendered on April 8, 2019 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 case presented by College Counsel: Ontario College of Teachers v. Gera, 2016 LNONCTD 70.

The Committee finds that the Member’s inappropriate conduct warrants a reprimand by his peers. The Member failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with the Student when he made unsupportive and embarrassing comments to her in front of her peers, and when the Member took hold of the Student’s [XXX] wrist and squeezed her [XXX] to the point that it compressed inwards. Members of the teaching profession are expected to promote safe and supportive learning environments and to model appropriate, respectful and professional behaviour. Through his interactions with the Student, the Member showed 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, reminding the Member of his professional obligations. Recording the fact of the reprimand on the Register will serve as a general deterrent to other members of the profession.

The Committee notes that the Member completed individual counselling in anger management in 2015 (as set out above at paragraph 7 of Exhibit 2 and described at Tab C). The Member has also written an apology to the Student (as set out above at paragraph 7 of Exhibit 2 and described at Tab B). However, the Committee finds that an additional course of instruction on professional boundaries tailored to the Member’s misconduct is appropriate in the circumstances of the Member’s case. The additional course will help to further rehabilitate the Member, if he returns to a teaching position in the future. It will also enable him to apply newly-learned skills in the classroom, which will in turn help to ensure that any future interactions with students are appropriate.

The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.

Date: April 24, 2019

______________________________

Alicia Nunn, OCT

Chair, Discipline Panel

___ ___________________________