DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Gocking 2019 ONOCT 52
Date: 2019-06-13
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
Lorne John Gocking, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
LORNE JOHN GOCKING (REGISTRATION # 443631)
PANEL: Jonathan Rose, Chair
Sara Nouini, OCT
Tom Potter
HEARD: June 11, 2019
Zirka Jakibchuk for Ontario College of Teachers
Jack Brown, representative of the Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation, for Lorne John Gocking
Erica Richler 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 June 11, 2019 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) at Toronto.
A Notice of Hearing dated March 6, 2019 (Exhibit 1) was served on Lorne John Gocking (the “Member”), inviting him to participate in the scheduling of the hearing and specifying the allegations. The hearing was subsequently set for June 11, 2019.
The Member was in attendance for the hearing and had 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 Lorne John Gocking 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 failed to supervise adequately a person who is under the professional supervision of the member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(11);
(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);
(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:
Lorne John Gocking was, at all material times, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers. Attached hereto and marked 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 District School Board of Niagara (the “Board”) as a [XXX] teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in St. Catharines, Ontario.
On November 2, 2017, the Member failed to attend at school on time, or to submit the required documentation for an absence due to illness. If the Member was ill, he was required to enter his absence into the Substitute Employee Management System (SEMS) software by 6:45 am that morning and to leave emergency lessons plans with the office. He did neither of these things.
The Member arrived at school approximately two hours late, after being called at home by the School Vice-Principal.
On November 9, 2017, the Board issued a discipline letter to the Member. In this letter, the Board noted that the Member had received a verbal warning for a similar incident the previous school year. The Member indicated that he was prepared to make changes to avoid this pattern of behaviour. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “B” is a copy of the Board’s discipline letter dated November 9, 2017.
On December 21, 2017, the Member again failed to attend at school on time, or to submit the required documentation (including a SEMS entry and emergency lesson plans) for an absence due to illness.
The Member again arrived at school approximately two hours late, after being called at home by the School Principal.
On January 30, 2018, the Board issued a discipline letter to the Member and suspended him for one day without pay. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “C” is a copy of the Board’s discipline letter dated January 30, 2018.
On January 25, 2018, the Member left the students in his [XXX] class at the School unattended for a period of approximately 20 minutes while he went to the auto shop to wash his personal vehicle. He did not stop the students in the class from working during this time.
While the Member was out of the classroom, a [XXX]-year-old male student (“Student 1”) suffered a burn to his fingers while [XXX].
On February 28, 2018, the Board issued a discipline letter to the Member and suspended him for one day without pay. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “D” is a copy of the Board’s discipline letter dated February 28, 2018.
Guilty Plea
By this document,1 the Member admits the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1-11 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts constitute conduct that 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(11), 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 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 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 his counsel 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 College 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 rendered an oral decision on June 11, 2019 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(11), 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 11 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(11), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
Paragraphs 3-4, 6-7, and 9-10 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 3-4, 6-7, and 9-10 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea demonstrate that the Member failed to supervise adequately a person who is under the professional supervision of the member, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(11).
Paragraphs 3-4, 6-7, and 9-10 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 3-4, 6-7, and 9-10 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 3-4, 6-7, and 9-10 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 that the fact of the reprimand 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) within 90 days of the date of the Decision, Reasons for Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense, a course of instruction on classroom management, with an emphasis on effective supervision in a [XXX] classroom. The course shall be pre-approved by the Registrar and be subject to the following conditions:
(i) the Member will provide to a 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; and
(ii) upon 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; 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 practitioner 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 June 11, 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 cases presented by the parties: Ontario College of Teachers v. Zagar, 2013 ONOCT 98, Ontario College of Teachers v. Barros, 2017 ONOCT 5, Ontario College of Teachers v. Neumann, 2014 ONOCT 74 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Richard, 2015 ONOCT 68.
The Member’s pattern of arriving to school late and failing to record his absences or provide emergency lesson plans despite warnings from the Board, in conjunction with his failure to supervise his class resulting in student injury, are aggravating factors in this case. The three instances of the Member’s misconduct happened in a short period of time – approximately three months. The mitigating factors include the Member’s guilty plea, which saved the time and expense of a contested hearing, and the fact that he has no discipline history before this Committee and was already disciplined by his Board. After weighing these factors, the Committee is satisfied that the proposed penalty is reasonable.
The Committee finds that the Member’s professional misconduct warrants a reprimand by his peers. Members of the teaching profession are responsible for the safety of students. It is not acceptable to leave students unattended, particularly in a [XXX] classroom where students have access to potentially dangerous materials such as [XXX] equipment. The Member’s failure to adequately supervise his students was concerning in this case, as was his lack of professionalism by repeatedly arriving late to school without providing proper documentation or lesson planning. 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 the course of instruction regarding classroom management, with an emphasis on effective supervision in a [XXX] classroom, will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. In particular, the Committee is of the view that the coursework must address the following concerns in order to satisfy the objective of specific deterrence:
Encourages self-reflection on the consequences for students, colleagues and the school community when teachers fall short of their responsibilities to be at school on time prepared to adequately supervise pupils;
Encourages self-reflection on the possible impacts for student safety of failing to adequately supervise students and methods to ensure a safe environment at all times.
The coursework will remind the Member of his obligations as a teacher and will help him to make better decisions in any future interactions with students.
The Committee is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: June 13, 2019
______________________________
Jonathan Rose
Chair, Discipline Panel
______________________________
Sara Nouini, OCT
Member, Discipline Panel
______________________________
Tom Potter
Member, Discipline Panel