Ontario College of Teachers v Dube, 2020 ONOCT 155

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Ontario College of Teachers v Dube 2020 ONOCT 155

Date: 2020-02-26

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

Alain Dube, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

ALAIN DUBE (REGISTRATION #198726)

PANEL: Mary Ellen Gucciardi, OCT, Chair Godwin Ifedi Sara Nouini, OCT

HEARD: February 26, 2020

Ava Arbuck and Steven Chadwick, for the Ontario College of Teachers Jerry Raso, for Alain Dube Renée Kopp, 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.

1This matter was heard before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) on February 26, 2020 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”).

2Alain Dube (the “Member”) attended the hearing and had legal representation. The Panel was advised at the outset of the hearing that the parties had entered into an agreement with respect to the hearing.

A. PUBLICATION ban

3The Panel ordered a publication ban pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) of the Ontario College of Teachers Act, 1996 (the “Act”), which makes such an order mandatory. Accordingly, 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.

B. THE ALLEGATIONS

4The allegations against the Member in the Notice of Hearing dated May 4, 2019 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that Alain Dube is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in 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 Act or the regulations or the by-laws, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(14);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);

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

C. AGREED STATEMENT OF FACTS

5College Counsel presented the Panel with the parties’ Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:

1. Alain Dube 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 with respect to the Member.

2. At all material times, the Member was employed by the Ottawa Catholic District School Board (the “Board”) as a teacher at [XXX](the “School”) in Kanata, Ontario.

The Incident in October 2013

3. In or around October 2013, approximately $200 went missing from the Member’s Physical Education office. This was money that he had collected from students for a student activity. The Member informed the principal of the School, alleging that the money had been stolen. On January 30, 2014, the Member emailed the principal indicating that he had “replaced part of the money”, acknowledged that he owed the principal $95, and said that he had already “covered $150 of the $220” that went missing. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the Member’s email to the principal, dated January 30, 2014.

The Member is Directed Not to Handle Funds due to a Pattern of Mismanagement

4. On December 12, 2014, the Member was directed by the principal not to handle any money at the School due to “numerous instances over the last two years with money being mismanaged.” He was told not to count/collect money for fundraisers, uniforms, or for teams that he coached. He was further instructed to “Redirect students to submit any money for any initiative to the Curriculum Leader”. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a copy of the principal’s email to the Member, dated December 12, 2014.

Theft of Money Continues through 2017

5. Throughout 2017, there were numerous reported instances of theft of money from a Physical Education Office (the “PE Office”) at the School. These were funds collected for trips and fundraisers.

6. On March 1, 2017 the School administration sent a note to all Phys-Ed staff, including the Member, reminding them about the correct procedure for collecting, handling, and submitting money, as well as reminding staff to lock their doors.

7. On December 4, 2017, money was taken from the desk drawer of Colleague A, a Phys-Ed teacher at the School. Colleague A’s desk was in the PE Office. On the morning of December 5, 2017 Colleague A noticed that the money was missing. He reported the theft to the vice-principal and explained that he had “buried” the money in the drawer as deeply as possible given the recent thefts. Colleague A asked the vice-principal to review the surveillance footage from the camera located right outside the PE Office.

8. On December 6, 2017, the vice-principal reviewed the surveillance footage from December 4, 2017. The video showed the Member entering the PE Office. He appeared to look around in the hallway, entered the PE Office, and later the Member was observed exiting the office before walking down the hallway, and out the front doors of the School. He was the only person to enter the PE Office that evening.

9. On December 7, 2017, the vice-principal met with the Member to discuss the incident. When asked where he was on the evening of December 4, 2017, the Member relayed a story about visiting the office to print at times inconsistent with those observed on the video. Further investigation the following day revealed there was no printer in the PE Office that was connected to or available on the School network. The administration had ongoing concerns regarding theft by the Member.

The Member Continues to Disregard the Direction for Handling Funds into 2018

10. In January 2018, the Member disregarded the instructions he received from the principal in December 2014, which remained in force, and continued to collect money from students. On at least two occasions, the Member failed to safeguard and/or lost track of the money that he collected. These include:

(a) On January 15, 2018, Colleague C, a teacher at the School, reported that $125 for a rock climbing activity had not been handed in. The Member had taken the money home in an envelope, which he returned to the School the next day.

(b) In or about January 2018, two students gave the Member $20.00 each for a Grade 7 excursion organized by Colleague D, another teacher at the School. The Member was unable to find the money that the students had given him, and informed Colleague D that he did not know where it was.

11. On February 14, 2018, the Member was caught on surveillance video and verified as stealing a plastic bag containing bills and coins from a teacher’s mailbox, and placing it in the right side pocket of his coat. The money was reported missing the following day.

Action by the Board

12. On February 15, 2018, the Member was issued a letter of discipline. He was suspended with pay effective immediately and instructed to attend a meeting at the Board office on February 16, 2018. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a copy of the letter from the Superintendent to the Member, dated February 15, 2018.

The Member Admits to Committing Theft

13. On April 18, 2018, the Member admitted to stealing $50.00 “from a teacher’s mailbox” on February 14, 2018. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “E” is a copy of the Member’s admission to the theft in an email to the Board’s Director of Education, dated April 18, 2018.

Minutes of Settlement and Resignation

14. On May 14, 2018, the Member signed Minutes of Settlement with the Ontario English Catholic Teachers’ Association and the Board pursuant to which he agreed to resign from his position.

15. On December 19, 2018, the Member notified the Superintendent that his last day at the School would be December 31, 2018.

GUILTY PLEA

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

17. 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).

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 otherwise 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 counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed does not bind the Discipline Committee;

(f) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea voluntarily, unequivocally, and having had the opportunity to obtain the advice of legal counsel.

19. In light of the Admitted Facts and the 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.

D. DECISION

6Counsel 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(14) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. College Counsel stated that the Panel’s permission to withdraw the allegation was being sought because it is unnecessarily duplicative of the allegation outlined in paragraph (a) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession. The Panel granted this request.

7Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Panel rendered an oral decision on February 26, 2020 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).

E. REASONS FOR DECISION

8The Member admitted the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 15 of the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and admitted the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Panel accepts that the Admitted Facts constitute professional misconduct under the headings of misconduct set out above. The Admitted Facts demonstrate that the Member repeatedly misplaced or mismanaged funds collected from students for activities and ignored formal directives issued by his principal not to handle any money at the School. The Member also admitted to stealing 50 dollars from a colleague’s mailbox.

9The Panel finds that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession. The Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession (“Ethical Standards”) require, among other things, that members work to promote trust and confidence in the teaching profession. The standard of “trust” requires members to conduct themselves with openness and honesty in their professional relationships. Intrinsic to the standard of “integrity” are “honesty, reliability and moral action”. The Member’s repeated mismanagement of funds and the fact that he took money from another teacher’s mailbox is a failure by the Member to act honestly and morally.

10The Panel finds that the Member failed to comply with subsection 264(1) of the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.2, which sets out the duties of a teacher. This provision requires members to assist in developing co-operation and co-ordination of efforts among the members of the staff. By continuing to collect funds from students despite having been formally directed to stop by the School’s principal, the Member acted contrary to this requirement. This resulted in the failure to effectively co-ordinate funds collection in the Physical Education department and ultimately to mismanagement of student funds. In addition, the Member’s theft from a colleague demonstrates that he failed to act as a role model within the school community.

11The Panel finds that the Member’s behaviour was disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional. The School reported several instances in which the Member misplaced or mismanaged money collected from students for activities, and specifically told the Member on December 12, 2014 not to count or collect money for fundraisers for the teams that he coached. The Member ignored this directive and continued to collect and handle funds, resulting in further issues being reported in subsequent years. On April 18, 2018, the Member admitted to stealing 50 dollars from another teacher’s mailbox. Misconduct of this nature is disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional. Members of the teaching profession are expected to behave in an ethical manner at all times. The Member failed to meet that expectation.

12Similarly, the Panel finds that all instances outlined above demonstrate that the Member’s conduct was unbecoming a member in that it undermined the reputation of the teaching profession and the trust that students and the public place in members.

F. PENALTY DECISION

13The parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on February 26, 2020, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:

1. The Member is directed 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”);

2. The Registrar is directed to suspend the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member for a period of one month commencing on the 15th calendar day following the date of the oral Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee relating to this matter, and the fact of the suspension is to be recorded on the Register. If the oral Decision and Order is rendered between May 1 and August 1, the suspension will commence on September 1;

3. The Registrar is directed 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 resuming or beginning 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 ethics, 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 and Reasons of the Discipline Committee;

(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;

(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:

(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.

G. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION

14The Panel accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties. The Panel recognizes that, once it ensures that it has jurisdiction to make the order requested, the law confines the Panel’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 Panel finds that the penalty proposed in the Joint Submission on Penalty falls within a range of acceptable outcomes, based on the following prior decisions of the Discipline Committee presented by College Counsel: Ontario College of Teachers v. Cadeau, 2019 ONOCT 108, Ontario College of Teachers v. Kastner, 2017 ONOCT 1 and Ontario College of Teachers v. Desjardins, 2015 ONOCT 18.

15The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The aggravating factors in the Member’s case are the repeated nature and prolonged duration of the Member’s misconduct and the fact that he disregarded his principal’s direction not to handle money at the School. Furthermore the Member stole funds from a colleague’s mailbox, which is a serious breach of trust. In terms of mitigating factors, the Member admitted his misconduct to the Board and the College, saving the time and expense of a contested hearing. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed by the parties is reasonable.

16The Panel finds that the Member’s repeated pattern of inappropriate conduct, despite having received formal directives from School administration, warrants a reprimand by his peers. Members of the teaching profession are expected to conduct themselves in an ethical manner at all times and to act as role models within the school community. The reprimand will allow the Panel 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.

17Given the repeated nature and duration of the Member’s conduct, the Panel finds that a one-month suspension is reasonable and appropriate. While the cases presented by College Counsel are factually distinct from this case, the misconduct represented in those cases is of a similar underlying nature and the cases confirm that a suspension is justified. The suspension will serve as a specific deterrent to the Member and a general deterrent to other members of the profession, making clear that the kind of misconduct the Member exhibited is unacceptable.

18The Panel finds that the course of instruction regarding ethics will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. The coursework will remind the Member of his obligations as a teacher and will help him to make better decisions in the future.

19The Panel is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.

Footnotes

1. 1Allegation withdrawn at the request of College Counsel.