DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
Ontario College of Teachers v Valdez 2020 ONOCT 177
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
Fredrick Isaiah Valdez, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
FREDRICK ISAIAH VALDEZ (REGISTRATION #457677)
PANEL: Diane Ballantyne, OCT, Chair Marlène Marwah Sara Nouini, OCT
HEARD: July 28, 2020
Jean-François Schaan, for the Ontario College of Teachers Angela Zhu, for Fredrick Isaiah Valdez Julie Maciura, 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 July 28, 2020 at the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”). With the consent of the parties, and in accordance with section 3 of the Hearings in Tribunal Proceedings (Temporary Measures) Act, 2020, S.O. 2020, c. 5, Sched 3, this matter proceeded by way of an electronic hearing.
2Fredrick Isaiah Valdez (the “Member”) did not attend the hearing but had legal representation attend on his behalf. 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 September 25, 2019 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Fredrick Isaiah Valdez 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 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);1
(c) 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);2
(d) 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:
Fredrick Isaiah Valdez is 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 Avon Maitland District School Board as a teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in [XXX], Ontario.
At all material times, Student 1 and Student 2 were female students at the School.
On or about November 8, 2018, the Member observed Student 1 appearing very tired and stumbling as she was getting out of the car.
At around 12:30 p.m., Student 2 notified the Member that Student 1 had taken two Xanax pills the night before and should be taken to the hospital. The Member spoke to Student 1 and Student 1 confirmed taking Xanax.
The Member recognized that Student 1 was unwell and had taken Xanax, but did not call 911 regarding Student 1. The Member contacted the School’s Health Nurse asking if he could drive Student 1 to the hospital emergency room. The Member was instructed to call an ambulance.
The Board suspended the Member for 5 days without pay. A grievance was filed and settled, subsequently reducing the suspension to three days. Attached hereto and marked as Appendix “B” is a copy of the Board’s November 21, 2018 letter to the Ontario College of Teachers.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and appendices referred to in paragraphs 1-7 above (the “Admitted Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Admitted Facts at paragraphs 4-6 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(18)(unprofessional) and 1(19).
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 his counsel and counsel for 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.
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(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. With respect to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, College Counsel requested that the Panel find that the Member’s conduct was unprofessional only (and not disgraceful or dishonourable). College Counsel stated that the Panel’s permission to withdraw subsection 1(15) was being sought as a by-product of negotiations in the adversarial process that resulted in the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea. College Counsel further submitted that the narrowing of subsection 1(18) to unprofessional conduct only was being sought as the Member’s conduct did not demonstrate a breach of morals and was not otherwise disgraceful or dishonourable. The Panel granted these requests due to the reasons stated by College Counsel.
7Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Panel rendered an oral decision on July 28, 2020 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(18) [unprofessional only] and 1(19).
E. REASONS FOR DECISION
8The 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 Panel accepts that the Admitted Facts constitute professional misconduct under the headings of misconduct set out above.
9The Admitted Facts demonstrate that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession, contrary to subsection 1(5) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. In particular, the Member breached the Ethical Standard of “care”. The standard of “care” requires members to express their commitment to students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional judgment and empathy in practice. The Member failed to uphold this standard by contacting the School’s Health Nurse instead of calling 911 when he recognized that a student was unwell and required medical attention. By failing to follow the appropriate procedure in the circumstances, the Member exercised poor professional judgment and his conduct fell below the ethical standards expected of members.
10The Panel finds that the Member’s conduct was unprofessional contrary to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member acted unprofessionally by failing to call 911 when he received information that a student required medical attention and by suggesting to the School’s Health Nurse that he drive Student 1 to the hospital himself. Members of the profession must prioritize the safety of students and follow appropriate procedures to ensure student safety. By failing to do so in this case the Member acted unprofessionally. He should have called 911 in the circumstances of this case.
11Similarly, the Member’s conduct was unbecoming a member contrary to subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member’s conduct undermined the reputation of the teaching profession, violating the trust that the public places in members to keep students safe at all times.
F. PENALTY DECISION
12The parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on July 28, 2020, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:
The Member is directed to receive a reprimand from the Committee, to be delivered by videoconference call after the conclusion of this hearing, and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the "Register");
The Registrar is directed to impose the following terms, conditions and limitations on the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and the fact of such terms, conditions and limitations is 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 effective supervision with a focus on individualized student needs. The course shall be preapproved 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.
G. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
13The 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 the parties: Ontario College of Teachers v. Quaglia, 2018 ONOCT 17, Ontario College of Teachers v. McColeman, 2019 ONOCT 109, Ontario College of Teachers v. Gocking, 2019 ONOCT 52, Ontario College of Teachers v. Gumulak, 2016 ONOCT 23, and Ontario College of Teachers v. Tallevi, 2011 ONOCT 33.
14The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The cases demonstrate that a reprimand and coursework is within the range of penalties for a member who neglected to respond appropriately to a medical situation involving a student. The mitigating factors in the Member’s case are that the Member admitted his misconduct, saving the time and expense of a contested hearing; has not been the subject of discipline proceedings in the past, and has already been disciplined by the Board. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed by the parties is reasonable.
15The Panel finds that the Member’s failure to follow the appropriate procedure when faced with a medical situation involving a student warrants a reprimand by his peers. 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.
16The Panel finds that the course of instruction regarding effective supervision with a focus on individualized student needs will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. The coursework is intended to instruct the Member regarding methods to maintain a safe environment for all students and regarding the appropriate way to react to an emergency. The coursework will also remind the Member of his obligations as a teacher and will help him to make better decisions in any future medical emergencies relating to students.
17The Panel is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: July 28, 2020
Diane Ballantyne, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Marlène Marwah Member, Discipline Panel
Sara Nouini, OCT Member, Discipline Panel