Ontario College of Teachers v. Grima, 2020 ONOCT 183

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Ontario College of Teachers v Grima 2020 ONOCT 183

Date: 2020-10-27

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

Spiro Grima, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

SPIRO GRIMA (REGISTRATION #283720)

PANEL: John Hamilton, OCT, Chair Shanlee Linton, OCT Wanda Percival

HEARD: October 22, 2020

Vincent DeMarco and Christine Lonsdale, for the Ontario College of Teachers Andrea Wobick, for Spiro Grima 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 October 22, 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.

2Spiro Grima (the “Member”) did not attend the hearing but 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 November 19, 2018 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that Spiro Grima 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);¹

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

(c) he abused a student or students physically, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.1);

(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 Act or the regulations or the by-laws, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(14);

(f) 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);

(g) 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

(h) 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. Spiro Grima 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 Thames Valley District School Board (the “Board”) as a [XXX]teacher at [XXX]School (the “School”).

3. At all material times, Student 1 was a [XXX] year-old female student at the School in the Member’s [XXX]class.

Parent Teacher Conference

4. During an April 4, 2017 parent teacher interview with Student 1’s mother, the Member discussed a prior disciplinary matter with the Board that had occurred at his previous school and disclosed confidential information about two other students. The Member told Student 1’s mother that he had been moved from his previous school and that the police had investigated. The Member also stated that he had a good friend on the police force, and that his friend had told him that if there is no reason to charge someone they are not charged, but that the Board and the Ontario College of Teachers were keeping an eye on him. The Member believed that Student 1’s mother already knew the information that he was sharing.

5. During this April 4, 2017 interview, the Member also discussed the teaching styles of other teachers at the School, leaving Student 1’s mother with the impression that he was being critical of them.

April 2017 Incidents

6. On April 24, 2017, the Member raised with the class that he felt that some of them did not like him. In front of the class, the Member stated “Your mom told me that you don’t like me” or words to the effect that Student 1 “hated” him. The Member meant this to be a joke. Student 1 responded to ask the Member how he had received this information. The Member told Student 1 that her mother had mentioned it. Student 1 knew that her mother had recently attended a parent teacher interview with the Member on April 4, 2017.

7. The next day, on April 25, 2017, Student 1 approached the Member standing outside the [XXX]office in order to talk to him about what had occurred the previous day. The Member told Student 1 that he did not mean what he had said, and that he was just joking. Student 1 told the Member that she did not hate him.

8. The Member then touched Student 1 on the face and shoulder. The Member told Student 1 that he knew that she did not hate him, and hugged Student 1. The Member’s comments and actions had a negative impact on the student. Student 1 moved away from the Member slightly and responded: “Okay, good. I’m glad you know that.”

9. The Member made additional inappropriate personal comments to Student 1. These comments included: saying “you must have been up all night worrying” and calling Student 1 “a beautiful person”. The Member’s comments had a negative impact on the student.

10. Following these comments, the Member reached out and held Student 1’s arm. The Member then told Student 1 that he believed she cared about him very deeply and that he cared about her very deeply. This interaction had a negative impact on the student.

Other Comments

11. During the 2016-2017 academic year, the Member:

(a) Yelled in class;

(b) On one occasion said to a student in his class “what the hell are you doing”;

(c) Talked about other teachers in a disparaging or degrading manner, including other [XXX]teachers in front of parents and students;

(d) Told his [XXX]class that everything they had learned before from another teacher was wrong.

Board Action

12. With respect to the conduct described in paragraphs 4-10, the Member was disciplined by his Board and suspended without pay for 10 days, from May 18, 2017 until June 1, 2017. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit ‘B” is a copy of the Board’s discipline letter to the Member dated May 25, 2017. Also attached hereto and marked as Exhibit ‘C” is a copy of the Board’s discipline letter to the Member dated April 24, 2015 which is referred to in the May 25, 2017 discipline letter.

13. The Member grieved the May 25, 2017 discipline letter and the 10-day suspension. As a result, the Member’s suspension was reduced by way of settlement to a 7 day suspension. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is the revised discipline letter to the Member dated December 15, 2017.

Current Status

14. The Member continued to work as a teacher for the Board until he retired from teaching in August of 2019. He retired from the Ontario College of Teachers in October 2019.

15. As of October 2020, the Member was employed in a field unrelated to education.

Previous Decision of the Discipline Committee:

16. The Member was previously found guilty of professional misconduct by the Discipline Committee on April 23, 2018. The penalty ordered by the discipline committee was a reprimand, a three month suspension, and the Member was required to complete coursework on boundary violations. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit ‘E” is a copy of the decision of the Discipline Committee dated April 23, 2018.

GUILTY PLEA

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

18. 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(7), 1(7.1), 1(7.2), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18), 1(19).

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 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.

20. 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 (a) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member contravened subsection 1(5) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. College Counsel sought the Panel’s permission to withdraw the subsection 1(5) allegation because it was duplicative of the subsection 1(14) allegation. 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 October 22, 2020 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(7), 1(7.1), 1(7.2), 1(14), 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 16 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 committed boundary violations with Student 1 and made inappropriate or disparaging remarks to Student 1’s mother and to his class.

9The Panel finds that the Member abused students verbally, contrary to subsection 1(7) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. Among other things, the Member singled out Student 1 in front of the class and divulged that during parent-teacher interviews he learned that Student 1 did not like him. The Member’s behaviour had a negative impact on Student 1. The Member also yelled in class and spoke in a disparaging or degrading manner about other teachers in front of students. Members must address students with respect and refrain from making mocking or personally embarrassing comments to students in front of their peers. They must also demonstrate respect when speaking about other colleagues in the school environment, both to model appropriate behaviour for students and to not undermine their colleagues.

10The Panel finds that the Member abused a student physically, contrary to subsection 1(7.1) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, by touching Student 1 on the face and shoulder while having a conversation with her. The Member also hugged Student 1 and reached out to hold Student 1’s arm, which had a negative impact on Student 1. It is inappropriate for teachers to touch and hug students.

11The Panel finds that the Member psychologically or emotionally abused a student, contrary to subsection 1(7.2) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. When Student 1 went to speak to the Member about his comments in class, the Member told Student 1 that he was joking and that he knew that she did not hate him, but that she “must have been up all night worrying” and called her a “a beautiful person”. The Member also told Student 1 that he believed that she cared about him very deeply and that he cared about her very deeply. The Member’s interaction with Student 1 had a negative impact on her. It is psychologically or emotionally abusive for members to make suggestive comments about personal feelings to students. Members of the profession hold a unique position of trust and authority and must always interact professionally with students.

12The Member’s conduct demonstrates a failure to comply with the College’s by-laws contrary to subsection 1(14) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member failed to meet the standards articulated in the Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession, which are set out at section 32.02 of the by-laws. Among other things, Members are expected to demonstrate their commitment to students’ well-being (“Care”) and respect for students in their professional practice (“Respect”). It falls below the standards of the profession to mock or embarrass a student in class by sharing information from a parent-teacher interview, to touch a student’s body, to make uncomfortable and suggestive personal comments to a student, and to disclose confidential information about other students to a parent.

13The Member’s verbally, physically, and psychologically or emotionally abusive conduct as described above also contravenes subsection 264(1) of the Education Act, which sets out the duties of a teacher. Among their duties, teachers are to encourage students in the pursuit of learning and act as positive role models. The Member’s inappropriate comments and physical contact with Student 1 failed to prioritize Student 1’s learning and well-being and had a negative impact on her. The disparaging way that the Member spoke to students about his colleagues also modeled disrespectful behaviour.

14The Panel finds that the Member’s behaviour was disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional, contrary to subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. Members of the teaching profession are always expected to maintain appropriate and professional boundaries with students and exercise professional judgment. The Member’s interactions with Student 1, his disclosure of confidential information about students to a parent, and his disparaging or degrading comments about his colleagues to students demonstrate the Member’s disregard for his professional obligations.

15Similarly, the Panel finds that the Member’s conduct was unbecoming a member, contrary to subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. Members of the teaching profession are expected to be stewards of the public trust. The Member’s lack of professionalism reflects poorly on the Member and on the teaching profession.

F. UNDERTAKING AND ACknowledgment

16On October 16, 2020, the Member entered into an Undertaking and Acknowledgement (Exhibit 4) with the College in which he agreed to the following terms:

1. I hereby resign as a member of the Ontario College of Teachers with immediate effect.

2. I undertake that I will not seek reinstatement of my Certificate of Qualification and Registration. For greater certainty, I undertake that I will never seek reinstatement of my Certificate of Qualification and Registration.

3. I undertake not to seek or accept employment in any teaching position in any public or private school in Ontario, or in any other position or capacity for which an Ontario Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required.

4. I understand that a breach of this Undertaking and Acknowledgment may constitute professional misconduct, and that in those circumstances, the Ontario College of Teachers will be at liberty to institute proceedings against me.

5. I acknowledge that my status on the Public Register of the Ontario College of Teachers will be “Cancelled – Resigned”, and there will be a notation on the Register as follows:

“On October 16, 2020, the Member resigned his Certificate of Qualification and Registration. The Member has undertaken not to reapply for reinstatement of his Certificate of Registration and Qualification.”

6. I acknowledge that I understand the scope, purpose and effect of my execution of this Undertaking and Acknowledgement and am executing same voluntarily, unequivocally, and with the advice of legal counsel.

G. PENALTY DECISION

17The parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on October 22, 2020 the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:

1. The Member is directed to appear before the Committee following the hearing of this matter and no later than 120 days after the date of the hearing 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 or by videoconference and the fact of the reprimand is to be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”);

2. By means of his undertaking, the Member undertakes to:

(a) not seek reinstatement of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration. For greater certainty, he will never seek reinstatement of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration;

(b) not seek or accept employment in any teaching position in any public or private school in Ontario, or in any other position or capacity for which an Ontario Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required;

3. The Public Register of the Ontario College of Teachers will state that:

“The Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration has been Cancelled - Resigned. On October 16, 2020, the Member resigned his Certificate of Qualification and Registration. The Member has undertaken not to reapply for reinstatement of his Certificate of Registration and Qualification.”

H. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION

18The Panel accepts the penalty jointly proposed by the parties and notes that the Member has resigned as a member of the College and undertaken to never seek reinstatement and to never again work in any teaching position in a public or private school in Ontario or in any other position that would require a Certificate of Qualification and Registration. 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, given the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgement, 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. Tremblay, 2015 ONOCT 80, Ontario College of Teachers v. Fisher, 2018 ONOCT 11; and Ontario College of Teachers v. Patry, 2017 ONOCT 73.

19The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The aggravating factor in the Member’s case is that his behaviour forms part of a concerning pattern whereby the Member failed to maintain appropriate, professional boundaries and had a negative impact on students. In addition to the conduct at issue in this case, the Member was previously warned by his Board in April 2015 and disciplined by the Committee in 2018 for engaging in similar boundary violations with students. In terms of mitigating factors, the Member admitted his misconduct, which prevented student witnesses from having to testify and saved the time and expense of a contested hearing. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed by the parties, in conjunction with the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgement, is reasonable.

20The Committee finds that the reprimand, together with the terms set out in the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgment will serve as a specific deterrent to the Member and make clear to other members that the profession will not tolerate the kind of misconduct exhibited by the Member. In view of the seriousness and repeated nature of the Member’s misconduct, the Panel finds it reasonable that the Member will no longer teach or seek to return to the teaching profession in Ontario. As part of their professional practice, teachers must demonstrate professional judgment, respect for students and peers, and a commitment to student well-being. The Member failed to maintain appropriate professional boundaries with Student 1 and repeatedly demonstrated a lack of professionalism. The reprimand, which was delivered to the Member via videoconference on October 23, 2020, allowed the Panel 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.

21The 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 College Counsel’s request.