DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE
OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
Ontario College of Teachers v Will 2021 ONOCT 01
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
Waldemar Georg Walter Will, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
WALDEMAR GEORG WALTER WILL (REGISTRATION #255580)
PANEL: Stéphane Vallée, OCT, Chair Élaine Legault Nancy Saunders, OCT
HEARD: December 3, 2020 and December 21, 2020
Danielle Miller, for the Ontario College of Teachers Saneliso Moyo, for Waldemar Georg Walter Will Julie Maciura, Independent Legal Counsel
PUBLICATION BAN: Pursuant to subsection 32.1(3) 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 proceeding was heard electronically before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on December 3, 2020 and December 21, 2020, in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.
2Waldemar Georg Walter Will (the “Member”) attended the hearing on the merits 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 Waldemar Georg Walter Will 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 abused a student or students verbally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7);
(c) he abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);1
(d) he engaged in sexual misconduct as defined in section 1 of the Act;
(e) he failed to comply with the Act or the regulations or the by-laws, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(14);2
(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);
(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:
Waldemar Georg Walter Will 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.
At all material times, the Member was employed by the Toronto District School Board as a high school teacher at [XXX] Institute (the “School”) in Toronto, Ontario.
At all material times during the 2017-2018 academic year, the Member taught [XXX] courses at the School.
During the 2017-2018 academic year, the Member showed one or more videos to his class that included content related to physical abuse and/or violence encountered by individuals while incarcerated and/or discussions of a sexual nature.
During April 2018, in his Grade [XXX] class, the Member:
(a) used the words “fuck”, “shit”, “bitch”, and/or “asshole”;
(b) made sexual or inappropriate jokes in front of students;
(c) said words to the effect of, “I hope you two do not use the same restroom”, after giving two students permission to go to the restroom.
As a result of the above incidents, the Member was suspended without pay by the Board for five days. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the Board’s correspondence to the Member dated May 7, 2018.
The Member retired from the Board, effective June 29, 2018.
GUILTY PLEA
By this document, the Member admits the truth of the facts and exhibits referred to in the paragraphs above (the “Admitted Facts”).
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(7), 1(15), 1(18), and 1(19). The Member further admits that the alleged conduct constitutes sexual misconduct as defined in Section 1 of the Act.
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; and
(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.
- 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 allegations of professional misconduct outlined in paragraphs (c) and (e) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member contravened subsections 1(7.2) and 1(14) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, be withdrawn. College Counsel submitted that the Panel’s permission to withdraw subsection 1(7.2) was being sought as there was not sufficient evidence to make out an allegation of psychological or emotional abuse. The Panel’s permission to withdraw subsection 1(14) was sought as the Member’s conduct is more properly captured by subsection 1(5) and proceeding under both subsection 1(5) and 1(14) would be duplicative. The Panel granted these requests.
7Having considered the Agreed Statement of Facts and Guilty Plea and the submissions of the parties, the Panel rendered an oral decision on December 21, 2020 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(5), 1(7), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19). The Member’s conduct also constitutes sexual misconduct as defined in section 1 of the Act.
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 Panel finds that the Member failed to maintain the standards of the profession. The standards of the profession are comprised of the Standards of Practice and the Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession. The Panel finds that the Member breached the standard of “Professional Practice”, which requires members to apply professional knowledge and experience to promote student learning and to use appropriate pedagogy and resources in their teaching. The Member failed to do so by showing inappropriate videos that were not related to the [XXX] curriculum that he should have been teaching.
10The Panel finds that the Member verbally abused his students by using vulgar and inappropriate language when speaking to his class. Specifically, the Member used the words “fuck”, “shit”, “bitch”, and/or “asshole” in class. Using profanity in the classroom is offensive, inappropriate, and amounts to verbal abuse by the Member.
11The Panel finds that the Member’s conduct constitutes sexual misconduct as defined in Section 1 of the Act. “Sexual misconduct” is defined in the Act as:
inappropriate behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature by the member that is not sexual abuse of a student, where,
(a) one or more students are exposed to the behaviour or remarks, or the member knows or ought to know that one or more students are likely to be exposed to the behaviour or remarks, and
(b) a reasonable person would expect the behaviour or remarks to have the effect of,
(i) causing distress to a student exposed to the behaviour or remarks,
(ii) being detrimental to the physical or mental well-being of a student, or
(iii) creating a negative environment at a school for a student exposed to the behaviour or remarks.
By showing videos that included discussions of a sexual nature and by making sexual jokes in front of his class, the Member exposed his students to behaviour or remarks of a sexual nature. The Panel finds that a reasonable person would expect these remarks to create a negative environment in the classroom. It is not appropriate for teachers to make sexual jokes in front of their class and by doing so, the Member engaged in sexual misconduct.
12The Panel finds that the Member failed to comply with section 264(1) of the Education Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. E.2, which sets out the duties of a teacher. Among other things, teachers are required to set a proper example for students and to exemplify the virtues set out in section 264(1) of the Education Act. By showing videos that include violent content, by using profanity in his classroom, and by making inappropriate or sexual jokes in front of students, the Member acted in a way that was in odds with his duties as a teacher.
13The Panel finds that the Member’s conduct was disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional. The Member acted unprofessionally by using profanity in the classroom and by showing one or more inappropriate, violent videos. By doing so, the Member failed to exercise good judgment in making pedagogical choices and acted in a way that was disgraceful, dishonourable, or unprofessional.
14Similarly, the Member’s conduct toward his students was unbecoming a member. It undermined the reputation of the teaching profession and violated the trust that the public places in members.
F. PENALTY DECISION
15The parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on December 21, 2020, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:
The Member is directed to 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 or by videoconference 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 suspend the Certificate of Qualification and Registration of the Member for a period of two months 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;
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 returning to teaching, the Member shall enrol in and successfully complete at his own expense, a course of instruction pre-approved by the Registrar regarding classroom communication and boundaries, 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
16The 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. Green-Johnson, 2018 ONOCT 30, Ontario College of Teachers v. Bielby, 2018 ONOCT 38, Ontario College of Teachers v. Lewsaw, 2019 ONOCT 35, and Ontario College of Teachers v. Eltis, 2016 ONOCT 58.
17The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The aggravating factor in the Member’s case is the repeated nature of his misconduct. In terms of mitigating factors, the Member admitted his misconduct, saving the time and expense of a contested hearing and has not been the subject of College discipline proceedings in the past. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed by the parties is reasonable.
18The Panel finds that the Member’s conduct warrants a reprimand by his peers. Members are expected to use appropriate teaching tools in the classroom and to refrain from making inappropriate or sexual jokes in front of students. The Member failed to do so by this misconduct. 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.
19Given the nature and severity of the Member’s conduct, the Panel finds that a two-month suspension is reasonable and appropriate. While the cases presented are factually distinct from this case, the misconduct represented in those cases is of a similar underlying nature and the cases confirm that a two-month 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. In accordance with the parties’ joint submission, the Member’s suspension will begin on January 5, 2021, which is 15 days after the Panel’s Oral Decision and Order.
20The Panel finds that the course of instruction regarding classroom communication and boundaries will assist in the rehabilitation of the Member. If the Member returns to teaching, 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.
21The Panel is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: January 4, 2021
Stéphane Vallée, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Élaine Legault Member, Discipline Panel
Nancy Saunders, OCT Member, Discipline Panel