DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
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 Joel Steven Bates, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.
BETWEEN:
ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS
– and –
JOEL STEVEN BATES (REGISTRATION #278765)
PANEL: Rebecca Forte, OCT, Chair Emile Ramlochan Jessica Saffran Reimers, OCT
HEARD: September 24, 2021
Ava Arbuck and Noam Uri, for the Ontario College of Teachers No one appearing for Joel Steven Bates 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 proceeding was heard electronically before a panel of the Discipline Committee (the “Panel”) of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “College”) on September 24, 2021, in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.
2Joel Steven Bates (the “Member”) did not attend the hearing and did not have 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 September 12, 2018 (Exhibit 1) are as follows:
IT IS ALLEGED that Joel Steven Bates 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);2
(c) he abused a student or students psychologically or emotionally, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.2);
(d) he abused a student or students sexually, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(7.3) and/or engaged in sexual abuse of a student or students as defined in section 1 of the Act;3
(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. STATEMENT OF UNCONTESTED FACTS
5College Counsel presented the Panel with the parties’ Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest (Exhibit 2), which provides the following:
Joel Steven Bates 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 Hamilton-Wentworth District School Board (the “Board”) as a [XXX] teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in Hamilton, Ontario. He was employed by the Board from 1998 until he resigned, effective June 30, 2015.
At all material times during the 2014-2015 academic year, the Member taught Grade [XXX], Grade [XXX], Grade [XXX], and Grade [XXX].
Inappropriate Comments and Remarks
- During the 2014-2015 academic year, the Member made inappropriate remarks in his classes, including when he:
(a) told a story about a student at his former school who got pregnant;
(b) joked about masturbation;
(c) told a story about an uncomfortable moment when a former female student had grabbed his crotch accidentally instead of the doorknob;
(d) explained the term “rainbow party” to his Grade [XXX] class;
(e) when students were aware that he had a medical appointment and one student asked him what he would do if he had a “hot nurse”, he joked that he would think about baseball;
(f) made “your mamma” and “that’s what she said” jokes;
(g) explained the concept of plagiarism using prostitution as an example;
(h) when a male student indicated he had been up late the previous evening, the Member spoke about a former student who had been caught downloading “dwarf porn” or “midget porn”.
- During the 2014-2015 academic year, the Member made inappropriate comments in his classes that some students found offensive and made them feel uncomfortable, including:
(a) during a discussion about an article from around 1950 the Member brought to class entitled, “How to be a good wife”, the Member said, “That is the way it should be”;
(b) during a debate generated by the above article focusing on women receiving less pay than men, the Member said, “most of them belong in the kitchen”;
(c) on more than one occasion when a computer acted up or there was an error in PowerPoint during class, the Member referred to it as “a female mistake” or a “woman moment”.
During a discussion in his Grade [XXX] class when a student raised the issue of suicide, the Member told the class, “Make sure you cut this way (demonstrating vertically) and not this way (horizontally)”. The Member meant to shock his students to get their attention. Unbeknownst to the Member, one of his students was particularly sensitive about the topic and was offended by the Member’s remarks. When she indicated to the Member that she found his comments inappropriate, the Member explained that if someone is intent on hurting themselves, there is nothing that can be done in the moment.
During a discussion about World War II in his Grade [XXX] class, the Member mentioned the fact that there was documented evidence of cannibalism. Students in the class questioned the Member for more information. There was a brief discussion about the fact that women would lose their breasts first because the high fat content could help sustain others. One student felt particularly uncomfortable and embarrassed by these comments.
The Member saw the same female student in the office waiting to talk to the Principal. The Member approached the student, inviting her to talk to him if she had any concerns. The following day after class, the Member asked the student why she had attended the office the previous day, offered to discuss her concerns, and said, “you don’t have a problem with me?” The student told the Member that some of the things he said were offensive, and the Member responded, “Well I am stopping.”
Board Investigation
On May 12, 2015, two female students approached the administration about comments the Member made in class that made them feel uncomfortable, following which the Principal interviewed a number of students from each of the Member’s classes.
Numerous students confirmed the Member made inappropriate comments including the statements referred to above in his classes. A number of female students reported feeling uncomfortable as a result of the Member’s comments, and male students reported that the Member was joking and his comments did not bother them.
During his meeting with the Board on May 29, 2015, the Member said he believed that some of his comments had been taken out of context, explained that he often used humour during his lessons which he understood could be taken the wrong way, and apologized if his comments had offended anyone.
On July 9, 2015, the Member entered into a Memorandum of Settlement (Termination Agreement) with the Board, which is attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B”. The Member agreed to resign effective June 30, 2015, and to not seek re-employment with the Board.
A concurrent Children’s Aid Society (“CAS”) investigation did not verify that children in the Member’s care were “at risk of sexual harm due to questionable sexual activity”, but it did verify that children were “at risk of emotional harm” from the Member, finding that his actions “related to corrupting behaviour that encourage the children to develop inappropriate behaviours”. In closing its file, the CAS noted that students advised the Member “often made inappropriate comments and jokes” which some students found offensive, however, the Member appeared to understand the inappropriateness of his conduct. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “C” is a copy of the CAS letter to the Member dated June 19, 2015.
Current Status
- The Member is currently not teaching and does not intend to return to teaching.
Undertaking and Acknowledgment
- On the 31st day of August, 2021, the Member signed an Undertaking and Acknowledgment resigning as a member of the Ontario College of Teachers and agreeing not to seek reinstatement of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration. He further undertook not to seek or accept employment in any teaching position in any public or private school in Ontario, or in any other capacity for which an Ontario Certificate of Qualification and Registration is required. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a copy of the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgment.
PLEA OF NO CONTEST
By this document, the Member agrees that the Discipline Committee can accept as correct the facts and the exhibits referred to in the paragraphs above (the “Uncontested Facts”).
The Member hereby acknowledges that the Uncontested Facts constitute conduct which is professional misconduct and pleads no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against him, being more particularly breaches of Ontario Regulation 437/97 subsections 1(7.2), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18) 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 Uncontested Facts being presented to the Discipline Committee;
(c) he understands that by pleading no contest 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 can accept the Uncontested Facts as correct, and can accept that those facts constitute professional misconduct;
(e) 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;
(f) he understands that any agreement between him and counsel for the College with respect to the penalty proposed does not bind the Discipline Committee;
(g) he understands and acknowledges that he is executing this Agreement voluntarily, unequivocally, and without the advice of legal counsel.
The Member provides this plea of no contest pursuant to Rule 3.02 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee under protection of the Evidence Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter E. 23, for the purpose of this proceeding under the Ontario College of Teachers Act 1996, chapter 12, and for no other purpose. The Member’s plea of no contest does not constitute an admission by the Member as to the facts or findings in any other civil, criminal or administrative proceeding
In light of the Uncontested Facts and circumstances, 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 (a), (b) and (d) of the Notice of Hearing, namely that the Member contravened subsections 1(5), 1(7) and 1(7.3) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 and/or that the Member engaged in sexual abuse of a student or students as defined in section 1 of the Act, be withdrawn.
7College Counsel stated that the Panel’s permission to withdraw the allegation with respect to subsection 1(5) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 was being sought because allegation would be duplicitous with subsection 1(14).
8College Counsel stated that the Panel’s permission to withdraw the allegation with respect to subsection 1(7) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 was being sought because the evidence did not support this allegation.
9College Counsel stated that the Panel’s permission to withdraw the allegation with respect to subsection 1(7.3) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 and/or that the Member engaged in sexual abuse of a student or students as defined in section 1 of the Act was being sought because the evidence did not support this allegation. College Counsel submitted the evidence showed that the remarks made by the Member, while of sexual nature, were not directed to a particular student and did not support a finding under this particular heading of professional misconduct.
10The Panel granted these withdrawal requests.
11Having considered the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and the submissions of College Counsel, the Panel rendered an oral decision on September 24, 2021 finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(7.2), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).
E. REASONS FOR DECISION
12The Member did not contest the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 15 of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and pleaded no contest to the allegations of professional misconduct against him. He acknowledged and the Panel accepts that the Uncontested Facts constitute professional misconduct under the headings of misconduct set out above. The Uncontested Facts demonstrate that the Member made inappropriate comments and remarks in his classes that were offensive to some students and made some students uncomfortable.
13The Panel finds that the Member psychologically or emotionally abused a student or students, contrary to subsection 1(7.2) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The comments the Member made about self-harm and about women, including suggestions about their role in society and whether women would lose their breasts first during a discussion of cannibalism, were offensive and made students feel uncomfortable, embarrassed, and upset. The Panel accepts that the Member’s conduct constitutes psychological or emotional abuse.
14The 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 human dignity and emotional wellness in their professional practice (“Respect”). The standard of Care requires members to demonstrate a commitment to students’ well-being and learning through positive influence, professional judgment, and empathy in practice. The standard of Respect requires members to model respect for cultural values and social justice, among other things. The Member failed demonstrate Care and Respect with his repeated inappropriate comments including those of sexual and sexist nature and comments showing a lack of sensitivity to issues of suicide and self-harm.
15The Member’s conduct as described above also contravenes subsection 264(1) of the Education Act, contrary to subsection 1(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 which sets out the duties of a teacher. Among their duties, teachers are required to encourage students in the pursuit of learning and act as a positive role model, demonstrating a high regard for virtues including truth, justice, and humanity. The Member’s repeated disrespectful and offensive remarks did not model these virtues.
16The Panel finds that the Member’s behaviour was disgraceful, dishonourable and 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 repeated inappropriate comments demonstrate his lack of professional judgment and disregard for his professional obligations, and amount to conduct that is disgraceful, dishonourable and unprofessional.
17Similarly, 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
18On August 31, 2021, the Member entered into an Undertaking and Acknowledgment (Exhibit 4) with the College in which he agreed to the following terms:
I hereby resign as a member of the Ontario College of Teachers with immediate effect.
I undertake that I will never seek reinstatement of my Certificate of Qualification and Registration.
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.
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.
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 August 31, 2021, 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.”
- I further understand, acknowledge and agree that:
(a) I fully understand the scope, purpose and effect of my execution of this Undertaking and Acknowledgment;
(b) I am signing this Undertaking and Acknowledgment voluntarily, unequivocally, and without compulsion or duress; and
(c) I have been advised by the College of my right to obtain legal advice prior to signing this Undertaking and Acknowledgment, and I have either done so or have had adequate opportunity to do so prior to signing this document.
G. PENALTY DECISION
19In addition to the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgment, the parties agreed to a Joint Submission on Penalty (Exhibit 3), which was presented to the Panel. In an oral decision rendered on September 24, 2021 the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty and made the following order:
- The Member is directed to receive a written reprimand, and the fact of the reprimand shall be recorded on the Register of the Ontario College of Teachers (the “Register”).
H. REASONS FOR PENALTY DECISION
20The 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 Acknowledgment, 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. Fisher, 2018 ONOCT 11; Ontario College of Teachers v. Grima, 2020 ONOCT 183; and Ontario College of Teachers v. Gacich, 2021 ONOCT 16.
21The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The aggravating factor in the Member’s case is that the Member made numerous inappropriate comments over the course of one year before numerous students in his classes. In terms of mitigating factors, the Member admitted his misconduct and cooperated with the College in arriving at a joint resolution, which prevented student witnesses from having to testify and saved the time and expense of a contested hearing. The Member has been a member of the profession for a long time and has no prior history with the College. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed by the parties, in conjunction with the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgment, is reasonable.
22The Committee finds that the reprimand, together with the terms set out in the Member’s Undertaking and Acknowledgment, will serve both as a specific deterrent to the Member and as a general deterrent making it clear to other members that the profession will not tolerate the kind of misconduct exhibited by the Member. In view of the seriousness 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 in either a public or private school setting. 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 demonstrate such good judgment by making numerous inappropriate and offensive comments. The written reprimand will allow 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.
23The Panel is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.
Date: September 29, 2021
Rebecca Forte, OCT Chair, Discipline Panel
Emile Ramlochan Member, Discipline Panel
Jessica Saffran Reimers, OCT Member, Discipline Panel