Ontario College of Teachers v. Morris, 2021 ONOCT 111

DISCIPLINE COMMITTEE OF THE ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

Citation: Ontario College of Teachers v Morris 2021 ONOCT 111

Date: 2021-09-27

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

John Vesta Morris, OCT, a member of the Ontario College of Teachers.

BETWEEN:

ONTARIO COLLEGE OF TEACHERS

– and –

JOHN VESTA MORRIS (REGISTRATION #524063)

PANEL: Anne Resnick, Chair Irene Dembek, OCT Azeem Khan

HEARD: September 23, 2021

Danielle Miller, for the Ontario College of Teachers Lauren Sheffield, for John Vesta Morris Rebecca Durcan, 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 23, 2021, in accordance with rule 8.01 of the Rules of Procedure of the Discipline Committee and of the Fitness to Practise Committee.

2John Vesta Morris (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 March 3, 2020, (Exhibit 1) are as follows:

IT IS ALLEGED that the John Vesta Morris is guilty of professional misconduct as defined in the Act in that:

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

(b) he failed to comply with the Act or the regulations or the by-laws, specifically section 32 of the by-laws, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsection 1(14);

(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. 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:

1. John Vesta Morris 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 Toronto District School Board (the “Board”) as a [XXX] teacher at [XXX] School (the “School”) in Toronto, Ontario.

3. During the 2018-2019 academic year, Student 1 was an [XXX] year old male student in the Member’s class.

4. On or about October 25, 2018, Student 1 was in the Member’s class. The students in the class were [XXX] to music. When the music ended, the Member told the students to lie down. After a few minutes, the Member asked the students to sit up and turn to the front of the [XXX]. Unlike the rest of the class, Student 1 sat up but faced the opposite direction. The Member approached Student 1 and used his hand to hit Student 1 in the back to move him closer to the other students. Student 1 was embarrassed.

5. Following the class during recess, Student 1 cried because it hurt and he was scared. Student 1 told the administration of the School that he did not want to return to the Member’s class. The Member did not witness Student 1 crying.

6. On October 26, 2018 the Board contacted the Toronto Police Service (“TPS”). The TPS closed their investigation and the Member was not charged.

7. On December 6, 2018, the Board commenced an investigation. The Board concluded that the allegation that the Member had hit Student 1 in the back was substantiated.

8. On December 20, 2018 the Member was disciplined by the Board as a result of his inappropriate conduct toward Student 1. The Member received a 15 day suspension. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “B” is a copy of the Board’s letter to the Member dated December 20, 2018.

9. On January 10, 2019, the Member grieved his suspension. The Board agreed to reduce the 15 day suspension to a 7 day suspension pursuant to a global settlement of various grievances filed on behalf of the Member (the “Minutes of Settlement”). Attached hereto and marked Exhibit “C” is a copy the Minutes of Settlement.

Prior Warnings:

10. On May 13, 2018, the Member received a letter from the Board regarding the use of inappropriate language toward students and leaving students unsupervised. The Member received a 3 day suspension which was subsequently reduced to a 1 day suspension pursuant to the Minutes of Settlement. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “D” is a copy of the Board’s letter to the Member dated May 13, 2018.

11. On May 16, 2018, the Member received a letter from the Board regarding inappropriate physical contact toward a student. The Member received a 6 day suspension and was required to attend anger management counselling. The 6 day suspension was subsequently reduced to a 4 day suspension pursuant to the Minutes of Settlement. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “E” is a copy of the Board’s letter to the Member dated May 16, 2018.

12. On August 14, 2019, the Member received advice in writing from the Investigation Committee in relation to the conduct described in paragraph 10. The Investigation Committee advised the Member to use professional language and to use professional language [sic] and to properly supervise students under his care at all times.

13. On August 14, 2019, the Member received a caution from the Investigation Committee in relation to the conduct described in paragraph 11. The Investigation Committee cautioned the Member to avoid inappropriate physical contact with students to ensure that he employed appropriate classroom management strategies to promote a safe learning environment. Attached hereto and marked as Exhibit “F” is a copy of the Member’s Caution dated August 14, 2019.

PLEA OF NO CONTEST

14. By this document, the Member agrees that the Discipline Committee can accept as correct for purposes of this proceeding only the facts and the exhibits referred to in the paragraphs above (the “Uncontested Facts”).

15. 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(7.1), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18), and 1(19).

16. 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 having had the opportunity to obtain the advice of legal counsel.

17. 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 civil, criminal or administrative proceeding [sic]

18. 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

6Having considered the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest and the submissions of parties, the Panel rendered an oral decision on September 23, 2021, finding that the Member engaged in acts of professional misconduct as alleged, contrary to Ontario Regulation 437/97, subsections 1(7.1), 1(14), 1(15), 1(18) and 1(19).

E. REASONS FOR DECISION

7The Member did not contest the facts and exhibits referred to in paragraphs 1 to 13 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 used inappropriate physical contact against Student 1.

8The Member engaged in the physical abuse of a student, thereby contravening subsection 1(7.1) of Ontario Regulation 437/97, when he hit Student 1, who was only [XXX] years old, on the back. The contact was of such force that Student 1 cried, said it hurt, was embarrassed, and indicated he did not want to return to the Member’s class. It is unacceptable for members of the teaching profession to use unnecessary physical force with students.

9The Member contravened subsection 1(14) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 by contravening the codified standards of the profession, which are set out in section 32 of the Bylaws of the Ontario College of Teachers. Using inappropriate physical contact on a student is a clear violation of the trust, respect, and care expected of teachers according to the Ethical Standards for the Teaching Profession. The ethical 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 honour human dignity, emotional wellness and cognitive development. The ethical standard of “Trust” forms the basis for teachers’ professional relationships with students, parents, and the public. The Member’s unjustified action of hitting Student 1 on the back failed to respect Student 1’s dignity and emotional wellness and did not promote a safe and supportive learning environment. The Member’s actions also undermined the trust that students, parents, and the public place in teachers. As such, the Member’s conduct falls below the ethical standards of the teaching profession.

10The Member contravened subsection 1(15) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 by failing to comply with section 264(1) of the Education Act, which sets out the duties of a teacher. Among other things, teachers are expected to “maintain […] proper order and discipline in [their] classroom and while on duty in the school and on the school ground.” Physical abuse is not a proper means of classroom management and discipline. The Member failed to fulfil his duties as a teacher with his actions against Student 1.

11The Member contravened subsection 1(18) of Ontario Regulation 437/97 by engaging in disgraceful, dishonourable or unprofessional conduct. The Member should have considered and used more appropriate classroom management methods, especially as he was previously disciplined by the Board for using inappropriate physical contact toward another student. In this case, the Member’s actions caused distress to Student 1. The Member therefore fell short of his professional obligations and failed to demonstrate sound professional judgment.

12Finally, the Member’s conduct was unbecoming of a member, contrary to subsection 1(19) of Ontario Regulation 437/97. The Member undermined the special position of trust that students, parents, and public place in teachers, who are entrusted with the safety of children.

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 September 23, 2021, the Panel accepted the Joint Submission on Penalty executed by the parties on September 9, 2021 and made the following order:

1. 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”);

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 15^th calendar day following the date of the Decision and Order of the Discipline Committee relating to this matter. If the Decision and Order is rendered between May 1st and August 1st, the suspension will commence on September 1st;

3. The Registrar is directed to impose the following terms, conditions, or limitations on the Member’s Certificate of Qualification and Registration:

(a) prior to commencing or resuming a teaching 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 classroom management, subject to the following conditions:

(i) the Member will provide to a course practitioner approved by the Registrar, a copy of the Statement of Uncontested Facts and Plea of No Contest 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 thirty (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 the parties: Ontario College of Teachers v. Allen, 2019 ONOCT 82, Ontario College of Teachers v. Snyder, 2019 ONOCT 86, and Ontario College of Teachers v. Von Eppinghoven, 2020 ONOCT 139.

15The Panel considered the Member’s circumstances in comparison to the cases provided. The aggravating factors in the Member’s case are the harm he caused to Student 1 and his previous disciplinary history with the Board that led to a caution from the College’s Investigation Committee for similar behaviour.

16In terms of mitigating factors, the Member did not contest his misconduct and agreed to undertake coursework on classroom management. The Member’s admissions have saved the College the time and expense of a contested hearing and negated the necessity of a young witness being required to testify. After weighing these factors, the Panel accepts that the penalty proposed by the parties is reasonable.

17The Panel finds that the Member’s inappropriate use of physical force against a student, despite previous Board discipline, warrants a reprimand. Members should refrain from physical contact as a means of giving direction to students and find appropriate ways to communicate their expectations. 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.

18Given the nature and severity of the Member’s conduct, the Panel finds that a one-month suspension is reasonable and appropriate. While the cases presented are factually distinct, the misconduct represented in those cases is of a similar underlying nature, which confirms 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. In accordance with the parties’ joint submission, the Member’s suspension will begin on October 8, 2021, which is 15 days after the Panel’s Decision and Order.

19The Panel finds that the course of instruction regarding classroom management 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 any future interactions with students.

20The Panel is satisfied that the penalty is appropriate in the circumstances and meets the principle of serving and protecting the public interest.