Simon Blackstone

The Member, a teacher, faced allegations of professional misconduct for pursuing a personal and sexual relationship with a student.

The Member pleaded no contest to the uncontested facts, which included communicating with the student about personal matters, meeting alone off school property, and attempting to initiate a sexual encounter.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct and sexual abuse.

The Committee ordered the revocation of the Member's Certificate of Qualification and Registration and directed that the decision be published with the Member's name.

The Member faced allegations of professional misconduct for physically and verbally abusing a student who refused to go to the office.

The Member pleaded no contest to the allegations and admitted to grabbing the student's backpack, shoving him into a locker, and making threatening remarks.

The Discipline Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, the completion of a course in positive discipline strategies, and publication of the decision without the Member's name.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the member.

The College confirmed that the member had recently passed away.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal of the allegations was appropriate given the member's death and was not contrary to the public interest.

The College brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct, including sexual abuse of a student, against the member.

The member, who no longer resided in Canada and had no intention to teach again, agreed to resign his membership and provided an undertaking never to seek reinstatement or teach in Ontario again.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal of the allegations in exchange for the undertaking and a notation on the public register was appropriate and served to protect the public interest.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the member.

The allegations included physical, sexual, and emotional abuse of students.

In exchange for the withdrawal, the member agreed to resign his membership, undertook never to seek reinstatement, and agreed never to teach again in any Ontario school requiring College membership.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion, finding that the withdrawal in exchange for the undertaking was reasonable and served to protect the public interest.

The applicant, a teacher placed on medical leave, sought to set aside a Registrar's order dismissing his application for judicial review of an arbitration award for delay.

The arbitrator had dismissed a grievance filed by the union on his behalf.

The court found that the applicant lacked standing to seek judicial review of the arbitration award, as the union had not taken a position adverse to him and there was no evidence of deficient representation.

Because the application had no real chance of success on the merits, the motion to set aside the Registrar's dismissal order was dismissed.

The Member, a teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct arising from an incident where she grabbed a student's sweatshirt, caused another student to fall by placing her hand on his shoulder, and used profanity.

The Discipline Committee accepted the plea and found her guilty of professional misconduct, including physical and verbal abuse.

Accepting a joint submission on penalty, the Committee ordered a reprimand, completion of a course on boundaries and anger management, and publication of the decision without the Member's name.

The member, a technology and design teacher, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct after removing an emergency generator from the school without authorization, storing it in his home garage, and failing to report its loss.

The Discipline Committee accepted the uncontested facts and found the member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee ordered a reprimand and directed that the findings and order be published in the College's official publication with the member's name, noting that his actions put the school population at risk.

The applicant filed two human rights applications against his former employer and his union, alleging discrimination on the basis of sex, sexual solicitation, and reprisal regarding his termination in 2003.

The respondents requested that the applications be dismissed for delay, as they were filed in April 2007, more than three years after the last alleged incident.

The applicant argued that the delay was justified by ongoing collusion between the employer and the union during subsequent grievance and duty of fair representation proceedings.

The Tribunal found no factual basis for the collusion argument and concluded that the applicant failed to provide a good faith explanation for the inordinate delay.

The applications were dismissed as untimely under section 34 of the Human Rights Code.

The applicant filed a human rights application against his union (OSSTF) and the Ontario Labour Relations Board (OLRB), alleging discrimination on the basis of disability.

The respondents requested early dismissal on several grounds, including judicial immunity and delay.

The Tribunal found that the claims against the OLRB were barred by the doctrine of judicial immunity, as they challenged an adjudicative decision.

Furthermore, the Tribunal determined that the application against both respondents was filed beyond the one-year limitation period set out in section 34(1) of the Human Rights Code, and the applicant failed to demonstrate that the delay was incurred in good faith.

The application was dismissed.

The applicant requested reconsideration of a decision dismissing his human rights applications for delay.

He argued he was denied natural justice when the Tribunal proceeded with the initial hearing despite his request for an adjournment due to his representative's sudden illness.

The Tribunal found that the respondents should have been aware the applicant was represented, and the refusal to grant the adjournment prevented the representative from attending.

Concluding there was a denial of natural justice that outweighed the public interest in finality, the Tribunal granted the reconsideration, set aside the previous decision, and ordered a new hearing on the preliminary issues.

The applicant, a teacher with multiple chemical sensitivity and other disabilities, alleged that her union and its representatives discriminated against her by failing to adequately represent her in seeking accommodation from her employer.

The respondents requested early dismissal of the application.

The Tribunal found that the union's actions, which included filing a grievance and pursuing an accommodation plan, did not constitute differential treatment or discrimination.

The application was dismissed for failing to establish a prima facie case of discrimination.

The Union raised a preliminary objection seeking to exclude a forensic handwriting analyst's report, arguing that the Employer breached the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act by providing the grievor's handwriting samples from business documents to the analyst.

The Employer used the samples to identify the grievor as the author of an offensive comment on a sympathy card.

The Grievance Settlement Board dismissed the objection, finding that the labour relations exceptions in s. 65(6) of the Act applied, as the documents were used in relation to anticipated proceedings and employment-related matters in which the Employer had an interest.

The Member, a teacher in a Deaf/Hard of Hearing Department, pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct for making inappropriate comments of a sexual nature to a female co-worker using American Sign Language.

The Discipline Committee found the Member guilty of professional misconduct for failing to maintain the standards of the profession and engaging in conduct unbecoming a member.

The Committee ordered a reprimand, completion of a course on workplace boundaries, and publication of the decision in summary form without the Member's name, noting the lack of prior history and the specific deterrence already achieved.

The applicant filed human rights applications alleging sexual harassment and reprisal against his former employer, several individuals, and his union, nearly four years after his employment was terminated.

The respondents requested that the applications be dismissed for delay under section 34 of the Human Rights Code, and the union additionally argued the matter had been dealt with by the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

The Tribunal found that the applicant failed to provide a reasonable explanation for the delay, concluding it was not incurred in good faith and that the passage of time would cause substantial prejudice to the respondents.

The applications were dismissed for delay.

The College brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw the allegations of professional misconduct against the member.

The College indicated that no witnesses would come forward, resulting in no reasonable prospect of a finding of professional misconduct.

The member consented to the motion.

The Discipline Committee concluded that the withdrawal was reasonable in the circumstances and authorized the College to withdraw the allegations.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought a motion seeking leave to withdraw allegations of professional misconduct against the member.

The Discipline Committee granted the motion on consent, authorizing the withdrawal in exchange for the member's immediate resignation, cancellation of his Certificate of Qualification and Registration, and an undertaking never to seek reinstatement or teach in any public school in Ontario.

The grievor, a bus driver, was discharged after a passenger complained about a comment she made to other passengers.

The employer alleged the comment was offensive and breached a 'Conditions of Continued Employment' agreement from a previous discipline.

The arbitrator found that, in context, the grievor's comment was an attempt to diffuse a situation after another passenger made a degrading remark about an elderly passenger's English skills.

The arbitrator concluded the grievor did not engage in culpable conduct, allowed the grievance, and ordered reinstatement with full compensation.

The Member pleaded no contest to allegations of professional misconduct for making inappropriate and unprofessional comments in the presence of a female student teacher.

The Discipline Committee accepted the plea and found the Member guilty of professional misconduct.

The Committee accepted a joint submission on penalty, ordering a reprimand, completion of a course on appropriate boundaries, and publication of the decision in summary form without the Member's name.

The Ontario College of Teachers brought disciplinary proceedings against a member who pled guilty to a criminal charge of internet luring.

The member had communicated online for a sexual purpose with an undercover police officer whom he believed to be a 13-year-old female.

The Discipline Committee accepted the member's guilty plea and the joint submission on penalty.

The Committee found the member guilty of professional misconduct, revoked his teaching certificate, and ordered the publication of the decision.