The College investigates and considers complaints about members that relate to alleged professional misconduct, incompetence or incapacity. If the Investigation Committee concludes that a complaint does not relate to one of those three matters or is frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of process, it does not proceed with the complaint.
Approximately four out of five complaints are not referred to the Discipline Committee but are dismissed or resolved by other means. Examples of cases considered by the Investigation Committee and not referred to a hearing are provided here.
investigations
Case #1
Complaint: Viewing of inappropriate materials in classroom
Outcome of investigation: Written caution
The College received a notification from an employer reporting that a member had been suspended from duties for viewing inappropriate materials on a classroom computer, with junior-grade students present. The employer’s investigation had also confirmed that the member had viewed the materials during the instructional day and that students had seen the materials, some of which were rated “mature audience” (signifying that the material might be unsuitable for persons less than 17 years of age) and “viewer discretion advised.” Upon review of the information received, the Registrar filed a complaint in this matter.
As is always the case, the member was provided with the opportunity to respond to the complaint. In his written response, the member acknowledged having viewed the material as described, that students may have been present and that he wore earpieces and headphones on more than one occasion during his viewing. The member acknowledged that his actions were inappropriate but submitted that the corrective measures taken by his employer should be sufficient and that the Investigation Committee should take no further action.
Given that he had viewed programs that were labelled “viewer discretion advised” or rated for a mature audience during the instructional day, and that employer information also indicated that students had seen some of the inappropriate material, the panel determined that it would caution the member.
Case #2
Complaint: Disclosure of confidential information
Outcome of investigation: Not referred and no further action
The College received a parental complaint that a member had inappropriately disclosed confidential information regarding the complainant’s child. The complainant indicated that the member had divulged, in the classroom setting, confidential information to another student regarding the child’s suspension from the school and the further consequences of that suspension.
The complainant indicated that the student had communicated to the complainant’s spouse and child that while the member was discussing an upcoming school event, she disclosed that the complainant’s son would not be allowed to attend that event due to his recent suspension.
The member responded that, during a classroom discussion, she had replied in general terms to student questions regarding suspensions and their effect on a future school event, and that at no time had she discussed specific situations or student names. The member further indicated that, at the time of the discussion, she had no information regarding the participation of the complainant’s child in the upcoming school event. The member also indicated that an investigation by her employer concluded that no breach of personal information had taken place.
A College investigator contacted the student in question, who indicated that prior to the issue being discussed in the member’s classroom she was already aware of the student’s suspension and that he might not be allowed to attend the upcoming school event. When questioned as to what information was specifically stated by the member during that discussion, the student indicated some uncertainty as to what was said by the member, and she could not recall whether or not the member had mentioned the complainant’s son by name. Another student who was present during the discussion was also interviewed, and she stated that the member refused to provide answers to the students’ question about the suspension of the complainant’s son. That student did not recollect the member providing information about the suspension or its effect on the upcoming school event.
A panel of the Investigation Committee reviewed the information obtained and was of the opinion that it did not support the allegations. For example, the statements of witnesses indicated that the member had not disclosed information relating to the suspension of the complainant’s son. As a result, the panel determined that it would take no further action in regard to this complaint.
Glossary of terms
The vocabulary used to report disciplinary hearings reflects their quasi-judicial nature. For a glossary of terms, visit www.oct.ca.
