Investigation Committee Case Study

What Would You Do?

The College's Investigation Committee considers all complaints made to the College about its members and reviews all information resulting from investigations. The committee can dismiss a complaint or refer the matter, in whole or in part, to the Discipline or Fitness to Practise committees for a hearing.

The Investigation Committee may also caution or admonish the member in writing or in person, or provide written reminders or advice, or ratify a Memorandum of Agreement reached through the complaint resolution process.

By law, cases under investigation are confidential. For the education of members, the following account, based on facts from real cases, raises important questions about teacher conduct, such as what is appropriate and what is not. Details have been altered to respect confidentiality.

This past summer, two Ontario doctors were disciplined by their professional organization for sending profane and abusive emails to the former head of the Ontario Medical Association (OMA).

Professional regulators have a duty to the public to investigate complaints about their members and to discipline them in matters where professional misconduct has occurred.

The following case studies illustrate the importance of using professional judgment in all matters and at all times when discussing professional colleagues or their work.

Case 1

The College received a complaint regarding Eric, a high school teacher. It was alleged that Eric posted personal opinions about a teacher on Facebook. He responded that his comments were justified.

Eric had been previously counselled in the past regarding similar behaviour. As a result of the school board's investigation, he was disciplined for inappropriate professional conduct and was suspended for six days.

Case 2

The College received a complaint about Martina, an elementary school teacher. It was alleged that she approached a teacher in the school's hallway and loudly berated her about a classroom management issue. When the teacher attempted to leave, Martina allegedly impeded her passage. Many witnessed the altercation.

Martina acknowledged that she had an intense argument with the teacher but denied that she blocked her from leaving the hallway.

She was suspended by her school board and was required to complete a course on respectful work environments.

If you were a member of the Investigation Committee panel, what would you have issued to these teachers:

• an admonishment in person (most severe)
• a written admonishment
• a written caution
• written advice
• a written reminder (least severe)

The Outcome

Case 1: Written admonishment

The Investigation Committee panel reviewed the parties' submissions and decided to admonish Eric in writing. The panel was concerned that he posted inappropriate and derogatory comments regarding another member of the profession on a public social networking site viewed by members of the community.

Case 2: Admonishment in person

The Investigation Committee panel reviewed the parties' submissions and decided to admonish Martina in person. The panel stated that the nature of her behaviour was of extreme concern.