Lack of transparency in Manitoba teacher discipline ‘disturbing’ By: Katrina Clarke Posted: 7:00 PM CDT Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2022 Last Modified: 9:04 PM CDT Tuesday, Oct. 4, 2022 Updates

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 03/10/2022 (716 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Manitoba Teachers’ Society is required by law to publish decisions related to misconduct involving its union members, but critics say there is no evidence of compliance.

Experts in the education, child protection and legal fields say this issue raises two troubling questions: why isn’t the union releasing decisions as required, and why isn’t the province doing more to make MTS accountable to the public?

The lack of accountability is another example of the widespread secrecy surrounding teacher discipline in Manitoba, reinforcing the need for a separate body to handle cases of wrongdoing by educators, experts say.

The provincial legislation (Manitoba Teachers’ Society Act) requires MTS to create bylaws that include processes for “publishing committee decisions” relating to code of conduct breaches, which includes professional misconduct. The act does allow for exceptions when circumstances determine publication is not to occur or may be delayed.

The union says it is compliant with the law. It will not say where decisions are published.

MTS president James Bedford said the misconduct complaints the union receives are almost exclusively member-to-member interactions related to its Code of Professional Practice. School divisions handle the majority of teacher misconduct complaints filed by parents and community members, he said, noting MTS “does not have a mandate to maintain a database” of complaints filed with MTS, the school divisions or the province.

The union previously told the Free Press it had received between two and nine complaints every year for the past five years.

Cameron Hauseman, an assistant professor with the University of Manitoba’s faculty of education, called the lack of transparency “disturbing.”

“It’s obviously troubling when a public body, especially one with a mandate as important as (MTS)… appears as though they’re not being completely forthcoming with this information and following the intent of this legislation,” Hauseman said. “If they say that they’re already producing these reports regarding their disciplinary decisions, well, they could easily put those up on their website.”

Monique St. Germain, general counsel with the Canadian Centre for Child Protection (based in Winnipeg), has similar concerns, saying the organization has never seen anything published.

It appears the intent of the legislation is at odds with the union’s position, St. Germain said, adding she’s struggling to make sense of MTS’s assertion it is compliant, considering decisions do not appear to be public. She said Manitobans deserve a clear explanation into how that’s possible.

“There’s so much that we don’t know,” she said.

According to MTS bylaws, a review committee made up of at least 12 MTS members and a chairperson is tasked with adjudicating cases of teacher misconduct. After the committee makes a decision about discipline, they provide a copy to the MTS executive director, who, “if directed by the review committee, shall publish a brief summary of the nature of the offence and the penalties imposed, with or without the name of the member found guilty of professional misconduct.”

Where — and if — that summary is published remains unclear.

For months, the Free Press has been investigating cases of teacher misconduct and the secrecy that surrounds them.

The newspaper filed nearly 70 freedom of information requests with school divisions and the department of education, asking for non-identifying information about cases of misconduct. Almost all school divisions refused the request, citing privacy concerns. The Manitoba department of education said it had disciplined 31 teachers over the last 5 1/2 years, though only the most serious cases are addressed at the provincial level.

In almost all cases, details, including the educator’s name, are kept secret unless criminal charges are laid.

Brandon Trask, an assistant professor of law at the University of Manitoba, said the discrepancy between how MTS can follow its bylaw and also not make discipline public can come down to two factors: the definition of “publish” and the review committee’s willingness to “direct” MTS to publish a decision.

Trask said MTS could be publishing decisions but only internally. It could also be the review committee has never pushed for a decision to be released, he said.

Either way, “There is certainly a pathway for them to publish, if so desired.”

Asked if the province is confident MTS is compliant and whether changes are required to increase transparency, an unnamed provincial spokesperson said MTS, as an independent organization, is responsible for following its own bylaws.

Hauseman, St. Germain and Trask all said making discipline public is in the best interest for all — teachers, parents and students. They say the best option is for Manitoba to create an independent body to handle teacher discipline; such cases should not be left to the union or handled in secret.

The province, meanwhile, is looking into options after a 2020 report from the K-12 review commission recommended it create a Manitoba College of Educators to certify teachers. The department of education is now at the consultation stage regarding teacher regulation possibilities, said a provincial spokesperson.

In addition, government recently sent out a reminder about “boundaries.”

“The province recently provided guidance to schools and divisions that they must also update their policies respecting professional boundaries and individualized interactions between school personnel and students,” the spokesperson said.

katrina.clarke@freepress.mb.ca

Katrina Clarke
Reporter

Katrina Clarke is an investigative reporter with the Winnipeg Free Press.

   Read full biography