Eggertson v. Alberta Teachers Association: Professional conduct case analysis

Professional Ethics -- Eggertson v. Alberta Teachers Association

Legal Case Analysis

The objective of this work is to examine the case Eggertson v. Alberta Teacher's Association and to first, state the facts of the case and to answer as to the highest court's decision in this case as well as the key points of law as set out by the judge in the rationale of the decision in this case. If this case had a majority and a minority judgment, the points in each will be outlined and the question answered of what the implications are to the professional and classroom practice of the teacher. This work will discuss how this case relates to the chapter readings and describe a similar example of this type of situation. Finally, the writer will answer how this case affects the perception of the situation.

Facts of the Case

This case involves a teacher, the appellant in this case, who is employed with the Calgary Board of Education. The appellant is reported to have been "charged and found guilty of unprofessional conduct by a hearing committee…appointed by the ATA's Professional Conduct Committee." ( p.2) The teacher is reported to have attended a meeting at the school on September 26, 1997, for the purpose of allowing teachers and parents a change to meet and discuss the students. The appellant is reported as having stated to the parents of some of the children that last years' teacher last year did not teach the children anything. The appellant is reported as having been charged with violating s.13 of the ATA's Code of Professional Conduct. The code of professional conduct states specifically as follows:

II. Key Points of Law

It is reported that the Code sets out minimum however, not complete standards of professional conduct that teachers must follow. Section 13 of the ATA Code is in regards to the criticism of professional colleagues as follows:

13. The teacher criticizes the professional competence or professional reputation of another teacher only in confidence to proper officials and after the other teacher has been informed of the criticism. (O'Leary, Costigan, and Paperny, 2002, p.5)

Section 22 of the Teaching Profession Act makes the following provision:

22(1) Any conduct of a member that, in the opinion of a hearing committee, Is detrimental to the best interests of: (a) Students as defined in the School Act,(i) The public, or (ii) The teaching profession, (b) Contravenes…a bylaw made under section 8(f)…., or (c) Harms or intends to harm the standing of teachers generally, whether or not that conduct is disgraceful or dishonorable, May be found by a hearing committee to constitute unprofessional conduct. (O'Leary, Costigan, and Paperny, 2002, p.5)

The PCAC found that the appellant was guilty of misconduct. The appellant filed for judicial review and that application for review was dismissed as there was not found by the reviewing judge to be any "procedural unfairness." (O'Leary, Costigan, and Paperny, 2002, p.6)

I. Appeals Court Ruling

It is reported that the Supreme Court of Canada erred in not according "adequate weight to the parental rights of the appellant as established by the 'School Act' and the orders and regulations made pursuant to it or to the regulations of the C.B.E." (O'Leary, Costigan, and Paperny, 2002, p.8) It is reported that the status of the appellant as a parent "required a balancing of her parental rights with her professional obligations as a teacher and member of the ATA rather than the strict and literal approach taken by the Committee and the PCAC." (O'Leary, Costigan, and Paperny, 2002, p.8-9) The Appeals Court states that for the reasons just stated that the finding of misconduct "was unreasonable and must be set aside." (O'Leary, Costigan, and Paperny, 2002, p.9)

III. How This Case Affects Perception of Situation

Certainly the appellant in the case under review had an inherent right to express her concern in regards to her children's educational provision however, she could have avoided a great deal of trouble if she had simply gone to the teacher of her children and discussed the situation rather than dispersing the dissatisfaction among other parents at the school. The wisest choice in this specific situation is to err on the side of caution when a dual-role is present, such as in this case of the teacher who is also a mother of children in the educational system. It is important to remember that in the area of professional ethics that sometimes what appears to be right will not be adjudged as being right and that many times the professional educator may feel wrong for doing what is ethically the right thing to do in alignment with professional codes of conduct.