Over 10 safety plans have now been required for staff because of the toxic working environment Trustee Carol Ann Sloat has created.
Brantford, Ont. – The Grand Erie District School Board will seek leave to appeal the findings of the Divisional Court regarding the behaviour of Trustee Carol Ann Sloat, which the Board determined breached its Code of Conduct. The Board of Trustees has instructed Susan Gibson, Chair of the Board, to communicate, “This is not a choice we wanted to make, but there is truly no other viable recourse. The Board respectfully disagrees with the Divisional Court’s findings. Additional Codes of Conduct are also being addressed involving Trustee Sloat. Therefore, important legal issues need to be clarified. We have tried everything to correct the toxic, bullying and inappropriate conduct of Trustee Sloat. These behaviours have directly resulted in staff asking for safety plans because of the unsafe and toxic working environment she has created. We have a legal and moral obligation to protect staff.
As a Board, we have watched Trustee Sloat tell a story to the public that paints her infractions as “minor,” and herself as a “whistleblower.” Both are patently unfounded. The Board will continue to protect the organization’s reputation, and that of our staff, who must reasonably be protected from being maligned and exposed to her troubling behaviour.
The one thing we agree on with Trustee Sloat is that the public has a right to know the truth. The simple truth is that Trustee Sloat continues to defy the collective will of the Board and inappropriately interferes with the Board’s day-to-day operations rather than fulfilling her governance and fiduciary responsibilities and when her conduct has been identified as concerning and more, she has refused to correct it. Trustee Sloat refuses even to offer an apology to those staff members who feel bullied. Instead, Trustee Sloat opines that she is the victim because she refuses to accept the approved changes to the role of Trustee that has evolved over 20 years. She is defiant when concerns are raised about her continuing conduct, which negatively impacts the well-being of staff and her colleagues. Trustees are supposed to be role models; this conduct would not be tolerated by Board policy and conflicts with legislative requirements in the school board sector. The role of all Trustees is to model appropriate conduct, including Trustee Sloat.
To further justify her narrative, Trustee Sloat suggests she is standing up for transparency and now improperly identifies herself as a “whistleblower.” If true, she is blowing the whistle on herself because she has caused the many in-camera meetings of the Board and the need to involve legal counsel by refusing to address her toxic conduct over and over again. Let’s be clear, the Board of Trustees did not take Trustees Sloat to court. This was her decision. The decisions to proceed in-camera were not identified by the Divisional Court or Office of the Ombudsman as improper.
As a Board, we have relied upon the options available under the Education Act. Trustee Sloat’s conduct was initially considered in private but ultimately in public when it was determined that sanctions were required to correct her conduct. Indeed, we would not wish to embarrass a Trustee with public criticism of her behaviour before we tried instead to raise the issues in-camera so that she would have a fair opportunity to reflect upon her conduct and consider the concerns of her fellow Trustees. She refused. And so, each time she continued to be defiant, we decided to initially meet in-camera again and again. The steps taken by the Board of Trustees were required because of her refusal even to acknowledge her colleagues’ concerns and the negative impact of her inappropriate conduct.
Suggestions have been made that the conduct issues were “minor.” Well, if that were correct, we would not have had to go through this unfortunate process that has exhausted the members of the Board who are attempting to fulfill their fiduciary obligations.
It is not “minor” to take highly confidential materials home. It’s not “minor” to storm out of in-camera meetings, removing confidential records and shouting out “call the police.” It’s not “minor” to repeatedly raise your voice and talk over staff and colleagues. It’s not “minor” to intimidate frontline staff by taking a photo of them and telling them she is calling her lawyer. It’s not “minor” to not uphold or respect the decisions of the Board. It’s not “minor” to post on social media which defames Trustees and staff and impugns their integrity, all intended to portray herself as a victim. It’s not “minor” to file an unsuccessful complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman with the intent of overturning decisions made by the Board, which she disagreed with because those decisions eliminated how Trustees micromanaged the Board, which once was a practice. It’s not “minor” to refuse to dissociate from social media chatter, which included defamatory and racist comments about school staff, after being asked to do so by the Chair. It’s not “minor” to embarrass staff without cause about their reports at the board table. It is, in fact, unforgivable for a Trustee to interfere in operations and grandstand. Even when the Board hosts events to support student success, Trustee Sloat’s self-serving interest demands that she must be the centre of attention. Trustee Sloat continues to disregard operations, and intimidates, and distracts staff without authority or cause, all of which cannot be reasonably known by the broader public.
It is truly not “minor” to personally create a working environment where more than ten staff members at different levels and in a variety of roles feel bullied by an individual Trustee. To behave in a way that makes people feel attacked. Targeted. Fearful. This is egregious behaviour that is unacceptable, and formal safety plans have been requested just so staff can function in a workplace as they are entitled to by law and to support students. No, that is not “minor.” It is toxic behaviour that requires action. Fundamentally, Trustee Sloat refuses or is unable to accept that her fundamental fiduciary responsibility is to this Board. All her acts of misconduct flow from that fact. It demands we speak out and shine a light on the toxic, unrepentant conduct of Trustee Sloat.
As a Board, we have achieved great things working together as Trustees. However, Trustee Sloat does not accept our governance role, a role the other Trustees uphold and are continuously committed to through our own ongoing education, relying upon governance experts.
Collectively and collaboratively, through a new, bold, and powerful mission, vision, and values, we have improved achievement in mathematics and increased graduation results. We have supported a new Grand Welcome Centre, launched an Innovation Hub, an Artificial Intelligence strategy and curriculum modules with police partners. We have improved specialized services, student-centred mental health and well-being supports and increased Indigenous languages course offerings. We are engaged in learning with the Toronto Holocaust Museum and the MEHRIT Centre for Shanker Self-Regulation. We have two new elementary school builds, one major renovation, and two childcare centres are underway. We have restored fiscal health and balanced budgets, and the Board would prefer to remain laser-focused on student success, achievement, well-being, and belonging.
We want the public to know that the Board of Trustees has achieved great things during the period of time Trustee Sloat was sanctioned, and despite the distractions Trustee Sloat has caused over and over again. Trustee Sloat continues to defy behavioural expectations under the Board’s code of conduct, which applies to all Trustees. That’s tragic and unfortunate.”
- 30 -
