BRITISH COLUMBIA

COMMISSIONER FOR
TF:ACIER REGULATION
April 30, 2014
Coedentiol

Mar
Re:

IIYDE-LAV,Inn
Our File No.

Commissionor for Toucher Regulation, I have reviewed the complaint you submitted on
August 23,2012 to the Teacher Regulation Brunch about Mr. Hyde-Lay, a teueber at
St. Michael's University School("SMUS"),regarding his conduct ccaehing basketball and in
particular as assistant coach of the senior beys' basketball team in the1111111111sehool ycar.
As the

to adv-

-yot f'n - decision with r

to the mettes ens

t- he compl

On November 26,2012, aller a preliminaly revicw of the complaint, I direeted under s.47 of the
Teachers Act that the complaint be investigated. A thorough investigation (the "Investigation")
wtrs completed by an indepondent investigator who condueted over 23 interviews of parents,
students and staff of MUS.I have cm:M'y considered the report ofthe investigator as mil as
the statements, documentary evidenee,and videos reeeived in the Investigation. I have reviewed
the reporta ofRobert finis and John Sanderson, but I have placed tjttic relianee upon their
.tindings in my assessment of the complaint, relying instead on the evidence obtained in the
Investigation,
A.

The Complaint

You made a written complaint on August 23,2012 regarding Mr. Ilyde-Lay, 1 understancl that
your complaint WaS made on behalfofothers, including some students on the basketball teams at
SMUS as well as some parents. Your complaint focussed on emotional abuse and bullying,
assault, phySical rastraining ofstudents, and yelling. Durit% the course of the Investigation,
statements were made about Mt Flyde-Lay whieb hroadened the complaint. The ellegations that
were made about Mt.Hyde-Lay and investigated may be summarized as:
itritht Culumbil
Controisdaree
fix Trader Itreatlen

'Daim ertle
CommItsiontr

Malling.Athlss:
4R0- 2025 Wm Iltuailw.Mereouvrt ISC V63 IZ6

TrIrphone 604 660-6040.

rarsimilr: 404 '/754858
I 800 55.5.3684

(a)

negative or otherwise demeaning comments made to the boys' basketball team,

(b)

negative or otherwise demeaning comments made to specific students on the

boys' basketball teams,

(c)

the use of profanities or derogatory slurs when speaking to or about specific

students,

(d)

yelling and gesturing inappropriately to students,

(c)

physical contact or restraint ofstudents by grabbing their jerseys or arms,

(f)

unfair or inappropriate coaching decisions, including favouritism,

(g)

ignoring or shunning students on the team,and

(h)

emotional abuse and bullying ofspecific students on the teatns.

Standards of Conduct and their Appliention in this Complaint

The Stmularilsibr the Education, Compvtenee and Professional Conduct ofEducators in British
Columbia(3 Edition, February MS)set out the commonly held standards of practice and
condttct ofeertificate holders ha British Columbia. These Standards apply to certificate holders
who are coaching extra-curricular sporting events just.as they apply to teachers working in the
classroom.
The..5tandards are expressly gated to be:
a profession's way of communicating to its members and the public the
description of the work of professionals what they know, what they are male to do,
and how they comport themselves as they serve the public.
It is well-established in the case law that a breach ofthe Standards does not necessarily
constitute professional misconduct, The breach mnst be a marked departure from the Standen*
before it is serious enough to constitute prolesskmal tnisconduct. The assessment of the conduct
also must be made having regard to all ofthe evidence, both "for" and "against".
The determination of whether conduct is a marked departure from the Standards depends in part
on the: context in which the conduct occurred, including such factors us the age and ability of the
students, the educational setting, ancl the specific activity. For e.xample, the act ol'a teacher
yelling at students may be misconduct when it occurs in the classroom but may not be ifit occurs
outside during sports day and will also depend on the substance of what the teacher yells and the
distance ofthe teacher front the students,

In this ease,the context in which the conduct alleged against 10

these factors:

14 11

occurred includes

(a)

the students were playing on the senior boys' basketball team

(b)

most of the conduct occurred in a gym during practices or games, which is an

inherently noisy enviromnent;and

(c)

the students were engaged in a voluntary, extra-curricular activity which they had
the option to pursue, rather than in the classroom in the delivery amendatory
curriculum with prescribed teaming outcomes.

tvlore importantly, the conduct occurred in the context of coaching,students in a competitive

sport at the highest school level. It is widely accepted that school sports programs become
increasingly competitive throughout high school. At the elementary level, the emphasis of the
program. is the participation ofall students who wish to play, as well as skill development and
enjoyment of sport. At the high school level, the program inereasingly emphasizes the skill,
ability and commitment of players. There is art ongoing tension between winning and
participation throughout the school programs,and the particular balance between them will not
satisfy every student and their parents. A coach is responsible to coach the whole team,
balancing the goals of the programs, the best interests of the team as a whole,and the needs of all
the students,The fact is that ft coach cannot fulfill the needs and preferences ofeach individual
student on the team throughout the entire season and the failure to do so cannot reasonably be
considered a breach ofthe Standards.
In addition, in this case there were markedly different expectations of the program that were
expressed by students and parents. Some felt that the program should be inelusionary, allowing
participation ofstudents regardless of skill, ability or commitmoat, while others felt that
opportunities to play should be accorded by merit, and still others felt that the program should be
directed towards enhancing the prospects of specific students to play at the university level. In
light ofthese very different expectations, it is not surprising that some students and parents were
unhappy with decisions which were made by Ivt.r, Ilyde-Lay.
Another feature of high school sport is the demanding nature ofcompetition at the higher
It is a COMI11011 feature ofcoaching at the high school level that a key part of the coach's
responsibility is to "push" the students to a higher performance. Conches use a variety of
strategies, which commonly include identifying how a student may improve performance, with
correction occurring during practices and games and often in the presence of other team
members, candidly assessing learn performance and identifying weaknesses or reasons for poor
performance and communicating these observations to the team,communicating with students in
play by yelling and using hand gestures, using training activities that exceed students' comfort
levels in order to improve fitness, and requiring attendance at praetiees and games.The fact that

all students do not thrive in or enjoy this enviromnent does not of itself make the conduct a
breach o.f the Standards,
However, teachers who coach student athletes are bound by the Standards and are required to
communicate and motivate students in ways which are respectful and age-appropriate. A coach
who uses demeaning or belittling comments or conduct towards students will breach the
Standards where the coach knows or ought to know that the comments or conduct will have the
effect of being demeaning or belittling:
(a)

the coach ought to know when a reasonably objective bystander observing the
conduct would find that it is demeaning or belittling according to %videly accepted
social standards, and

(h)

the coach knows when he has actual knowledge that the conduct is considered
demeaning or belittling because it has been brought to his attention by another
person, whether a colleague, administrator, another student or the student who is
subject to the behavior.

Under this test, a coach who intentionally engages in this kind ofconduct would be found in
breach of the Standards, as will the coach who did not intend to belittle or demean, but whose
conduct objectively and reasonably has that effect, or who has been told has that effect. It
includes both express comments as well as body language that reasonably conveys such a
message. When it is brought to a coach's attention that his conduct may reasonably be perceived
as disrespectful, belittling, humiliating, or bullying, that coach must adjust his behavior or risk
disciplinary proceedings. A coach who does not adjust .his behavior after such a warning tray be
considered to be intentionally engaging in conduct in breach ofthe Standards.
An excellent conch will continuously adjust his style and strategies to 4.msure that all students
have a good opportunity for skills development and are appropriately motivated during games
and practices. However, a coach who does not is not necessarily in breach ofthe Standards, and
even where he is, unless his conduct is a marked departure from the Standards it does not
constitute professional misconduct. It is unlikely that a panel would make an adverse finding
when a coach uses a style or strategies that are widely aecaptcd .within the high school sports
community.
Outcomes after an invesiination under the Teachers Ad
After an investigation, further action is not taken under section 52 if:
(a)

the matter is not within the jurisdiction of the commissioner or a panel;

(b)

the tnatter is frivolous, vexations or trivial or gives rise to an abuse of process;

(e)

the report or complaint that led to the investigation was made in bad faith or filed

5
for an improper purpose or motive;
there is no reasonable prospect that the report of complaint or a matter relating to
the investigation will result in an adverse .finding by a panel;
It is not in the public interest to take further action in respect ofthe matter;
the matter has not been pursued in a timely manner.
In order to take further action by issuing a citation or initiating the consent resolution process, I
must be satisfied that there is a reasonable prospect that ir the matter proceeded to hearing a
panel would make an adverse finding under section 63 of the Teacher,s Act. In order to find that
there is a reasonable prospect ofan adverse finding, there must be sufficient evidence to
demonstrate to a panel through specific examples of conduct that the teacher's conduct is a
marked departure from the expectations set out in the Standards.
In this matter, statements were made in the complaint and investigation that expressed
conclusions about Mr. Hyde-Lay's conduct or that characterized it in a certain way. Often the
evidence available as insufficient to support these eoxtelusory statements. In order to proceed
further by issuing a citation, the material racts of the conduct that allegedly occurred mnst be
specified In \wiling in a citation in order to provide satisfactory notice to a respondent teacher of
the ease against him fthere is no-specific evidence ofconduct that is in breach ofone or more
of the Standards, there is no reasonable prospect that a panel -would make an adverse finding.
Further, the likelihood of an adverse -finding must be considered taking into account both the
evidence that supports an allegation, as well as evidence that does not support it. This kiSSeSSIT10111
is not an assessment ofcredibility, but a weighing(Wall ofthe evidence that a panel may
consider, including whether there is corroborative evidence from persons who were in a position
to observe the alleged misconduct.
My assessment of each of the allegations and the evidence related to them is set out Mow.
1.

Negative or otherwise de

lfliugcanna01iS

to the team

The allegation is that Mr. Hyde-Lay made comments to the team (rather than specific students
that 1V(.140 inappropriately lik;gative, because or their content, frequency, or both,

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.111owcver, in their statements, ernails and

interviews, students and parent:, provided very tew specific examples of this alleged conduce
The evidence ofcomments allegedly made by Mr. 1-1yde-Lay to the team include:
a

stated that after the Provincials, Mr.I-Iyde-Lay told the team that it was an
crabcaiassin.etit."

6
stated that during a game against Claremont Mr. Hyde-Lay yelled at the
tea "why are you guys so bad?".
None of the other students whOwere interviewed or who Submitted.emails referred to this
conduct, which allegedly occurred in the presence of most of the team. Further, many students
made statements that art inconsistent with Mr.Ilyde-Lay Making inappropriately negative or
demeaning comments to the team, and in particular:
,atod that when things were going really badly during a game, Mr.Ilydebe more supportive and tell players it was okay and they would just work
air

things.

NM stated that Mr. Flyde-Lay has a "softer side and he calmed us down
sometiInes".
Hyde:Lay stated in his interview that he may have said ``we are embarrassing" but denied
that he would have said "you are embarrassing" because he includes himself when he is critical
of the team. He also acknowledged that he did say "we are sot)" in group discussion, such us
referring to not rebounding. In my view, it is not a breach ofthe Standards for a high school
sports coach to speak to the team frankly and honestly about shortcomings or areas of
improvement,including using the phrase"We are soft ...".
In these circumstances, there is Ito reasonable prospect based on this evidence that a panel would
make an adverse finding.
2.

Negative or otherwise de caning comments to individual students

There is little specific evidence that shows that Mr. Hyde-I ay made negative or demeaning
comments to particular students:
IMO

1111111111111111111111111111111111111111
I

NMI
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

I 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111=111111111111111111111111111111111111
111111111111111111111111111111M

111.1111111M1111
11111111111111111111.1111111111
111

1111.11111111111111111111111
However, there is considerable evidence from otlserY boys of tl e teii tit t they 'viewed the
coaching of Mr.14yde-Lay :es posi ive.111.111.111.111111111.1.111111.111.1111111.
11111111111111
111111111111111.1.11.111.1.11.1111111.1.1.11. Sem& other boys .frain The team
made statements by mail; they did not indicate any issues with Mr, Hyde-Lay's conduct.
In addition, there were statements font parents, including:
parents confirmed that their son holds ivtr, Ilyde-Lay in "extremely high
regard" and that being coached by Mr. llyde-Lay bad "assisted {Student 11
enormously in developing many critical life skills, including self-confidence.,
determination and a notable ability to focus".
11111111111, who coached 1111111111.11111111111 with Mr. Hyde-Lay for a year
had not witnessed any concerning behavior to IvorTint the level of complaint that
seems to be occurring.
A parent of
been nothing s

vvrote that Mr. Hyde-Lay's"approach \vitt) the athletes has

frespectful, encouraging, realistic and caring".

A parent of...11 stated that he had not observed /vir. Hyde-lay targeting an
individual player.
A parent ofOM.stated in an email 1111111111111111 that she could not

8
think ofanyone they would rather have coaching her son,and she was "completely
confident that Ian will make the Most of whatever opportunity he is allowed to have
to develop his players".
stated that she or her
whose son was
A parent
husband had attended every game and many practices and had not observed any
inappropriate conduct by Mr. Tyde-Lay, w mm she stated as providing "the highest
level ofcoaching available in the city".

Setting aside the use of profanities, there is rata reasonable prospect ofan adverse finding
because:

Some ofthe statements are not objectively negative or demeaning,

the students and the context of-competitive extra-cturiculat sport-,

the age of

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111=O saYing on-c-o'ort conduct is

"soft" -are appropriate coummication to students a txpectatiobs for on-court
conduct.
Some of the comments were apparently made by Mr, Hyde-Lay under his breath and
not intended to be communicated to or heard by students.
The evidence is inconsistent and in some instances contradictory. For example,
ME was reported to be the subject ofinappropriutely negative or demeaning
comments, but he was interviewed and did not report these continents or similar
concerns. Similarly, Student was reported to have been the subject fa comment
that was heard by a parent in thc stands, but neither he nor anyone else referenced
such a comment.
Further,there is a considerable body ofevidence that Mr. ilyde-Lay did not make
negative or demeaning comments to students.
3,

Use of profanities and derogatory slurs

The allegation is that Mr.Ilyde-Lay used profanities and derogatory slurs,UMW

MIIIIINIIIIN111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

f
111111111111111111111111
The preponderance ofthe evidence is that Mr. Hyde-Lay has used obscenities, likely "under his
breath" tn. muttered them in the presence of students. Some parents who were interviewed
did not mention any swearing by Mr. llyde-Lay, 1,vhich supports
the perception that when it occurred, it was under his breath rather titan "yelling". There is no
evidence that Mr.Hyde-Lay swore directly at a student as a means of communicating with that
student.
The use of profanities in a school setting is inappropriate conduct and a breach ofStandards Pi
and 2. However,in this ease, a panel may not find the conduct constitutes professional
misconduct because the preponderance of the evidence is that the swearing was net intended to
be Iaeard by students and was indirect, rather than directed to a student. Although riot ideal
conduct, given the widespread and accepted talc ofobscenities in contemporary society, this
conduct is probably not a marked departure from the Standar& as to constitute professional
misconduct, particularly when it occurs outside of a class setting. Further, the public interest
does not favour taking further action in these circumstances,particularly since this process has
brought to ivir. Hyde-Lay's attention that such conduct is inappropriate.
4.

Yelling and Gesturing

A number ofstudents and parents reported that Mr.Ilyde-Lay yelled and gestured at students.
Video clips were provided 'which show that Mr. Hyde-Lay has an animated, intense and often
agitated MalinCr while coaching from the side of the court. Ile yells and displays energetic
physical reactions to what happens on the court, by pacing at the sidelines, holding his head in
his handsonaking fists with his hands,and throwing his hands in the air.
The pfvonderance orparents who provided statements were very supportive of Mr. Hyde-11,ay's
coaching style and had high praise and respect for him. However,some parents,'minding you,

10
Hyay as ntirnidating1,"out of control" and "generating fev"
viewed this cQuet hy
in the students 111111.1111111111111111111111111
Importantly, the overwhelming majority ofstudents who experic)icetl Vh. Ilycle-Lay's eoildttet
cliti not perceive his conduct in the same way as these parents,
1111M111111.1111.1111.1

1111.
1111111111111

1111111111.111111111111111101111111111111111111111111
I1Il1I
111111111111111111.11111

111111111111111111111

Some students suggested that Mr. Hyde-Lay's conduct negatively aft'eeted other students but
those students either denied that the conduct affected them that way or di.d not provide a
statement or be interviewed.
A number ofstaff were interviewed, T1011C of whom reported seeing any conduct that concerned
them,
There is also evidence that Mr. Hyde-Lay had adjusted his coaching style after the concerns were
raised in the spring MIN:

11

MMEMIMMMMIIIM

MOM=

I
1.0111.11111111111111111111111111111
MM.

1111111111111.11111111111
It is obvious that Mr. Hyde-Lay is an engaged and intense coach, and that his intensity and
physical mannerisms may be perceived by some students in a negative light, particularly younger
students or students who arc more sensitive to external stinjralt. Some students perceived his
conduct as expressing anger, and,in particular, anger at them.
Mr. lyde-Lay's conduct in this regard is not ideal. He is coaching high school students - not
adults - who have varying levels ofability..[ coaching may be more effective for a broader
range ofstudents if he"toned down" his yelling and gesturing. However, there is no reasonable
prospect that a panel would find that this conduct is a marked departure from the Standards and
constitutes professional misconduct for the following reasons:
the environment in which it, occurred was very noisy and in order to communicate
with students in play Mr. Hyde-Lay often reasonably neecled to yell or gesture;
the conduct occurred hi the context ofcom )etitive sport at the senior high school
level, where it is a common feature that coaches "pttsh" students to achieve their
very best, including by yelling and gesturing and expressing disappointment or
frustration; and
the conduct of Mr. Hyde-Lay was perceived to he acceptable by the majority ofthe
students and by others who observed him.
Further,it is unlikely thatnhearing.patel -wOuldmake a:finding that this conduct-constitutes
profesilonal trtitduct based Solelyen the inbjeetiVe evidence.Ofhow a small number of
students.peretiVedit.Generally, in order for interpersonal behavior to be wrongful at law,as in a
human rights or workplace harassment context, the conduct must either:

be conduct that a reasonable person would view as being negative or unwelcome

based on how the majority ofpeople would view it, or
there must be evidence that the person should have known that his conduct would be
viewed as negative or unwelcome in those circumstances,such as having been told
that the conduct was viewed this way or had a negative effect.

2
In this case, there is no evidence that Mr. Hyde-Lay was made aware of a ne ia ive impact upon
after cmaiIs were sent by parents of1111.11.1. It is not
students until mid-February
likely a panel would make a finding of professional misconduct in respect ofconduct that WO
acceptable to a majority of persons who witnessed it, but winch subjectively had a negative
impact on certain individuals.
5.

hysleat contact with students by grabbing erseys ar arms

This allegation by MINE is that Mr. Hyde-Lay would grab players by their shirts and that
Mr. Hyde-Lay grabbcd him by his shirt twice during the season. in 1111.111's opinion, it was
clone in a way to demonstrate Mr. Hyde-Lay's frustration or anger and he estimated that
Mr.Hyde-Lay grabbed students' shirts about live times during the year.
Student R was the only student who made this allegation against Mr. Hyde-Lay.
There is no reasonable prospect thatn finding would be made caf inappropriate contact that
constitutes professional misconduct in these circumstances, given the absence ofcorroborating
evidence in circumstances in which other students were allegedly the subject ofthis conduct and
other people would be expected to have seen the conduct,
6.

Unfair or otherwise inappropriate coaching decisions/Favouritism

Tbc allegation is that Mr. Hyde-Lay made poor coaching decisions and preferred certain players
by providing them with additional playing time or coaching help at the expense of other players.
Particulars of this allegation include:

111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111=
1M11l1
MNMMEIN

IMMI1EN=111

11111
MMMIMIMIMMIIM

13

HOWCVC1':

MIN

The majority ofboys who played basketball felt they icrned a lot nd developed
their basketball skills.
In March WII., you sent an email to Mr. Hyde-Lay in whieh you thanked him "for
an amazing season" and noted that your son had learned and developed so much
under Ills coaching.

MEN
EMENNOMMINNEMiii111MMENENNIMME
IMMOMMENNEMOMMENNO
11111111i
1111111111111111.

14
In addition, as noted earlier hi this letter, the preponderance of parents and students eurrunented
positively on Mr. Hydelay's -coaching. This evidence;coupled with the actual performance of
the teams, indicates that the basketball teams were eottehed in an effectiVe manner, but some
students and parents disagreed with certain specifie deeisions that Were made regarding playing
time or position. There is an-aliev,atiOn of faveuritiSin; bui little evidenee was offered to support
the allegation, beyond the perception ofsmaii greupofStudents and parents.
Moreover,theta wastl sitni?leant.'adk Ofconsiateney in -the pereeptiops ofstudents and patents
vho voice4 concerns0 i tho quality or(he oaching and Mr,Ilyde-Lay's conhing deeiSi0118.

1111111111.
Undoubtedly,some decisions made by Mr. Ilyde-Lay, particularly regarding which students to
play, for how long, when,or in what position, were not the best decision that he could have made
in the particular circumstances,in regard to either the best interests ofa particular student or the
team. Some decisions were likely "wrong". Mr. Hyde-Lay has acknowledged This.'However, it is
not a breach ofthe Standards to make coaching decisions that could have been better, whether
for an individual student or the team. There arc very few,ifany, teachers who can say that they
have never breached the Standards by failing to handle a situation in the best way for everyone
involved or made a wrong decision. This reason is why every breach ofthe Standards is not
professional misconduct; only breaches which are a marked departure constitute professional
misconduct.
Accordingly, there is no reasonable prospect that this conduct would result in an adverse finding.
7.

Ignoring or"Shunning" Students on the Team

The allegation is that certain students were ignored or"shunned" by Mr.Hyde-Lay:

I
11111111=1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
I
IMO

5
However;

11111111111111111111111111111111111111
I
Mr. Hyde-Lay denied any shunning, particularly with respect to players who did not
He pointed out that three offive starting players for the prior two years had not111111.111. Tic
noted that playing other sports is a benefit to an athlete's sport ofchoice because it builds a
culture of team and is good for fithOSS and conditioning.
Unequal playing time and being subbed off is not necessarily equivalent to "shunning" or
"ignoring". Notably, there is no complaint of this nature from the students who were alleged to
have been the subject ofthis mistreatment 1.1111111111111.11111 The views of
111111111111111.1111111111111111111111
is not reliable evidence that t icse other
students were ignored or shunned, given they do not know all the communication between the
coaches and these students nor other personal factors which may have caused those students not
to view their treatment as being ignored or shunned.
Emotional abuse and bullying of students
This allegation encompasses the speoifie allegations of misconduct which have already been
discussed. An allegation ofabuse or bullying is primarily a label or characterization oftypes cif
condue t.
At law, behavior is not bullying or abusive just because the person who is the subject ofthe
conduct fseds intimidated, demeaned or hurt:. There must be an objective element that the
behavior reasonably would have that effect, either by its IntitIrt OT by the known effect upon the
subject of the eoncluct. For example, bullying is defined in the BC government publication Foots
on Eziltving: A Prevention Programfor Elementary School Communities as". a pattern of
repeated aggressive behavior, with negative intent where there is a power imbalance".
Worksafc lC defines bullying In its policy as"any inappropriate conduct or comment by a
person towards a worker thatthe person knew or reasonably ought to have known would cause
that worker to be humiliated or intimidated".
In this ease, the allegations ofabuse and bullying are based largely upon how Mr. Hyde-Lay's
conduct was subjectively viewed by some students mid some parents. There is considerable
evidence that most students and patents did not observe anything wrongful or inappropriate
about Mr; nydc-Lay.'s condumilven amongstthefew Students who did voice complaintsor
s conduct as hallying or abusiv
concerns about his conduct,so'ine did not view tvh

16

1111
In these circumstances, it is not likely that any finding ofabuse or bullying would be made. As
noted above, in order for behavior to be considered at law as abusive or bullying, it must be
proven not only that the behavior was unwelcome, but also that the person engaging in the
behavior knew or ought to have known that the conduct would be unwelcome. In these
circumstances,the conduct complained ofis not inherently abusive, bullying or unwelcome,
which is demonstrated by the -fact that the conduct was not viewed that way by most students on
the team who experienced it, and many ofthe parents Who observed it.
If it had been brought to Mr.Hyde-Lay's attention that his conduct was being perceived and
experienced as abusive and he continued to engage h the same conduct towards the same
s.tudent(s), his conduct -would then likely be considered improper. In this ease, there is no
that any ofthe students were
evidence that Mr. Hyde-Lay was UNVEITC until mid-February
negatively impacted by his conduct.Prior -to'this date, there. were a. number ofemails from
parents that were largely.poSitiveandeompliraentary.. in nature. A reasonable person reading
these erraai.is would notituderstandfrom them thata studentwas experieneing a significantly
negative.imp.apt:firmi fi liyderT;py's001041;as.opposed in suggestions ofhow coaching could
be tailored.for a student's speeirteand uniqUeneeds.
In these circumstances, there is no reasonable prospect that as panel would find that the conduct
constituted professional misconduct.
11r, Hyde-Lay .is now aware ofthe way his conduct may be perceived, which is a factor that
would be considered in the assessment ofany future complaints,
For these reasons, I have determined to take no further action with this complaint, However,in
accordance with.the objects ofthe Teachers Act, the Teacher Regulation Branch will retain a
complete record of this matter and it may be considered ifany further complaints arc received.
',blurs

-kin ,J
Commissioner
BP/sdw
cc. Ian Clyde-Lay

ston