A former School District 57 superintendent is taking the board of education to court.
In a notice of claim filed July 8 on behalf of Anita Richardson, trustees are alleged to have created a toxic workplace while she held the post and violated an obligation to act in good faith when they rebuffed her efforts to return to the position after taking a leave of absence.
Richardson was the school district's superintendent from Dec. 18, 2019 to Dec. 11, 2020 when she took the leave of absence and was terminated from the position on Jan. 25, 2022. Three days later, it was announced that Cindy Heitman, who had been the acting superintendent for a year, would be taking on the job on a permanent basis.
According to Richardson's claim, terms of her employment agreement held that the board could terminate the agreement "without cause" but also that the board must give notice in writing that the action is being contemplated, advise of the reasons for the move and give her an opportunity to respond.
A week before termination, Richardson said she received noticed that the board was considering the step over concern her relationship with area First Nations was "difficult and that there was a lack of trust" and at a time when trustees were "heavily focused" addressing issues raised in a special advisors report on the matter.
In answer, Richardson said trustees were aware her relationship with the First Nations was good and that it was the trustees' conduct that undermined it. Moreover, she said difficult relations with the First Nations existed before she had been hired and that trustees failed to seek Richardson's advice or implement specific strategies she had developed to improve the situation.
Former school trustees Trent Derrick and Shuirose Valimohamed are singled out in the claim. They are specifically named as defendants and are accused of working to undermine Richardson's relationship with certain First Nations communities the school district served.
Over an 11 month period starting Feb. 10, 2020, Richardson said she "experienced a toxic work environment and bullying and harassment" from certain trustees, including Derrick and Valimohamed.
Richardson goes on to variously accuse Derrick and Valimohamed of breaching the trustees rights and responsibilities policy by failing to share pertinent information prior to a school board meeting, by having side conversations about key issues and then failing to share those discussions, attending meetings with "rights holders" and union presidents without district staff present and "communicating inappropriately with rights holder groups about operational processes."
Richardson also variously accuses the two of breaching the district's respectful workplace policy by, in the case of Derrick, sending an email to Richardson, and in the case of Valimohamed, by virtue of her conduct on five occasions.
And Richardson alleges all the trustees breached the rights and responsibilities policy by voting on Feb. 25, 2020 to rename Kelly Road Secondary School without first seeking input from staff, including Richardson, and of breaching the respectful workplace policy through their conduct during a Nov. 17, 2020 meeting of the Education Programs and Planning Committee.
"The unlawful and inappropriate misconduct of the School Trustees, in breach of the polices, and in particular the misconduct of the Defendants Derrick and Valimohamed resulted in physical and emotional harm to the Plaintiff as well as embarrassment, frustration, loss of reputation and an inability to properly carry out her duties as Superintendent and address the issues she had been specifically hired to deal with," Richardson says in the claim.
Earlier in the claim, Richardson noted she began her teaching career in School District 57 and by summer 2012, when she had relocated to Alberta, had risen to become a high school principal. On Oct. 9, 2019, the SD57 board, "which was dysfunctional and beleaguered by political turmoil induced the Plaintiff to become the fifth Superintendent of the School District in 4 years."
Richardson said she was flown in from Alberta and was offered the position the same day and that both the acting superintendent and board chair "wished to change behaviour within the School District, including difficult relations with First Nations, and fully supported the Plaintiff as Superintendent."
On her effort to return to work, Richardson said she made inquiries in January 2021 - the month following the start of her leave of absence - but was rebuffed and, on Feb. 11, 2021, the Ministry of Education appointed the special advisors to "inspect and evaluate" the board's governance practices, she noted.
In March 2021, Richardson submitted a claim to WorkSafeBC and filed a complaint of bullying and harassment and was put on paid administrative leave. In response to the bullying and harassment complaint, Richardson said the board appointed an independent investigator who produced a report roughly five months later.
Richardson said she was allowed to read a summary of the report but, in alleged breach of the respectful workplace policy, was refused a copy of the document. According to Richardson, the summary "confirmed and substantiated" several of her complaints.
Richardson goes on to claim Derrick and Valimohamed retaliated by falsely accusing her of bringing the complaint for the "improper purpose of using it as a threat or a tool against them."
Roughly two weeks after the school district's director of human resources received the investigator's report, Richardson received a copy of the summary from the B.C. School Superintendents Association and only after counsel for the organization requested it.
Ten days later, on Sept. 13, 2021, Derrick and Valimohamed resigned from the board and a week later, Richardson inquired about returning to work and participating in "restorative practice" pursuant to the respectful workplace policy but was refused. Trustees continued to maintain that position through to the date of termination and despite efforts by the BCSSA to change their minds.
That was not all of the bad blood, the claim indicates. In mid-December 2021, the board "falsely accused" Richardson of delivering a summary of the investigator's report to the school district offices "together with a threatening note."
"These allegations were false and were either made knowing them to be false or without regard to whether the allegations were true or false," the claims says.
A further effort to get a full copy of the investigator's report resulted in Richardson receiving a version "which redacted all of the findings and facts underlying the report," the claim alleges.
Richardson alleges the termination was "made in bad faith" and, in part, made to make her a "scapegoat" for issues raised in the special advisors' report for which she was not responsible.
Richardson is seeking general damages from the board for alleged breach of contract and breach of duty of good faith and damages from Derrick and Valimohamed for "intentional interference with contractual relations" as well as special, aggravated and punitive damages.
According to the claim, Richardson's employment agreement was good for five years ending on Dec. 17, 2024, with a starting salary of $194,790 plus benefits. If terminated without cause, she is entitled to one year severance if employed in the position for 18 to 35 months.
None of the allegations have been tested in court and none of the defendants have yet filed responses to the claim.
