Former SD 57 Superintendent seeking damages from the school district

Former School District 57 Superintendent Anita Richardson has taken legal action against her previous employer.

According to the BC Supreme Court, a notice of claim was filed on Friday, July 8th where trustees are accused of creating a toxic work environment while she held the role of superintendent.

Richardson became SD 57’s fifth superintendent within a four-year span in the fall of 2019, receiving a five-year contract from the board of education, which was scheduled to conclude in 2024.

The position had a starting salary of just under $195,000 plus benefits.

In December of 2020, Richardson took a leave of absence and was eventually replaced by Cindy Heitman who assumed the role of superintendent in January of this year.

According to her claim, Richardson’s employment contract stated that the board could terminate the agreement “without cause” but must give notice in writing that the action was being considered by SD 57.

In September of 2021, a major shakeup occurred within the school district as then board chair Trent Derrick and vice-chair Shuirose Valimohamed resigned from the board, which led to a by-election that occurred in January.

The move came a month after the Ministry of Education urged the School Board to act on a special adviser’s report, which outlines concerns in the school district, including educational outcomes for Indigenous students, relationships with First Nations communities, allocation of resources, and strategic planning.

Both Derrick and Valimohamed were pointed out in the claim.

It states that Richardson accused them of breaching trustees’ rights and responsibilities by failing to disclose key information.

The claim noted Richardson was subjected to a toxic work environment filled with bullying and harassment, most notably from Derrick and Valimohamed outlining several incidents that occurred between February and December of 2020.

In January of 2021, Richardson said she made inquiries about possibly returning to resume her role as superintendent but was denied.

Two months later, she then submitted a complaint to WorkSafe BC, citing bullying and harassment, and was placed on administrative leave.

In response to the complaint, SD 57 hired an independent investigator who issued a report several months later.

The court document also outlined that Richardson was allowed to read a summary of the report, but was denied the opportunity to obtain a copy of the document.

According to Richardson, the summary “confirmed” a number of her complaints towards the trustees and the board.

She is seeking general damages from the board for what she claims is a breach of contract and breach of duty of good faith as well as damages from Derrick and Valimohamed.

None of the allegations have been proven in court and the defendants have yet to respond.