• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Beloved Black Principal Fired in Ludicrous Critical Race Theory Spat

HomerJS

HomerJS

Lifer
James Whitfield during the summer of 2020 during the height of awareness concerning the murders of George Floyd, Ahmed Arbury and Breonna Taylor he penned a letter to the community that said the following...
At 4:30 a.m., he wrote a letter to the school community declaring that systemic racism is “alive and well” and that they needed to work together to achieve “conciliation for our nation.” “Education is the key to stomping out ignorance, hate, and systemic racism,” Whitfield wrote. “It’s a necessary conduit to get ‘liberty and justice for all.’”
Click to expand...

At that time his letter had nothing but positive responses. Fast forward one year later At a July 26 Grapevine-Colleyville ISD school board meeting, Stetson Clark, a former school board candidate at Grapevine-Colleyville ISD, would use the letter to accuse Whitfield of teaching and promoting “critical race theory.” That's all it took now all the aggrieved white people who have been brainwashed that CRT is the new evil like Sharia Law and Colin Kapernick started shouting and demanding his firing at school board meetings. He was suspended and now his contract is not being renewed.

I guess I should give credit to oppressed white people they do exactly what they are told by the right wing machine and now a well respected principal is being pushed out because of the very racism he wanted to fight against.

Grapevine-Colleyville, Texas School Board Ousts Black Principal James Whitfield Over Critical Race Theory (thedailybeast.com)
 
SmCaudata said:
Seems a violation of first amendment rights along with unlawful termination. I'd love to see huge windfalls in lawsuits. Typically I am not a fan of suing the government due to taxpayer burden but I'm all out of fucks to give for the people of Texas given who they chose to elect.
Click to expand...

You underestimate the insanity that exists here. I could probably throw a stone to Grapevine which is part of Colleyville ISD, I am by no means surprised. It's just on another side of the lake as Southlake, one of the richest cities in Texas. It is mighty white /w some Asian sprinkles. They play the poor white person card very well. I'm surprised they haven't banned blacks from holding public jobs in this state yet, I'm sure it would hold up /w todays SCOTUS.

This is the real reason they want him gone, he mixes with their kind! How dare he!

836ab960-1c25-11ec-936e-a57b77d4bc71_800_420.jpeg
 
Did the cowards on the board give no cause? No reason?
That they would not stand for a man who is falsely accused speaks volumes.
 
Dulanic said:
You underestimate the insanity that exists here. I could probably throw a stone to Grapevine which is part of Colleyville ISD, I am by no means surprised. It's just on another side of the lake as Southlake, one of the richest cities in Texas. It is mighty white /w some Asian sprinkles. They play the poor white person card very well. I'm surprised they haven't banned blacks from holding public jobs in this state yet, I'm sure it would hold up /w todays SCOTUS.

This is the real reason they want him gone, he mixes with their kind! How dare he!

836ab960-1c25-11ec-936e-a57b77d4bc71_800_420.jpeg
Click to expand...

You may find this story relevant
people.com

Principal Speaks Out After School District Brands His Anniversary Pic with Wife 'Questionable'

Colleyville Heritage High School Principal, Dr. James Whitfield, said the photos were taken for their anniversary
people.com people.com
 
Jaskalas said:
Did the cowards on the board give no cause? No reason?
That they would not stand for a man who is falsely accused speaks volumes.
Click to expand...
They claimed it wasn't race or the hoards of white people who want him fired. Board is claiming "performance problems"

Principal says it's not true. I believe him. No issues with him until that fateful school board meeting and they pulled out his letter to the community from a year ago.
 
Already a thread on this. Don't be a black principle in racist Texas | AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

A statement by the school:

"THE DECISION TO PUT DR WHITFIELD ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE WAS NOT THE RESULT OF STATEMENTS MADE BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, INCLUDING THOSE WHO SPOKE AT RECENT GCISD BOARD MEETINGS. THE DECISION WAS ALSO NOT MADE IN RESPONSE TO CLAIMS THAT DR WHITFIELD WAS TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY, OR BECAUSE OF PHOTOS ON HIS SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT THAT CAME TO THE ATTENTION OF THE DISTRICT IN 2019."

Because lawyers are involved, the school board will not likely add further comment. We'll have to wait and see, or just make ourselves the judge jury and executioner (the normal thing to do on AT P&N). About as much accountability as politicians with the muckraking, and if it all wasn't so damned entertaining (at times) I'd be sad though.
 
maluckey1 said:
Already a thread on this. Don't be a black principle in racist Texas | AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

A statement by the school:

"THE DECISION TO PUT DR WHITFIELD ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE WAS NOT THE RESULT OF STATEMENTS MADE BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, INCLUDING THOSE WHO SPOKE AT RECENT GCISD BOARD MEETINGS. THE DECISION WAS ALSO NOT MADE IN RESPONSE TO CLAIMS THAT DR WHITFIELD WAS TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY, OR BECAUSE OF PHOTOS ON HIS SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT THAT CAME TO THE ATTENTION OF THE DISTRICT IN 2019."

Because lawyers are involved, the school board will not likely add further comment. We'll have to wait and see, or just make ourselves the judge jury and executioner (the normal thing to do on AT P&N). About as much accountability as politicians with the muckraking, and if it all wasn't so damned entertaining (at times) I'd be sad though.
Click to expand...
Wait, so you are saying the school isn't admitting that it fired him because he's black and involved in a mixed race marriage? Well, we should all just move along then, nothing to see here.
 
maluckey1 said:
Already a thread on this. Don't be a black principle in racist Texas | AnandTech Forums: Technology, Hardware, Software, and Deals

A statement by the school:

"THE DECISION TO PUT DR WHITFIELD ON ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE WAS NOT THE RESULT OF STATEMENTS MADE BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, INCLUDING THOSE WHO SPOKE AT RECENT GCISD BOARD MEETINGS. THE DECISION WAS ALSO NOT MADE IN RESPONSE TO CLAIMS THAT DR WHITFIELD WAS TEACHING CRITICAL RACE THEORY, OR BECAUSE OF PHOTOS ON HIS SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNT THAT CAME TO THE ATTENTION OF THE DISTRICT IN 2019."

Because lawyers are involved, the school board will not likely add further comment. We'll have to wait and see, or just make ourselves the judge jury and executioner (the normal thing to do on AT P&N). About as much accountability as politicians with the muckraking, and if it all wasn't so damned entertaining (at times) I'd be sad though.
Click to expand...

Then the decision was made based on...? Something? Not providing a reason for termination is extremely troubling.

I see looking it up that Texas follows the at will employment doctrine. I'm not sure if he has any extra protection as a government employee (county level?). Of course it is illegal federally if he can demonstrate he was fired because of race. The school board may not need any justification at all, but not providing one given the circumstances is highly suspicious for discrimination.
 
interchange said:
Then the decision was made based on...? Something? Not providing a reason for termination is extremely troubling.

I see looking it up that Texas follows the at will employment doctrine. I'm not sure if he has any extra protection as a government employee (county level?). Of course it is illegal federally if he can demonstrate he was fired because of race. The school board may not need any justification at all, but not providing one given the circumstances is highly suspicious for discrimination.
Click to expand...

They did give some reasons not mentioned in the article.

During Monday’s meeting, a district official elaborated on the reasons behind the recommendation to end the principal’s contract. She pointed to allegations that Whitfield had “deficiencies in communication” in emails and conversations with colleagues. She also accused Whitfield of “insubordination,” “being dishonest with the media” and failing to formally report his concerns about racial discrimination following the July 26 board meeting.
“Dr. Whitfield has diminished his effectiveness by dividing large segments of the community,” she said at the lectern during the meeting. The remark led many in the crowd to erupt into jeers and protests. The board president repeatedly pounded his gavel and called for silence.
Click to expand...


Spot the circular reasoning.

Whitfield is not fired yet. He needs to do the appeal and present his case against termination. Then if he ends up fired, I would get a lawyer and sue under Title VII.
 
woolfe9998 said:
They did give some reasons not mentioned in the article.




Spot the circular reasoning.

Whitfield is not fired yet. He needs to do the appeal and present his case against termination. Then if he ends up fired, I would get a lawyer and sue under Title VII.
Click to expand...
Insubordination, failing to express concerns and dividing the comunity sound like phrases pulled from all the other crazy anti-CRT rhetoric.
 
SmCaudata said:
Insubordination, failing to express concerns and dividing the comunity sound like phrases pulled from all the other crazy anti-CRT rhetoric.
Click to expand...

I've read a few articles and each gives a couple bits and pieces of the reasoning they provided at the meeting. One set of reasons given (poor communication with staff, deficient employee evaluations) sound like the sorts of things you do not fire a relatively new principal over. Even if true, the usual way to handle them would be to put the principal on notice and try to work with him to improve.

The second set is the circular part. "We're not firing him over CRT. We're firing him over saying we were firing him over CRT."

While the second set is logically absurd, the first set sounds pretextual to me. Like the kinds of things you put together after the fact to justify firing someone for an impermissible reason. An inference I think a jury would be entitled to make.
 
woolfe9998 said:
I've read a few articles and each gives a couple bits and pieces of the reasoning they provided at the meeting. One set of reasons given (poor communication with staff, deficient employee evaluations) sound like the sorts of things you do not fire a relatively new principal over. Even if true, the usual way to handle them would be to put the principal on notice and try to work with him to improve.

The second set is the circular part. "We're not firing him over CRT. We're firing him over saying we were firing him over CRT."

While the second set is logically absurd, the first set sounds pretextual to me. Like the kinds of things you put together after the fact to justify firing someone for an impermissible reason. An inference I think a jury would be entitled to make.
Click to expand...

It does sound like they were already looking for an excuse for termination. As more information comes out, we may find more to the story.

Something to consider is that failure to inform management (or HR) of discrimination (or other wrongdoing) is grounds for discipline, up to termination in many companies, and for all state/federal federal employees. His stated lack of good communication coupled with sub-standard rating of his direct employees tells us something wasn't all well-managed at the workplace. Did the school board or superintendent already put an action plan (always following a notice of intent to not-renew if standards weren't met) into place?

interchange said:
Then the decision was made based on...? Something? Not providing a reason for termination is extremely troubling.

I see looking it up that Texas follows the at will employment doctrine. I'm not sure if he has any extra protection as a government employee (county level?). Of course it is illegal federally if he can demonstrate he was fired because of race. The school board may not need any justification at all, but not providing one given the circumstances is highly suspicious for discrimination.
Click to expand...

I could hypothetically say that the board may have wanted to not renew his contract (from what the board said, are several smaller issues that add up to a bigger one) , and Whitfield went straight to "racism" as a cause. I could just as easily say the board was racist and hated him from the start...but then why hire him in the first place?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top