Beloved Black Principal Fired in Ludicrous Critical Race Theory Spat

[cytg111]

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!

Wait, how white is white enough? This shit is confusing. Is this dude black? Of “color”?

 

[Wreckem]

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?



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?

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.

Texas is at will but education and administrative personnel in public schools are are on contracts and have contractual protections. There are things that have to be done to fire someone for performance reasons(what they allege). It’s quite apparent the school district didn’t follow the proper procedures in his termination for performance reasons what is based on what is known. Nothing alleged could result in a for cause firing of an educational administrator.

Either way they haven’t followed the true proper procedure for terminating a contracted school employee and they were stupid in giving comment and making allegations publicly at the board meeting.

 

[HomerJS]

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?



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?

Think this country is less racist because they hired Obama?? I'm not saying they fired him because he is black. They fired him for speaking out against racism which is racist by nature. It had the effect of upsetting a bunch of loud triggered aggrieved white people. The nerve of him! Uppity principal.

 

[MrPickins]

Texas is at will but education and administrative personnel in public schools are are on contracts and have contractual protections. There are things that have to be done to fire someone for performance reasons(what they allege). It’s quite apparent the school district didn’t follow the proper procedures in his termination for performance reasons what is based on what is known. Nothing alleged could result in a for cause firing of an educational administrator.

Either way they haven’t followed the true proper procedure for terminating a contracted school employee and they were stupid in giving comment and making allegations publicly at the board meeting.

I could be wrong, but the way I've read it is that they've declined to renew his (yearly) contract. I'm not sure they even legally need to give a reason, in that case.

 

[HomerJS]

I could be wrong, but the way I've read it is that they've declined to renew his (yearly) contract. I'm not sure they even legally need to give a reason, in that case.

I think in court under oath they would have to

 

[MrPickins]

I think in court under oath they would have to

Oh, for sure. I just meant that without a lawsuit, they can decline to renew without providing any reason.

 

[woolfe9998]

I could be wrong, but the way I've read it is that they've declined to renew his (yearly) contract. I'm not sure they even legally need to give a reason, in that case.

Even if so, they remain subject to federal and state anti-discrimination laws. If they refused to renew his contract for being black and speaking out against inequality, that would qualify. Would also qualify if they refused to renew because racist white people in the community didn't like seeing photos of him with his white wife.

I would argue that those inferences are strong given 1) the timing of their initial decision to suspend him, and 2) the apparent weakness of the "legitimate" reasons they gave.

Whether or not they have to make the reasons public right now, they're going to have to explain themselves if or when there's a lawsuit. I put the odds at 2:1 that this will happen.

 

[maluckey1]

Regardless of the outcome, it'll be all fruits of a bad seed. If Whitfield keeps his job, he'll only have it until the next renewal. The board will certainly not renew again after this. If he sues and wins, he's got that over his head as halo effect for his next potential employer to consider.

I once had a soldier in my Battalion report a "racially insensitive" comment by a Sergeant. Not normally an issue, except that this Private reported it to the Battalion S1 actual (military HR chief), without ever saying anything to that Sergeant, Platoon Sergeant or Platoon Leader. The Battalion Commander (think corporate Vice President) was obligated to respond to ALL of the soldiers chain of command, down to the Sergeant that made the comment.

That soldier regretted it until they left the unit. It was "by the book" (Hell on earth) for all 33 members of that company at that point. I asked the soldier why it went down like that, and he replied that he wanted to ensure that the person making the comment would "understand that it wasn't OK".

I replied that they could have just explained it to the Sergeant that offended them.........and maybe he would have been surprised. Or maybe not, then at least you had a reason to escalate, other than hurt feelings.

My point is that many situations like with Whitfield get blown way out of proportion because people respond with "shame anger" or "Viewpoint insecurity anger" spiraling into the shouting matches and tabloid drama that we see.

 

[interchange]

They did give some reasons not mentioned in the article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2021/09/21/james-whitfield-school-board-vote/

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.

Thanks. I suffered from a logical leap that there wasn't more to the statement. If any published article only gives the "we didn't fire him for racist reasons" statement without the "we fired him for racist reasons" part, that is bad journalism, but I realize the quote from the school board came from a poster.

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?

That does seem the logical steps to take if there are deficiencies. Certainly if his termination departs from how they've handled similar issues with other employees, it bolsters his case of racist motivations.

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?

There's no real conflict there. Lots of people experience racism on the job from the person that hired them. Why they hired them in the first place is a question I could offer a speculative answer on, but it isn't needed.

Even if so, they remain subject to federal and state anti-discrimination laws. If they refused to renew his contract for being black and speaking out against inequality, that would qualify. Would also qualify if they refused to renew because racist white people in the community didn't like seeing photos of him with his white wife.

I would argue that those inferences are strong given 1) the timing of their initial decision to suspend him, and 2) the apparent weakness of the "legitimate" reasons they gave.

Whether or not they have to make the reasons public right now, they're going to have to explain themselves if or when there's a lawsuit. I put the odds at 2:1 that this will happen.

Well the burden here would be on him to prove by preponderance of the evidence it was a title VII violation right? So technically the school board wouldn't have to do squat. Practically speaking, it looks like what's been presented would be pretty damning in the absence of any real demonstration his termination was justified.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Regardless of the outcome, it'll be all fruits of a bad seed. If Whitfield keeps his job, he'll only have it until the next renewal. The board will certainly not renew again after this. If he sues and wins, he's got that over his head as halo effect for his next potential employer to consider.

I once had a soldier in my Battalion report a "racially insensitive" comment by a Sergeant. Not normally an issue, except that this Private reported it to the Battalion S1 actual (military HR chief), without ever saying anything to that Sergeant, Platoon Sergeant or Platoon Leader. The Battalion Commander (think corporate Vice President) was obligated to respond to ALL of the soldiers chain of command, down to the Sergeant that made the comment.

That soldier regretted it until they left the unit. It was "by the book" (Hell on earth) for all 33 members of that company at that point. I asked the soldier why it went down like that, and he replied that he wanted to ensure that the person making the comment would "understand that it wasn't OK".

I replied that they could have just explained it to the Sergeant that offended them.........and maybe he would have been surprised. Or maybe not, then at least you had a reason to escalate, other than hurt feelings.

My point is that many situations like with Whitfield get blown way out of proportion because people respond with "shame anger" or "Viewpoint insecurity anger" spiraling into the shouting matches and tabloid drama that we see.

Well said. We're not always required to 'speak to the manager' to get the result we're after.

I blame fear and shame.

 

[interchange]

Well said. We're not always required to 'speak to the manager' to get the result we're after.

I blame fear and shame.

In my view, if safe to do so, you should always address any concern with the individual you have the concern with directly. If needed, you can escalate from there, ideally with that individual's knowledge.

In the past I can think of a time where I did go to a colleague for some advice regarding a concern with a supervisor, but in that case I was not reporting the colleague I was trying to get some perspective and guidance.

 

[woolfe9998]

Well the burden here would be on him to prove by preponderance of the evidence it was a title VII violation right? So technically the school board wouldn't have to do squat. Practically speaking, it looks like what's been presented would be pretty damning in the absence of any real demonstration his termination was justified.

Burden of proof is on the plaintiff. But like I said, given the poor timing of this, and the apparent weakness of their reasons, they'll need to explain themselves better than they already have or risk losing. Also, in discovery they will have to produce all internal documents and all relevant individuals will be deposed.

 

[Sunburn74]

Personally I think he's better off. Probably will get a book or movie deal out of it and land a better job. Screw that school district.

 

[maluckey1]

Personally I think he's better off. Probably will get a book or movie deal out of it and land a better job. Screw that school district.

True enough, and may be a good way to blow this off.

A song comes to mind as a cautionary tale.....

"Choose your enemies carefully, ’cause they will define you/
Make them interesting, because in some ways they will mind you/
They’re not there in the beginning, but when your story ends/
Gonna last longer with you than your friends. "

 

[pmv]

True enough, and may be a good way to blow this off.

A song comes to mind as a cautionary tale.....

"Choose your enemies carefully, ’cause they will define you/
Make them interesting, because in some ways they will mind you/
They’re not there in the beginning, but when your story ends/
Gonna last longer with you than your friends. "

Dunno what that's from, but it certainly expresses a truth.

On that tangential topic, the strange thing is that sad wistfulness one feels when those enemies die (especially if it's of old age).

 

[maluckey1]

Dunno what that's from, but it certainly expresses a truth.

On that tangential topic, the strange thing is that sad wistfulness one feels when those enemies die (especially if it's of old age).

The song is from "Cedars of Lebanon" by the rock group U2.

U2 is a favorite band of mine since the 80's. So many great songs and lyrics that are sometimes haunting. I don't always agree with everything the band sings about, but I always enjoy listening to them. They can sometimes come across as preachy though. Tim Sult and Neil Fallon from the band "Clutch" even wrote a song about Bono called "Army of Bono" which is rather amusing, while still being insightful and respectful at the same time.

As far as sadness when an opponent dies.....

Lots of good examples in movies and literature (especially comic books) where this happens. I've seen it on the battlefield as well. Seems to be hard- wired into some people, and not so much for others.

 

[Wreckem]

I could be wrong, but the way I've read it is that they've declined to renew his (yearly) contract. I'm not sure they even legally need to give a reason, in that case.

For contract term employees in education, they’re are required to do observations, evaluations, and if you are deficient you have to be put on a growth plan. You cannot be non renewed for performance issues if you have not been put on a growth plan.

Apparently he always had decent/ evaluations and has never been put on a growth plan. His last evaluation which would have occurred in May/June wouldn’t justify putting him on admin leave in summer and non renewing him for next year in September.

The district has handled all of this improperly based on Texas education employment law for contract positions(teachers and admins).
Right now they are trying to non renew for performance reasons which they cannot legally do without putting him on a growth plan. It would be different if they fire him for cause but they aren’t trying they because they really don’t have a legal basis for that either. Then they publically made statements about personnel matters and made accusations publicly in a public hearing. The district fucked up and have doubled down on their fuck up. Most likely the will terminate him he will sue and then they will settle for an undisclosed sum.

 

[dawp]

the feds are stepping in and starting an investigation

Federal investigators launch civil rights probe into Southlake, Texas, schools

Southlake, a diversifying suburb, has been at the center of a growing political battle over the ways schools address issues of race, gender and sexuality.

www.nbcnews.com

 

[trenchfoot]

the feds are stepping in and starting an investigation

Federal investigators launch civil rights probe into Southlake, Texas, schools

Southlake, a diversifying suburb, has been at the center of a growing political battle over the ways schools address issues of race, gender and sexuality.

www.nbcnews.com

Betsy DeVos, with Trump's blessing of course, would have gone in the opposite direction by ignoring the incident or even give her support for the principal's termination. The Trump admin. would go far toward appeasing the racists of the nation who found a welcome home in that corrupted party of theirs.

 

[thraashman]

The conservative uproar over CRT is just the modern day Southern Strategy. Shows how using racism has always been the best strategy for scaring up those with conservative leaning views.

 

[Lezunto]

CRT is not Black History. People are incredibly confused about CRT. I was too, because so many Black people defend it as a necessary recounting of the Black Experience in the U.S.

But it is not. It's an optional university course. Black History is just that: Black History.

However, as long as misguided Black people and Black academics fail to come up with a simple, but effective one or two line retort, CRT is going to be used time and time again to attack Black advancement. Because that is the real fear among Whites who believe they will become the minority. That Black advancement will continue.

But racist Whites have little to fear from Blacks. Only a relative few of Blacks have actually dreamed of a justifiable, but ignoble revenge for Chattel Slavery, racism and discrimination. Most have always longed to be treated fairly and equally. I am speaking generally, don't get bent out of shape.

Of course, that view is changing as Blacks face pummeling after pummeling.

And Latinos will become the dominant ethnic majority in the U.S. anyway and it's still unknown which side most will appear to support: The Right or the Left.

Defund the Police sounded nice at the beginning. Until one actually looked closely at the phrase. The problem is the folks who come up with these slogans fail to consider their target audience. What may sound good to wide-eyed and angry protesters will rarely go over well with people who are far removed from the reality of police brutality and racism.

And that is not what reasonable anti-police brutality folks wanted anyway: We wanted a shift in police funding priorities.

Instead of buying all of this military surplus equipment and emphasizing the cracking of heads and shooting fleeing suspects, we wanted more money to go to social services so when adrenalin-juiced cops encountered a stressed out or mentally unfit Person of Color, they would put out a call for trained social service therapists. Not just unload bullet after bullet.

However, that explanation was lost in the frenzied and sometimes crazed demands for Defund the Police. Which cost Democrats plenty at the polls.

Our side does not have good political slogan writers. Republicans have long been eating the lunch of Democrats when it comes to messaging. Instead, our side has taken to separating themselves into two camps with many resorting to juvenile taunts and intransigence. Never a good sign for longevity.

For those who are immature and react with childish epithets to this post, save it. I will not respond in kind.

 

[hal2kilo]

Well said. We're not always required to 'speak to the manager' to get the result we're after.

I blame fear and shame.

In my corporate training, there were no reprisals allowed for going by your immediate supervisor.
No having your desk moved to the hall by the bathroom type of stuff.

 

[DaaQ]

The song is from "Cedars of Lebanon" by the rock group U2.

U2 is a favorite band of mine since the 80's. So many great songs and lyrics that are sometimes haunting. I don't always agree with everything the band sings about, but I always enjoy listening to them. They can sometimes come across as preachy though. Tim Sult and Neil Fallon from the band "Clutch" even wrote a song about Bono called "Army of Bono" which is rather amusing, while still being insightful and respectful at the same time.

As far as sadness when an opponent dies.....

Lots of good examples in movies and literature (especially comic books) where this happens. I've seen it on the battlefield as well. Seems to be hard- wired into some people, and not so much for others.

I just have to say that even mentioning Neil Fallon, is the reason for my thumbs up. That man has some of the most interesting and creative lyrics I have ever experienced. Also as amazing is there is hardly ever any curse words.

Back when they released their second album, the song Big News got radio airplay, and I remember back then one of the radio personalities being amazed of the depth of the man's vocals. Back then being such a small and lanky guy.

My apologies for the off topic. Couldn't help it.