NYC to pay $2.1M in 'Toxic whiteness' discrimination settlement
By: nypmetro (New York Post)
S E E D E D C O N T E N T
By Social Links for Susan Edelman
- View Author Archive
- Email the Author
- Get author RSS feed
The city will pay a total $2.1 million to three white Department of Education executives demoted under ex-Schools Chancellor Richard Carranza and replaced by less-qualified people of color, they charged.
Lois Herrera, Jaye Murray and Laura Feijoo - who will receive $700,000 each - reached a settlement three months after a judge ruled they "offer evidence of race-based discrimination in Carranza's DOE," paving the way for a June trial.
"This landmark case is a resounding affirmation that discrimination of any form should not be tolerated in educational institutions, regardless of the race of those negatively impacted," their lawyer Davida Perry told The Post.
3Jaye Murray, former executive director of the Office of Counseling Support Programs, is one of three plaintiffs named in the settlement.
Filed five years ago, the suit alleged Carranza waged a crusade against "toxic whiteness" in the city Department of Education.
Herrera, who had a Harvard master's degree, was working successfully as CEO of the Office of Safety and Youth Development when one of Carranza's deputy chancellors abruptly stripped her title and replaced her with a "less-qualified" Black man, Mark Rampersant, who held a GED, the suit alleged.
Herrera retired in January 2023.
Murray, then executive director of the Office of Counseling Support Programs, was told to report to Rampersant, the first in a series of demotions.
She remains on the DOE payroll, but with sharply reduced duties.
Feijoo — then-Senior Supervising Superintendent who oversaw 46 DOE superintendents - was replaced by an underling, Cheryl Watson-Harris, who is Black and, at the time, lacked the required NY licensing.
Feijoo left the DOE for another job in November 2019, and Watson-Harris quit in June 2020 for an ill-fated top spot in Georgia.
An internal DOE email written by the DOE's then-chief operating officer, Ursulina Ramirez, said de Blasio, who appointed Carranza chancellor in 2018, was "fixated on diversity."
3A third plaintiff, Laura Feijoo, claimed that she was among the earliest casualties of Carranza's overhaul.
In sworn depositions, both de Blasio and Carranza insisted they wanted to hire the most qualified candidates, but also leaders who "looked like New York City."
Those picked to replace the three women got the jobs after "a tap on the shoulder," without the positions being advertised and other candidates interviewed, the suit charged.
Carranza quit the top DOE job in February 2021, and De Blasio left office on Dec. 31, 2021.
3Lois Herrera was abruptly stripped of her title and demoted three levels, according to the suit.
Now, the three women "feel justified and vindicated by the resolution of this significant legal battle," Perry said.
"They hope the light that was shed on the DOE's policies will help other institutions understand that every individual deserves to be treated with dignity and fairness."
The city admitted no wrongdoing in the settlement.
"The DOE and City are fully committed to fair and inclusive employment practices, and we maintain that these claims lack merit," a spokesman for the Law Department said. "Nevertheless, settlement of this long standing case was in the best interest of all parties."
No memes, no fascist or MAGA crap, no Trump references.
No source bashing.
Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
Tags
Who is online
637 visitors
Congrats to the plaintiffs on fighting actual institutional racism
Now whites are the real victims of racism ? LOL.
In this case they clearly were.
did you read the story?
Yep, people other than whites are actually capable of racism. It's a fact.
Yep, and some are bigtime apologists.
It would appear so, in this case. Did you read the story or just the headline?
Neither justice nor injustice is the exclusive province of any particular group.
He probably did not. The story has nothing negative to say about Trump
That alone seems to be enough to trigger some on the hard core liberal left.
Sometimes yes
I heard on tv today that the average net worth of whites is ten times more than the average net worth of blacks. Do any of the [deleted] [✘] here think that racism over the past 100 years had anything to do with this ?
If that really concerns you, donate everything you have to the NAACP.
And BLM.
Is that true even in our Northern and West Coast liberal, Dem regions?
Mainly becasue the richest 10% of white people are much richer than the richest 10% of black people. The bottom 50% of white and black people have about the exact same wealth.
r the past 100 years had anything to do with this ?
Is there anything you don't blame on racism? Do blacks have any agency in their lives at all?
Well if you heard it on TV it must be true.
Lol!
Might have been true prior to 1964, but are you saying that Blacks have been held back since then?
“prior to 1964, but are you saying that Blacks have been held back since then?”
Are you saying that there is a level playing field; judicially, educationally or economically since 1964, 1864, or in 2024?
Privilege is one thing, denial is another, and yet somehow they are always intertwined.
2024 and yes there is not a level playing field. Some groups are given unfair advantage over others via DEI initiatives , quota’s and affirmative action. None of that was happening in 1964 or earlier.
Some call that progress. I call it an unleveled playing field.
Based on some of the MBA’s that I’ve worked with over the years one wonders.
[✘]
Well only in the liberal, Dem, North and West Coast.
Pushing out qualified people who are performing their jobs to expectations is not justice. That’s not how we level the field.
One of the canards we have always heard from regressives is that improving opportunities for some group will take away from someone else. E.g., working women will take jobs from men, educating or hiring people of color will cause white people to lose access to schools or jobs. Those complaints are usually prejudiced BS, but in this case, it actually happened that way.
Any ideology - Left or Right - can be taken too far.
So it is highly possible that it has happened before.
Why? When you lower standards for some groups and not others, of course it will cause the group held to higher standards to lose access to jobs. How could it not?
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
[✘]
This is just dumb. I love diversity, but you don’t get rid of good people just so you can increase the diversity of your program or business.