Three University of Holy Cross professors claim the school has a "hyper-fixation" on the race of its professors.
Caitlin Gilson, Michael Carlin and Todd Amick filed their lawsuit in federal court against the University of Holy Cross and Stanton McNeely III, who is the president of the university.
According to the complaint, McNeely assumed office in July 2019. In June 2020, it says he authorized a university-wide email from history professor Craig Bauer in honor of the Juneteenth holiday that "distinguished between the history and effects of the Emancipation Proclamation versus the Thirteenth Amendment which outlawed slavery in the United States as a matter of Constitutional law."
McNeely, who is white, later claimed in an email “deeply wounded, offended, and angered members of our university family” and apologized in a letter promising to “do better, and to live fully our Core Values of Respect, Diversity, and Inclusion.”
"From this point onward, McNeely became hyper fixated on the race of UHC’s faculty and began perseverating about the 'optics' (his alleged word) of hiring or terminating professors based on their races," the complaint states.
Gilson taught a course titled African and Arabian Philosophy. After June 2020, College of Liberal Arts & Sciences Dean Michael Labranche told Gilson she should not teach the course because she is white. When Gilson refused to voluntarily drop her class based on her race, UHC cancelled the course citing an alleged lack of student interest.
"Gilson (also) was told by UHC administrators that only Black professors should be allowed to teach history courses on the American Civil War," the complaint states. "Later, in response to UHC’s new fixation on the race of its employees, Gilson asked permission to join UHC’s Diversity and Inclusion Committee. UHC at first denied Gilson’s request. Gilson objected and complained. Eventually UHC allowed her to join."
In January 2021, new Director of Diversity Andre Carpenter, who is Black, proposed a set of reporting structures for complaints of racism by UHC students against professors. In April 2021, Gilson says she emailed Carpenter and cautioned that his proposed policy could chill academic expression and freedom. Carpenter responded by email dismissing Gilson’s concern and suggesting she was only opposed to his proposal because she was “Caucasian.”
UHC fired Carpenter around 2021 because of his allegedly poor performance.
"Nevertheless, when administrators first recommended Carpenter’s termination to McNeely, he rejected the idea, complaining that he could not fire Carpenter, despite his objectively poor performance, because of the bad 'optics' of terminating a employee who was Black," the complaint states, adding Carpenter later sued UHC claiming his termination was based on his race. That case eventually was settled, according to the complaint.
"In September 2022, approximately two months after Carpenter filed his lawsuit, UHC Vice-president for Academic Affairs and Provost (Lisa Sullivan) removed Gilson from the Diversity & Inclusion Committee," the complaint states. "Gilson objected and asked why, but Sullivan never responded."
On January 31, 2023, McNeely decided not to renew the contracts of about a dozen UHC professors, including Gilson, Carlin and Amick.
"At the time, based on plaintiffs’ best estimation informed by publicly available data and their own observations, UHC employed approximately 69 full-time professors and instructors (of any academic rank), approximately 80% of whom were White (perhaps less), and approximately 20% of whom were Black, African American, or other Americans of color (perhaps more)," the complaint states. "McNeely selected approximately 10 professors for non-renewal who were White. He selected an additional 2 professors for non-renewal who were foreign citizens employed pursuant to a work visa (one professors from Pakistan, one from Nepal). McNeely did not select any comparator professors who were Black, African American, or other Americans of color.
"McNeely justified his decision not to renew Gilson, Carlin, Amick and their colleagues’ employment agreements because of an alleged financial shortfall requiring what amounted to a layoff. UHC did not assert that Gilson, Carlin or Amick were poor performers or otherwise merited dismissal. UHC did not, however, declare a 'financial exigency' under the meaning of the term defined in the faculty handbook.
"And McNeely later told the plaintiffs that he intended to replace them, after their current contracts expired, with adjunct lecturers who UHC could pay more cheaply."
The plaintiffs allege they were selected for non-renewal along with approximately eight or so of their fellow professors who are also white because of their race.
"In other words, plaintiffs allege that, assuming identical circumstances, UHC and McNeely would not have decided against renewing the plaintiffs’ contracts if they were Black, African American or Americans of color," the complaint states. "Plaintiffs allege multiple of their comparator professors who are Black, African American or Americans of color held lower academic rank, fewer credentials, created less revenue for UHC by credit hour taught, and were objectively, similarly situated to plaintiffs, but were treated better than plaintiffs because of UHC’s administration’s fixation on race."
The plaintiffs appealed McNeely's decision to the Faculty Judicial Committee, which voted in favor of the plaintiffs and effectively overruling McNeely’s decision not to renew their employment agreements.
"In written letters, McNeely refused to implement the decisions of the Faculty Judicial Committee," the complaint states. "McNeely gave no substantive reason or justification for his refusal. This is inexplicable given the shared governance between UHC and its faculty committees concerning faculty employment matters."
The court filing states that each plaintiff had previously filed a Charge of Discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging discrimination based on race and retaliation consistent with their current complaint. These charges still are under investigation by the EEOC.