Ags4DaWin said:

---

It's a bribe to get her to stop calling the university racist.

---

That's how you get more of that, not less.

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes

Bucketrunner said:

---

Note to Aggies everywhere: Never do business with a person of her political beliefs. They are grifters.

---

Both sides do this, it has nothing to do with politics. Hell ultra conservative coaches do it everyday. And assuming that binding promises weren't made that got broken is a fallacy. The President didn't exit for no reason, someone should do a FOIA request to see the emails.

What is being ignored here is that women are making it harder on themselves for future employment opportunities as a class, and blacks as a sub-class. Why even entertain the notion of hiring increasingly controversial employees that only expand the risk set to any employer? Common sense says to hire lower risk employees, all tense being equal.

cheeky said:

---

What is being ignored here is that women are making it harder on themselves for future employment opportunities as a class, and blacks as a sub-class. Why even entertain the notion of hiring increasingly controversial employees that only expand the risk set to any employer? Common sense says to hire lower risk employees, all tense being equal.

---

Once again, everyone does this, this is not a gender or race based behavior. There are thousands of employment lawsuits based on breaking promises made and the detriment to the employee who was offered employment. The walk away from the previous job, reputational harm, and on and on. This is super common, this is not that big of a deal. A&M will settle and they should.

They should stop asking for money, apparently, they have way too much of it.

Agreed.

Can someone explain what is the benefit of allowing these publicly funded universities to sit on gigantic endowments?

TAMU is $18-billion

tu is $43-billion

What is the net benefit to the people of the State of Texas for camping out on that amount of cash?

(Other than hiring people away from each other and then paying them not to work.)

ArcticPenguin said:

---

cheeky said:

---

What is being ignored here is that women are making it harder on themselves for future employment opportunities as a class, and blacks as a sub-class. Why even entertain the notion of hiring increasingly controversial employees that only expand the risk set to any employer? Common sense says to hire lower risk employees, all tense being equal.

---

Once again, everyone does this, this is not a gender or race based behavior. There are thousands of employment lawsuits based on breaking promises made and the detriment to the employee who was offered employment. The walk away from the previous job, reputational harm, and on and on. This is super common, this is not that big of a deal. A&M will settle and they should.

---

Ur ignoring the fact that once hired HR is much more reluctant to get rid of an employee of a "protected class" of citizens for fear of appearing racist or bigoted

This is true. Anyone who has dealt with HR at this point knows this fact.

It is just as true that police now have a much higher threshold for pulling their firearm when confronted with a violent POC than a white person.

At this point everyone knows if enough hell is raised by someone in a protected melanin group or the right portion of the alphabet you run the risk of being called a racist/bigot or accused of wanting to send people to concentration camps

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Did she lose another job or get her reputation harmed by the action?

---

I bet her left-wing credentials just went through the roof, and she will most likely get a new sweetheart deal from UT.

Ags4DaWin said:

---

ArcticPenguin said:

---

cheeky said:

---

What is being ignored here is that women are making it harder on themselves for future employment opportunities as a class, and blacks as a sub-class. Why even entertain the notion of hiring increasingly controversial employees that only expand the risk set to any employer? Common sense says to hire lower risk employees, all tense being equal.

---

Once again, everyone does this, this is not a gender or race based behavior. There are thousands of employment lawsuits based on breaking promises made and the detriment to the employee who was offered employment. The walk away from the previous job, reputational harm, and on and on. This is super common, this is not that big of a deal. A&M will settle and they should.

---

Ur ignoring the fact that once hired HR is much more reluctant to get rid of an employee of a "protected class" of citizens for fear of appearing racist or bigoted

This is true. Anyone who has dealt with HR at this point knows this fact.

It is just as true that police now have a much higher threshold for pulling their firearm when confronted with a violent POC than a white person.

At this point everyone knows if enough hell is raised by someone in a protected melanin group or the right portion of the alphabet you run the risk of being called a racist/bigot or accused of wanting to send people to concentration camps

---

I am not ignoring that at all. At the executive level it is almost never about that because a check pretty much always will be written - the only question is how much.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

MouthBQ98 said:

---

Did she lose another job or get her reputation harmed by the action?

---

Are they counting on the same legal people that vetted the deal in the first place to vet their way out of it?

---

Spot on! People always disparage the Beutel Health Center (quack shack) because they assume only bad doctors work there because good doctors would make more money working anywhere else. I've always believed the same thing about their general counsel; never been impressed with their legal skills.

Stat Monitor Repairman said:

---

Agreed.

Can someone explain what is the benefit of allowing these publicly funded universities to sit on gigantic endowments?

TAMU is $18-billion

tu is $43-billion

What is the net benefit to the people of the State of Texas for camping out on that amount of cash?

(Other than hiring people away from each other and then paying them not to work.)

---

And they have $100,000,000 to go to scholarships to address "diversity issues" which means what most think it means. And good point on the endowments. They need to quit begging for money.

Manhattan said:

---

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

I think the Texas Tribune should be banned as a source for anything here. It is pure propaganda and only serves the left side of the political aisle.

---

banning views that don't align with yours, hmm where have we seen that before.

---

We see it from the people that YOU support all the time.

Who cares what you call the college if people don't want to come here because they're labeled racist because you are a professor that preaches that white man or the devil and that we are toxic you know what then so be it that is not racism but you can keep blowing up that beloviated lie that you got from the Marxist

A&M got played big-time.

She gets a payout and keeps her old job. The dean and president lose theirs.

Who got hurt here?

We need a head of journalism who won't go running to the media whenever they don't get their way.