College Official, Fired for Alleged Cover-Up, Claims Sexism To Blame

When someone gets hired at a new place, there’s usually some sort of orientation process. You know what I’m talking about: in addition to being shown where you go to get food without leaving work, you also get briefed on company policies.

I bring this up because I’m becoming convinced that women and minorities are being briefed at a second meeting, where they are taught that, if fired, to focus attention on their “oppressed” status rather than the violation.

The latest example comes from the University of Louisville, where an aide of the now disgraced president was fired for reportedly trying to cover up millions in overspending by the college.

From The College Fix:

Kathleen Smith’s punishment by the University of Louisville Foundation (ULF) may illustrate something far more rare, according to a public-interest watchdog: an official who paid a price for violating the spirit of transparency laws, if not the letter.

Auditors at Alvarez & Marsal said Smith, a longtime aide to the now-disgraced U of L president, helped conceal millions in overspending over at least eight years. Dozens were interviewed for the independent audit, which detailed years of mismanagement and deception at ULF, a private not-for-profit that raises money for the public university.

Emails published in the 128-page audit show Smith sought to conceal deferred payments to administrators totaling $8.7 million over five years, as the foundation blew through its endowment and squandered millions in high-risk investments in startups that ultimately failed.

…

Smith’s lawyer said the boards of both the university and foundation had set up Smith as a “fall girl” for a plan they had approved and which was not “secret” as claimed.

“This is a breach of Kathleen’s contract with the Foundation,” Ann Oldfather wrote in a written statement dated June 22, “but worse it is a cowardly failure to stand behind fully transparent salary and compensation decisions that would never be questioned were she one of the highly-compensated men on these boards.”

Smith claims that her own compensation was completely in line with reality, because she brought in so much money to the school.

Which might even be true. It doesn’t matter. Frankly, nothing about this indicates that if she were a man, she’d get a pass.

Instead, she seems to be claiming “sexism” to deflect attention from her own reported misconduct, and to garner sympathy from the liberal-leaning academic community. Probably in hopes of landing on her feet somewhere else.