Investigation clears University of Warwick staff member following racism allegations
An investigation has cleared a University of Warwick staff member following racism allegations.
The investigation found that the staff member, a Careers advisor in the Law School, had exercised poor judgement, but was not intentionally racist during the seminar.
The Careers advisor allegedly claimed that black people “actively disadvantage themselves” as they were “generally laid back”.
Tweets belonging to third-year Warwick Law student Ikepo Abiru described an encounter with the staff member which she said made her feel “confused” and “not sure what was happening”.
As The Boar reported back in October, Ikepo filed a complaint following a Careers seminar led by the staff member.
In a Twitter thread, she claimed that the staff member cited research by the law firm Linklaters, showing that on average black candidates handed in their applications 38 days later than white applicants.
The Careers advisor allegedly asked two black students whether black people were “generally laid back”.
The Careers advisor then recalled a conversation she had previously had with a black woman, who claimed she was not surprised by the results as black people are “generally laid back”.
She then asked the two black students in the room whether it was true that black people were generally laid back. Ikepo claimed that she asked whether she was being asked to speak on behalf of all black people.
The Careers advisor then allegedly said that some groups “actively disadvantage themselves”.
Ikepo tweeted, “The whole time I am just sat there in utter disbelief”.
The Twitter thread received a lot of attention from other users. Many expressed their anger.
The University of Warwick tweeted a reply to the thread, stating that the matter had been “escalated”.
A University spokesperson said, “The investigation has now finished and it concluded that the member of staff in question did not intentionally, or purposefully, behave in a racist manner, but had exercised poor judgement when handling sensitive information.”
Comments (1)