Paul Vallas’ June 13 op-ed (“CTU’s contract demands are divorced from reality. Here’s what Chicago must demand.”) takes a very unfair jab at the Chicago Teachers Union. It reflects the author’s own biases and predilections more than anything else. “There’s been much talk about how divorced the proposal (CTU’s leaked contract agenda) is from reality,” Vallas writes, describing the union’s approach of bargaining for the common good as “outlandish.” I don’t know who is he talking to or what reality he is referencing. Everything he outlines as “egregious,” I find hopeful.
To its great credit, CTU has taken the approach that union members, and the students they serve, are not one-dimensional human beings existing in silos. They live in communities where the climate crisis is a real threat. Reproductive health, including access to abortions, can affect their ability to learn and to teach. And migrant children are students or potential students, so of course teachers should be concerned about their well-being too. These are all issues that CTU is reportedly aiming to discuss in upcoming contract negotiations with the city. This broad and holistic platform recognizes that we are interdependent and that you don’t have successful students without having a healthy environment, access to care and necessary support services for families.
Vallas’ sniping critique says more about his disregard for these important issues than it does about any weaknesses in CTU’s leadership. Bravo to CTU President Stacy Davis Gates and her colleagues for being bold advocates for a more vibrant, healthy and sustainable city. Our kids deserve that as much as they deserve unbiased textbooks, well-compensated teachers, and counseling and support services when problems arise.
— Barbara Ransby, Chicago
Making teachers accountable
Paul Vallas’ commentary regarding the Chicago Teacher Union’s contract demands is on point.
Shouldn’t at least some of the consideration CTU members receive pursuant to the forthcoming new contract be based on each member’s performance? Does not just about all negotiations between an employer and an employees union involve an element of what employees have produced in the past?
Albeit, a union must advocate for its members. Also, there are of course other causative factors in play besides the quality of the education when analyzing reasons for the performance of Chicago Public Schools students. Still, should not the members have to support the CTU’s demands with their product?
It is not appropriate to grade CPS on graduation rates. A cursory review of the numbers shows that the rates are inflated. While CPS graduated about 80% of its students in 2019 (pre-COVID-19), as the Illinois Report Card reflects, only 26% of all CPS 11th graders tested were proficient in reading, according to the state assessment.
Again, the performance of the student cannot be attributed solely to the educators. Yet, the educators must take some responsibility, and CPS student performance must be taken into account when teachers’ compensation is negotiated.
A union should know when to recognize that its members are not putting out the product that justifies the union’s demands.
— Terry Takash, Western Springs
Wind energy article not balanced
Regarding the June 9 article “Birds, bats are at risk near wind turbines”: While it’s crucial to examine all facets of renewable energy development, the article misses critical points and a fair assessment of the facts.
First, the article’s focus on wind turbines and wildlife populations overlooks more pressing threats to birds and bats. Data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service shows nearly 600 million birds die every year by colliding with buildings in the U.S., a toll far surpassing that of wind turbines. Vehicles often collide with birds, leading to fatal injuries, while communications towers can cause bird collisions during migration. Poisonings from pesticides and other chemicals also endanger avian species and are among the top threats listed by the Fish and Wildlife Service.
Additionally, a study by the Audubon Society conclusively demonstrates that climate change poses a paramount threat to avian populations, highlighting the urgent need for deploying renewable energy resources.
Wind energy is also not a significant factor in bald or golden eagle mortality. Bald eagle populations have been soaring at the same time wind energy growth has also grown exponentially. And golden eagle populations have remained steady while wind energy has grown.
The article makes only passing reference to white nose syndrome, one of the leading causes of deaths for at-risk bat species. White nose syndrome has had devastating effects on bat populations: Mortality rates can reach more than 90%, with federal officials citing the syndrome as the leading factor for listing certain bat species under the Endangered Species Act.
Bat Conservation International’s “State of the Bats” report also cites climate change as a foremost threat confronting the majority of bat species because it imperils their habitats, food sources and hibernation patterns worldwide.
Ignoring these factors detracts from constructive discussions on wildlife conservation and renewable energy.
The article also fails to acknowledge the rigorous guidelines set forth by Fish and Wildlife Service for wind energy projects. These guidelines, which include provisions for pre-construction studies, post-construction monitoring and best practices across the life cycle of a wind farm, among other provisions, aim to minimize the impact on wildlife habitats and population.
While it’s essential to assess the potential impacts of wind energy, we must ensure a balanced perspective that considers all relevant factors. We can then foster informed dialogue and advance our clean energy needs for a more sustainable future.
— Tom Vinson, American Clean Power, Washington
Advice for election pollsters
As the presidential election season ramps up, I get regular text messages and mailings asking my opinion on issues and whom I plan to vote for. In order to submit my opinion, I am asked to donate. Without a donation, is my opinion even counted? Probably not.
I did get one telephone survey on current issues and whom I plan to vote for in the presidential election. They didn’t ask for donations, but the survey was 20 minutes long, and the questions were rambling. I often needed them repeated before giving my opinion.
Can pollsters ask brief and concise questions without asking for donations? You might get a better idea of what Americans are really thinking.
— Linda Morton, Harvard
Keeping the conversation going
Regarding the op-ed “An important case threatening First Amendment rights is about to go to trial” (June 12): As we were reminded of recently with the 80th anniversary of D-Day, freedoms are not guaranteed. While I have no sympathy for socialists, nor do I agree with the the African People’s Socialist Party’s grossly self-indulgent stance on world affairs, I would rather it continue to speak than all of us be forced to live in silence.
Freedom of speech is also the freedom to discourse, and it’s much more empowering to prove others wrong the dirty way than to clean up shop so effortlessly. That may be why we still love our televised debates and why our divisions haven’t yet resulted in a second civil war: It’s incredibly amusing to see how out of touch people can be and equally rewarding to be the ones to put them in their place.
Mud slinging and name-calling keep democracy alive and the conversation going. Where would America be without it?
— Amaan Bhimani, Atlanta
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
