Writer wasn't concerned about good education

In a recent op-ed, "A Tale of (Teaching In) Two Cities," Chris Talgo argued that unionized educators hinder effective public school systems. With only a slight amount of scrutiny, however, Talgo's thesis is found to be utterly false.

Talgo contrasts his experience teaching in Illinois with his time in South Carolina as a way of framing his argument: "One of the main reasons for this seismic schism [between South Carolina schools and Chicago Schools]: the Palmetto State is a Right to Work state (you do not have to join a union) and the Prairie State is arguably the most union-friendly state in the nation."

To the author, unionized educators cripple public education. According to Talgo's claim, if I were to research the states with the best schools in the country, the highest ranking states would be right-to-work states, and the lowest ranking schools would not be.

The data tells another story. According to the US News and World Report's Pre-K-12 state education rankings, only eight of the top 25 states (32 percent) are right-to-work states. For the bottom half, 19 are right-to-work states (76 percent). Only three of the top 10 states are right-to-work, while eight of the bottom 10 are right-to-work.

With this, Talgo's argument falls flat. In fact, the data would support the opposite conclusion: right-to-work laws hurt public education and student performance; unions do not.

It is clear that Chris Talgo and his libertarian friends at the Heartland Institute are not arguing out of care for the future of Chicago's children, as he claims. Rather, Talgo is arguing from place of sinister, selfish, and greedy intentions.

Billy Rivi

Wilmette