LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: In response to deaf student's difficulties, UTF pay freeze, 'fracking' protest


Disheartened by CMU's reaction to deaf student

I wanted to express my appreciation to Central Michigan Life for recently featuring the article about oppression and discrimination against Kelly Laatsch, a Deaf elementary education senior.

I learned about this situation a few months ago and as an alumna of the class of 1997, I cannot express enough my disappointment in my alma mater. This kind of bullying and blatant discrimination by university leaders makes me so very angry.

Would they ask a student in a wheelchair to stop being so dependent on the chair, a ramp or an elevator? Would they ask a student with vision loss to stop being so dependent on a cane, a service animal or braille?

Audism is an attitude based on pathological thinking that results in a negative stigma toward anyone who does not hear; like racism or sexism, audism judges, labels and limits individuals on the basis of whether a person hears and speaks (Humphrey and Alcorn 1995: 85).

University leaders at CMU appear to be engaging in audist practices with this student, and it needs to stop immediately. When I first came to CMU in 1993, the campus felt like a whole new and exciting world to me.

I graduated from a small-town high school with only 40 other students who were exactly like me. It was at Central that I first met other students of color, other students with disabilities, other students of various sexual orientation, other students of various socio-economic status.

It was at Central where I first learned to be mindful of the privilege from which I benefit because I am a straight, white, middle-class, able-bodied American.

It was at Central where I learned that my world is a wonderful and exciting place when I include all people in it and all people are equal.

I am truly disheartened that twenty years later, the institution that first introduced me to being open to difference in the world is engaging in this type of privilege and oppression.

Leslie Pertz, LLMSW Class of 1997

Administration changes stance on UTF pay freeze to suit its own needs

When I heard University President George Ross’ announcement that employment groups at CMU who endured a pay-freeze in 2010/2011 would receive a 2.25 percet lump-sum bonus, I was excited.

After all, I had received a zero-percent wage increase that year — as had all my colleagues in the Union of Teaching Faculty (the union representing the fixed-term faculty who teach about half the classes at CMU).

I sure could use the extra money: maintaining a family of four on a salary of $41,000, before tax, is not easy. And I knew Ross knew that I hadn’t got a raise last year — his administration made a point of claiming that UTF members had “accepted” a pay freeze in several press releases all last semester.

The UTF protested these press releases repeatedly: we had not “accepted” any such freeze; it had been imposed upon us before we won our first contract in the Spring of 2011.

But last semester, the administration liked to say the contingent faculty had accepted a pay freeze: this made our colleagues in the Faculty Association look greedy in their fight for a modest cost-of-living raise.

What a difference a semester makes! Now that there is money at stake, Ross seems convinced by the UTF argument: we didn’t accept a freeze in 2010/11 (our pay was frozen, but we didn’t voluntarily “accept” this freeze) — so we’re not eligible for the lump-sum payment.

Apparently, when it suits this administration’s public-relations needs, I accepted a freeze last year. When it suits the administration’s pocketbook to say the opposite, I didn’t accept the freeze — I just got frozen.

Either way: pretty cold, President Ross.

Michael Ostling Visiting Assistant Professor and UTF Member, Philosophy and Religion Department

Hydraulic Fracturing in Michigan is proven safe, important

Your article about a recent CMU student group protest on hydraulic fracturing highlighted some common misconceptions about the practice that I would like to clarify.

Hydraulic fracturing has been used safely in Michigan for many years, and is integral to energy production, job creation and our economic wellbeing.

Michigan’s natural gas production is critical to our state’s supply of clean, abundant and affordable energy. Nearly 22 percent of all natural gas used by Michigan residents and businesses is produced from right here in Michigan. Approximately 10,000 Michigan workers attribute their jobs to the industry.

Hydraulic fracturing makes this possible, and Michigan has a long track record spanning nearly 60 years and more than 12,000 wells of using the method safely, responsibly and without incident.

Hydraulic fracturing in Michigan takes place below any fresh water supplies, and all aspects are strictly regulated from proper well construction on the front end to Michigan DEQ and U.S. EPA approved disposal of fracturing fluid at the end.

Michigan regulations require measures and practices that prevent oil, natural gas or hydraulic fracturing fluids from coming into contact with fresh water aquifers. Hydraulic fracturing uses more than 98 percent water, sand and a small amount of other components, which are documented for regulators and local emergency personnel.

Producing the energy Michigan needs, while protecting the environment and growing our economy is something MOGA members are very proud of.

We care deeply about the communities where we live and work, and we share a deep commitment with all Michiganians to keeping Michigan’s lakes, streams, rivers and groundwater resources clean and safe.

Frank Mortl President, Michigan Oil and Gas Association

Share: