Letters: Climate job training shows what we can accomplish at the state level
Due to the game-changing law passed in 2021, the Climate and Equitable Jobs Act workforce hub training classes are currently graduating many Black and brown students who are going on to well-paid clean-energy jobs. It is proof that we all must continue to fight and advocate for environmental justice here in Chicago and throughout the state.
Due to the outrageous cuts to all clean energy work by the federal government, we must focus on what we can do at the local and state level. And sometimes, we just need to take a breath and look at what has already been accomplished and then keep working.The Tribune's recent article on clean-energy job training rightly highlights the need for stronger career pathways for underserved communities and the importance of preparing Illinois' workforce for a climate-friendly future. We're proud that labor is not only part of this critical transition but also helping lead it.
Illinois' landmark Climate and Equitable Jobs Act (CEJA) set a national example by tying climate action to economic justice, including the statewide network of workforce development programs that prioritize Black, Latino and other equity-eligible communities historically left out of energy careers.
Crucially, it was Illinois' labor movement that helped secure landmark labor provisions in CEJA — including requirements for prevailing wages, project labor agreements and high-road labor standards for utility-scale projects — ensuring clean energy jobs are good jobs. These standards raise the bar for equity, quality and safety across the industry.
Climate Jobs Illinois, in partnership with HIRE360 and unions across the state, is investing in clean energy workforce programs that open doors for equity-eligible communities. Backed by CEJA, these programs are more than job training — they're launching pads for long-term, family-sustaining careers in solar, wind, electric vehicle infrastructure and energy efficiency.
Through the Climate Works Pre-Apprenticeship Program, participants receive:
This is how Illinois makes a just transition real — by putting people to work in the communities that need it most, with the skills and protections to build and sustain the state's clean energy future.Regarding the June 27 Nation & World article 'Heat dome brings 'double whammy'': I never understand why politicians continue to ignore the facts when it comes to the health and well-being of American citizens. The evidence is overwhelming that links extreme heat and air pollution to climate change.
As the article states: 'Researchers are worried about the twin health hazards of extreme heat and pollution, which can amplify each other. As climate change drives up global temperatures past record levels, the frequency of days when it is both hot and polluted has also been increasing.'
As someone with respiratory issues, I live with this double whammy, and it's only gotten worse over the years as politicians ignore this fact. They pass energy policy that only worsens this impact.
As the article points out, 'the (Donald) Trump administration is moving to weaken limits on emissions from power plants and cars, which could increase carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, particulate matter and other pollutants. It is also encouraging more mining and burning of coal, the dirtiest of the fossil fuels.'
The article also states: 'The World Health Organization estimates that outdoor and indoor air pollution combined cause 6.7 million premature deaths a year.' And: 'A 2023 analysis of more than 20 million deaths around the world found that hot days and days with bad air quality both resulted in higher-than-normal mortality rates. But periods in which heat and pollution are combined were even deadlier.'
Don't Republican politicians care about people's health?
Ironically, I recently sat in on a webinar given by a leading energy professor and scientist on the state of renewable energy, highlighting that we have the technology and know-how to reverse course on this double whammy. Unfortunately, it's apparent we don't have the will or desire to take appropriate action.
As a result, I'll be forced to spend more time indoors this summer and future summers, suffering the consequences of these politicians' apathy toward human health.Two recent Tribune pieces — an article highlighting Chicago Teachers Union President Stacy Davis Gates' call to prioritize district contracts ('CTU president rebukes Trump administration, urges district to prioritize union contract,' June 24) and an op-ed co-written by CTU Vice President Jackson Potter advocating for increased funding for public education and transit ('Public education and transit benefit Chicagoans but aren't being fully funded,' June 24) — raise critical issues but miss the mark on solutions.
Both suggest massive new spending, funded by higher taxes on Chicago and Illinois residents. While I agree that our public schools and transit system need significant improvements, I strongly disagree that more taxes are the answer.
Chicago Public Schools already has sufficient funds to support its shrinking student population. With 47 schools operating at less than one-third capacity, consolidation could free up resources to enhance remaining schools, rather than burdening taxpayers further.
Similarly, our transit system — the CTA, Pace and Metra — needs an overhaul, but not through costly projects like the $1 billion-per-mile Red Line expansion. Instead, merging these agencies into a single, efficient unit with unified fares and coordinated schedules could cut administrative costs and improve service.
Chicago and Illinois don't have a taxing problem; we have a spending problem. Let's prioritize efficiency and innovation over endless tax hikes.The CTA appears to be on life support and needs a new president who has extensive experience running mass transit systems, someone who actually rides the trains and buses, unlike the recently departed Dorval Carter Jr. and current members of the CTA board. The mayor claimed his administration conducted a national search for a CTA president but apparently didn't do that, according to the Tribune's June 20 edition ('Records show mayor didn't conduct formal national search for CTA head').
The mayor could install one of his cronies who has no experience in running a large transit agency like the CTA. That would be a big mistake at a time when the CTA needs solid, experienced leadership.When I decided to study prelaw at the University of Illinois at Springfield, I knew the LSAT and, later, the bar exam would be serious hurdles.
What I didn't expect was the cost of preparing for them. Quality LSAT prep courses can cost well over $1,000. That's not within reach for aspiring professionals.
Thanks to the Prepare for Illinois' Future initiative, I didn't have to make that financial trade-off. This state-funded program gave me access to one of the top LSAT prep resources from Kaplan at no cost. The weekly classes, personalized feedback on practice exams and live tutor support helped me stay on track while working a part-time job. I was able to target the areas where I needed the most improvement, boosting both my score and my confidence.
Improving my LSAT score isn't only about getting into my top-choice law school; it also positions me for scholarships that make that path financially viable.
But this program was never just about one student or one test. It was about access. It was about removing financial barriers that hold back aspiring professionals from advancing in law, health care, education and other critical fields.
That's why I'm disappointed to hear that the program hasn't been included in the next state budget. I urge lawmakers to reconsider. The value here isn't just academic — it's economic. Programs like this unlock talent that might otherwise go unrealized.
Cost shouldn't decide who gets to pursue professional success in Illinois. Not now. Not ever.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
2 hours ago
300,000 Black women have left the workforce: US Bureau of Labor Statistics
Gender economist Katica Roy joins ABC News Live to discuss why Black women are leaving the U.S. labor force. July 27, 2025
Business Insider
5 hours ago
- Business Insider
I moved to Portland at 22. Now that I'm 30, I've outgrown so much of what I loved about the city.
I was only supposed to be in Portland, Oregon, for four months. Eight years later, though, I'm still here. When I first moved to the city at 22, I knew little to nothing about Portland. Although I'd spent time elsewhere in the Pacific Northwest, I'd never even visited Oregon. I was offered an editorial internship, though, and saw this as my chance to leave home, have more freedom, and start my career. Any opportunity, especially one that would let me write, felt worth the leap. Then, in the blink of an eye, what was supposed to be a brief blip turned into nearly a decade. At first, Portland felt like the perfect place for me Portland's quiet green spaces, access to nature, quirky commitment to staying "weird," and community of small businesses made the city feel just right. I loved the food carts, walkability, and general pace and culture. I found a charming one-bedroom with a large living room and natural light in a quiet, walkable neighborhood near downtown, for a rent below market rate. My apartment gave me a home base, and with that came a deep sense of independence that felt imperative in my early 20s. As I adjusted to my new city, I created rituals that made Portland feel like home: grabbing a slice from Sizzle Pie, floating the river with friends in the summer, wandering through Powell's for books. Now that I'm 30, the city I once loved doesn't feel right anymore I work in journalism, and around the time I turned 30, I started to feel like this city might not be the best place for the career I've been building. Although Portland is home to powerhouse brands like Nike, Intel, and Adidas — and there are tons of small businesses and local media organizations — many of my dream roles seem to be based in cities like Los Angeles, New York, or Atlanta. Also, although there is a vibrant Black community here, the Portland metropolitan area is predominantly white. Some days I walk outside, and barely see anyone who looks like me. After growing up in a majority-white suburb, my neighborhood sometimes makes me feel like I never really left. I'm learning that as I grow older, what I'll need in a city might change — and that's OK I'm no longer 22, 24, or even 29. I've realized that what I need in my 30s might be different from what I needed several years ago. Portland will always be the first place I truly lived on my own, and it gave me room to grow, reflect, and find myself. I found so much joy in sunset hikes, aimless wanders through Powell's, afternoons at the Portland Art Museum, and live music in the parks. I'm grateful for my time here, but I'm ready for something new. Maybe I'll move to LA, where the creative community feels more accessible. Or I'll go back to London, a city I once lived in for college, where I felt so inspired by its pace and diverse mix of people. Although I'm excited to move to one of these cities whenever the right opportunity comes, I know that my next home might not be forever, either. One of the biggest lessons Portland has taught me is that different chapters call for different places — and even though Oregon no longer feels like home, I know I'd happily visit again and again, with gratitude.
Vox
6 hours ago
- Vox
The real reason we tip
is the host of Explain It to Me, your hotline for all your unanswered questions. She joined Vox in 2022 as a senior producer and then as host of The Weeds, Vox's policy podcast. We've all been there. Maybe it's when you grab a coffee in the morning or when you finish up a dinner out with friends. Maybe it's when you least expect it, like at the merch table at a concert. You tap your card, only to be confronted with the dreaded tip screen. There's a lot of talk about how much to tip and if you even should tip (more on that later), but why do we add gratuity in America in the first place? Nina Mast has the answer. She's an analyst at the Economic Policy Institute, a left-leaning think tank in Washington, DC. The point of the tip is to make up the difference between the minimum wage and the tipped minimum wage. 'The tipped minimum wage is the lower minimum wage that employers can pay tipped workers with the expectation that tips will bring their pay up to the regular minimum wage rate,' she says. 'Under federal law, the tipped minimum wage is $2.13 an hour. So tipped workers need to earn an additional $5.12 in tips to bring them up to the federal minimum wage, which is $7.25 an hour.' On this week's episode of Explain It to Me, Vox's weekly call-in podcast, we find out how this system began and why we still have it. Below is an excerpt of our conversation with Mast, edited for length and clarity. You can listen to the full episode on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you get podcasts. If you'd like to submit a question, send an email to askvox@ or call 1-800-618-8545. Where does tipping in America come from in the first place? Tipping goes back to the pre-Civil War times in the US. There were wealthy Americans who were vacationing in Europe, and they noticed this practice of tipping where if you had good service, you gave a small extra fee on top of what you paid. Then, tipping started to fade as a practice in Europe but persisted in the US. We can tie that back to the abolition of slavery. Once slavery was abolished following the Civil War, workers who were formerly enslaved in agriculture and domestic service continued to do these same jobs, but employers didn't want to pay them. So instead of actually just paying them their wage, they suggested that the customer paid a small tip to Black workers for their services. That's how tipping started proliferating across service sector jobs and became the predominant way that workers in these jobs were paid. How did the restaurant industry start to do this? It really goes back to the formation of the National Restaurant Association. From the very beginning, going back to the early 1920s, they united around a common goal of keeping labor costs low, essentially lobbying against any efforts to raise wages for tipped workers and to eliminate the tipped minimum wage. It sounds like this whole policy is a direct legacy of trying to keep Black people from getting the same minimum wage as other workers. When were service sectors included in the national minimum wage? It wasn't until the mid-1960s that tipped workers got the same rights as other workers under changes to the Fair Labor Standards Act. In the mid-1960s — this is during the civil rights movement, a few years after the March on Washington, which called for stronger minimum wage protections — amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act established a wage floor for tipped workers. It also increased protections for workers in agriculture, schools, laundries, nursing homes — a lot of sectors in which Black people were disproportionately employed and in which workers of color are still overrepresented even today. This was a big deal. Something like a third of the Black population gained protections under the Fair Labor Standards Act through these amendments in 1966. Even after these amendments, the FLSA continued to exclude farm workers from overtime protections, and domestic workers didn't gain rights until the 1970s. It was a significant change, and a big deal, for tipped workers to be covered, but there was a huge catch in the amendment. It established a lower minimum wage that tipped workers could be paid through the creation of the tip credit system. And that's still what is in use today. This tip credit essentially allowed employers to count the tips that were received by their staff against half of the minimum wage that they were required to pay. In 1996, the FLSA was amended again to raise the minimum wage federally from $4.25 to $5.15. Essentially, that froze the tipped minimum wage at $2.13 an hour, while the non-tipped minimum wage continued to go up. The tipped minimum wage has been stuck at $2.13 an hour since 1991, even though the federal minimum wage has been increased multiple times. And that's still the situation we're in now. Why hasn't this changed? It seems like it would be easier to give everyone the same minimum wage, and you wouldn't have to worry about tipping. I think that's in large part due to the lobbying and advocacy efforts of the National Restaurant Association, its affiliates — groups like the US Chamber of Commerce — and other employer groups that have fought tirelessly to prevent the minimum wage from being raised, both for tipped workers and for other workers. There is a proposal in Congress to raise the minimum wage to $17 an hour by 2030, and it would completely phase out this tipped minimum wage so tipped workers would receive the same minimum wage as everyone else. Some states have already eliminated the tipped minimum wage, but a lot more states haven't been able to do so yet. In most states, the minimum wage for tipped workers is still less than $4 an hour. How does the tip credit system work in practice? Employers are legally required to make up the difference if workers aren't receiving enough in tips to get them up to the regular minimum wage. But in practice, it's extremely difficult to enforce that rule. It's largely left up to the workers themselves to track their hours, their tips, and make some complicated calculations about what they're actually earning per hour per week. Then they have to confront their employer if it seems like they're not actually receiving the minimum wage, which obviously introduces a whole host of issues related to power dynamics. Not only is it difficult to calculate and keep track of, but it's also difficult for workers to demand what they're owed. As a result, it's largely not enforced. Workers who are already earning much lower wages than workers in non-tipped occupations are highly at risk of wage theft. I think as consumers, we're initially taught that tips are a way to reward good service. How should we think about tipping? I think this is a big misconception. People don't realize that they're actually paying the lion's share of their server's wages through their tips. Unfortunately, when you fail to tip your server, you're actually denying them their wage. We don't have the luxury in the US of having the system that you describe where you can pay a tip for particularly good service or pay a smaller tip to indicate that you didn't get good service. How much do you typically tip? I tip 20 percent as a standard, and sometimes, for a really good service, I'll tip more. I think that's basically the standard at this point in the US. It does get tricky, because we've seen a proliferation of tipping across lots of different transactions where a service wasn't necessarily rendered.
