The story about women's pay should have made mention that in a union house there's equal pay for equal work ("Pay falls short for Minnesota women," Feb. 29).
But there's another issue to think about. We've all done the right things for the past 40 years -- went to school, landed a job with a good company and worked hard. We all expected that the reward would be pay and promotion for those who performed particularly well.
We have all seen corporations and executive management reap the benefits, while lower- and middle-class wages are decimated. Note the last two years of corporate profits and bonus awards while millions are unemployed or underemployed.
For most of us, the best thing we can do is to hang together; hanging separately has not worked so well.
ERIK SCHEURLE, Minneapolis
* * *
The news media is focusing on the seven Minneapolis City Council members who won't support a $300 million public sports subsidy without a referendum on the Vikings stadium ("Holding the line on the stadium," Feb. 25).
A letter writer said these council members need to make the "tough decision" to vote against holding a referendum on a stadium tax (Readers Write, Feb. 28).
It seems to me that it would be easy for these council members to cave to the pressure. Instead, they're acting as champions of the citizens of Minneapolis, standing tough against the city's media Goliaths. These council members should be applauded for their independence and courage.
JAMES ROETTGER, MINNEAPOLIS
* * *
University of Minnesota executives received a total of $2.8 million in university-paid leaves and/or extra retirement contributions ("U execs are paid well on way out," Feb. 26).
Minnesota National Guard and Army Reserve veterans have returned from serving, only to find they have no job or a job with a lower salary and fewer hours ("Vets fight for jobs they left behind," Feb. 26). Where are our priorities? Who is most deserving of protection?
JOHN SCANLAN, WEST ST. PAUL
• • •
The story about generous payouts to the U's upper echelon was an example of excellent investigative journalism. As a university alum, I hope the student body will be motivated to launch an "Occupy Morrill Hall" event to send a message to the administrators whose offices are there. While poverty is high among students, greed infects the elite.
KEITH MARKWARDT, BUFFALO, MINN.
* * *
It's wonderful that commentary writer Michael Friedman has created a restorative justice program that he believes is effective in dealing with misbehaving students ("Suspensions don't make bad kids good. Here's what does," Feb. 28).
However, he offers no evidence that the program is effective other than parents and students reporting "satisfaction" and a social worker who feels she's saving kids. Is that all it takes to claim you have the answer to this incredibly complicated issue? Perhaps the world outside of education has a different accountability standard.
MARY VOIGT, ST. PAUL
• • •
Somebody in Minneapolis is actually paying for another feel-good answer to classroom discipline. Forget parent or student responsibility: too much pressure. The problem, Mr. Friedman, is that there are no parents involved.
PAUL CRAVEN, CHANHASSEN
* * *
I'm grateful to columnist Gail Rosenblum for sharing the painful story of Blake Anderson, a homeless child who died from leukemia ("Blake Anderson loses his battle," Feb. 28).
However, the Star Tribune's decision to place the Feb. 28 article about his death on Page B5 -- while highlighting a story of Edina real estate on Page B1 -- shows how little the lives of the homeless are valued.
Children's Hospital and the nonprofit group Hearts and Hands tried hard to help Blake and his mother. What makes a big difference for a struggling patient is the ability to rest comfortably at home, with ongoing access to doctors, medicine and good nutrition.
Blake had none of that. If our state provided assistance to the poor that brought them out of homelessness into affordable housing -- and if we all had health care that stretched beyond the emergency room crisis -- there would be fewer tragedies like this.
SUJATA MASSEY, MINNEAPOLIS
* * *
As an opponent of the proposed marriage amendment, I'm interested in learning others' views. So Robert Franklin's commentary was of interest ("And now for some straight talk about the marriage commitment," Feb. 24).
He provided an interesting perspective by looking back at the topic of unmarried couples cohabitating, which was highly controversial in the early 1980s. Before that, interracial marriages were seen as unacceptable and a threat to the institution of marriage.
Interestingly enough, decades later, both of these situations are common in our society. I can only hope that in 20 years we'll be able to look back and say the same about the controversy surrounding same-sex marriage.
It's unfortunate that so much energy is being put into preventing two committed, loving individuals from being married.
Perhaps that energy would be better spent focusing on some of the real threats to marriage: divorce, infidelity, financial irresponsibility, and the unwillingness of many individuals to put time and effort into strengthening their own marriages.
JENNIFER COOK, WOODBURY