Union Democracy and The Free Exchange of Ideas: An Open Letter to the CTU Executive Board from a Dissident

Dear Executive Board Member

If you read my March blog, “They Can Ban Me...But They Can't Kill Union Democracy!”  I told you that after being elected delegate, CTU banned me from the House of Delegates. CTU cited my 2019 dismissal (as a CTU field rep) and a "non-contact" provision with two CTU officers until May 2024. CTU claimed that if I attended a House meeting, I would have contact with the two officers. I filed a ULP in February because CTU refused to honor my election. 

Unfortunately, CTU did not settle the ULP and allow me to serve as delegate. CTU's response?... A lawsuit, served at my home by a Cook County Sheriff.  Imagine when my son told me, “Daddy, there’s a cop knocking on the door.”  I gotta give them credit, CTU flexed their power over me.

CTU's lawsuit alleges I made “defamatory” social media comments. One alleged defamatory act was calling Stacy Davis Gates “a bully.”  Now tell me, how would you describe using dues money to sue a fellow member? A member who was your opponent in the last CTU officer election? CTU has a budget of nearly $30 million and I'm a veteran teacher with a mortgage and kids college expenses. CTU is demanding $50,000 in damages, payment for their legal fees and a return of the payment made when they dismissed me (without cause) in 2019.  Does this sound like the actions of a bully? 

Another alleged defamatory act was stating that CTU operates as more of a “Super-PAC than a Union.”  As a candidate for Vice-President, with the REAL caucus, I argued that CTU prioritizes electoral politics over organizing and member representation.  The REAL platform envisions a member driven union, and not one focused on wielding traditional political power. Now tell me, would a member driven union file a lawsuit against its own member?  Would the House of Delegates approve such an action? Or does that sound like old school political practices? 

CTU's lawsuit alleges defamation when CTU was described as having “secretive practices that are undemocratic.”  As a candidate for Vice-President, I argued that our union's financial audits and political spending should be published in the union magazine and put on the union’s website. REAL criticized CTU's Aldermanic endorsement process when they never spoke to longtime ally and candidate Sharon Pincham.  Does it sound secretive and undemocratic when endorsements are made without a transparent process and audits are withheld from members?   

A favorite quote of mine is, 

“For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.”

This quote applies to another allegation of defamation. CTU claims I engaged in defamation when I “liked” a post that stated, “The inclement treatment of CTU staff lead to corruption.”  Think about that, I hit a button with a thumbs up emoji!  CTU spent time and money combing through my social media posts to find my likes.  

I believe the “treasure” represents CTU’s allocation of resources to monitor my social media.  I believe the “heart” is CTU’s desire to silence me through the courts.  In my opinion, CTU’s lawsuit is driven by retaliation and power.  To me, this action is inconsistent with an open exchange of ideas and union democracy. My brothers and sisters - do you believe our leadership’s action is driven by a heart of love? 

In an April email to members, CTU responded to members who took legal action against the CTU, and stated that their lawsuit:  

"Weakens our Union, and the time and energy we must spend responding to baseless charges is a waste of resources, staff, and attorney time that otherwise could be spent advocating for CTU members with CPS."

I ask all Executive Board members to consider our statement.  Do you believe spending money on lawsuits against a fellow member weakens our union?  Do you believe CTU could use those same resources advocating for CTU members with CPS?  If your answers are yes, I urge you to speak up.

My “non-contact” provision ended last May, so I attempted to attend October's House of Delegates meeting. At first I was told there were questions about me being a citywide member because the Prosser website has me listed as a teacher. Well, many citywide members are assigned to only one school and Prosser welcomed me as a member of the staff.

Then I was told, “You’ve missed meetings.”  Well, yes I missed two meetings due tp coaching flag football. The CTU constitution requires a delegate miss three consecutive meetings and a member make a complaint. Eventually I was told that due to the “pending litigation” I would not be admitted, not even as a visitor. 

The "pending litigation" is a reference to CTU's offer to settle if I agreed to a ban on House meetings for the duration of Stacy’s presidency. I countered by requesting a Trial Board in front of the Executive Board, a proposal consistent with our union’s constitution (Art XIV Sec 1) and past practice (Marc Wigler).  This democratic approach allows the Executive Board to determine if any punishment should be issued for my alleged defamatory statements.  If I should be banned from meetings, let the Executive Board decide. CTU said, “No,” and made no counter offer. 

Last March, I confided that the experience caused me sleepless nights, anxiety and stress.  I stated that, “It feels like they want to bankrupt me with legal fees. I fear losing my home.” Unfortunately, those fears and stresses have exasperated.  I’ve made a choice though.  Despite those fears and stress, I will fight. 

Thankfully, I am not alone in this fight. Many friends and family donated to my gofundme legal defense fund.  My legal bills are now more than $12,000 and we haven’t gone to trial!  Thus far I’ve kept my fundraising efforts discreet out of respect for our entire union. 

I believe my fight is not for myself.  In my opinion, union leadership must respect and honor all delegate elections.  My fight is for our union democracy, for the free exchange of ideas and for our constitutional process that places checks and balances on the power of the officers. Our fight is for the heart and soul of our union. 

As unionists, we must speak respectfully of all our union siblings, and not calling them infiltrators or enemy collaborators.  Our Union must protect our members freedom of speech or movement, even political dissidents. If we can't do this, we risk becoming what we despise - authoritarian.  

I ask the Executive Board — again — to protect our Union's democracy and request a trial board. I have faith in your discernment and dedication to our union's values.

In solidarity,

Joseph “Joey” McDermott