Thank God. That's one of many things that needs to be done to fix education.
Tenure is kind of a complicated issue. I'll say up front that I lean towards doing away with it. That said, at the university level (which is what I can speak to), tenure does serve a purpose in that it allows academic freedom both to teach and to conduct scholarly work as one sees fit. There is peer (and administrative) review in determining if that teaching and scholarly work is worthy of tenure (and promotion), but once achieved, it
should allow a professor to tackle controversial issues or crazy-sounding theories, advocate for change within their own university, and generally be outspoken as they like without concern for their jobs. Part of me thinks that we have protections for wrongful firing, but part of me also realizes that it is hard enough to prove someone was wrongfully fired for their race, gender, handicap, etc. let alone for their outspokenness or the "wrongness" of their research interests. So at the university level, at least, we have a conundrum. If we want to push the boundaries in art, literature, and science, then we need to have some protection from the consequences of
appearing to pursue a crazy idea for a while. But then there is all the possible bad stuff that comes with becoming nearly untouchable, like becoming lazy, spoiled ivory-tower academics. Maybe it is a matter of tenure needing to be rarer, or less broadly applied, or with a harsher review process. I haven't figured out the right solution, but I do know that as long as tenure is a viable option at my university, I will pursue it.
Of course, that barely even touches tenure below the university level...