Every two weeks, union dues and voluntary COPE donations come out of the paychecks of more than 100,000 active UFT members. Millions upon millions of dollars of our hard earned money go to maintaining, strengthening, and empowering our union each year. Although the UFT  “does not use any union dues money for political action,” a sizable portion (over 25%, according to Americans for Fair Treatment) goes to affiliates such as New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT), who give money to legislators in order to lobby for our best interests. Throw in our COPE donations and some of these politicians are looking at quite a windfall. This article is not meant to be an exposé by any means; it is simply meant to help our membership see where our money is going because we deserve to know. We are in no way encouraging members to cancel their union dues and/or COPE donations. Our union needs our support in order to thrive.

All research was done through

https://publicreporting.elections.ny.gov.

Each union donates money under several names (ex: NYSUT may be listed as New York State United Teachers, NYS United Teachers, NYSUT, etc.), making it extremely difficult to pin down exactly how much they donated. 

It should also be noted that NYSUT (600,000 members) and the AFT (1.7 million members) receive contributions from other teachers’ unions, so all money donated by them does not necessarily come directly from our pockets. However, it is safe to assume that some of it does. All that being said, we hope this article helps you gain some insight as to where our lobbying contributions go. Again, all dollar amounts are for 2022 and 2023, combined. 

Lastly, it should be noted that some of the dollar amounts may not be exact. These are all minimum figures. Please keep in mind that in addition to direct contributions from the teachers’ unions, many of the legislators you see here also receive funding from the super PACs that appear on this list, making it impossible to know exactly how much they are raking in. Without further ado, here is a complete list (to the best of our ability) of everyone who received donations (and how much they received) from the UFT, NYSUT, and AFT. All donations are written exactly as they appear on the public reporting website.

1. Progress NYS: $750,000

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $250,000  2022 New York State United Teachers: $500,000

2a. NYS Democratic Senate Campaign Committee (NYSDSCC): $255,900

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $117,300  2023 NYSUT: $113,600  2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (an arm of NYSUT you can learn more about here): $25,000

2b. NYS Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee (NYSDACC): $255,900

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $117,300  2023 NYSUT: $138,600

4. UUP Higher Education Action Fund: $250,872.44

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $89.971  2023 New York State United Teachers: $160,901.44

5. New York State Democratic Committee: $234,600

Contributions: 2022 American Federation of Teachers: $117,300  2022 New York State United Teachers: $117,300

6. Eleanor Roosevelt Legacy Committee: $211,000

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $6,000  2022 UFT: $50,000  2022 United Federation of Teachers: $95,000  2023 United Federation of Teachers: $60,000

7. Kathy Hochul: $186,500

Contributions: 2022 American Federation of Teachers: $69,700  2022 Voice of Teachers for Education: $69,700  2022 United Federation of Teachers: $47,100

8. New York State Public Employees Federation: $179,387.67

Contributions: 2022 AFT Political Action Contribution: $80,021.40  2023 AFT Political Action Contribution: $99,364.27

9. Working Families Party: $90,000

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $45,000  2023 New York State United Teachers: $45,000

10. Carl E. Heastie (Speaker of the New York Assembly): $51,125

Contributions: 2022 NY State United Teachers: $25,000  2023 VOTE COPE (NYSUT’s non-partisan action fund): $1,125  2023 NYS United Teachers: $25,000

11. PSC PAC: $49,874.24 (Note: This may just be their COPE fund)

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $49,874.24

12. Buffalo Teachers Federation: $40,023.72 (Note: This may just be their COPE fund)

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $35,389.50  2023 NYSUT: $4,634.22 

13. Syracuse Teachers Association: $33,783.70 (Note: This may just be their COPE fund)

Contributions: 2023 NYSUT: $33,783.70 

14A. New York League of Conservation Voters PAC: $25,000

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $25,000

14B. New York Women Lead: $25,000

Contributions: 2022 UFT COPE: $25,000

14C. Melinda Katz (District Attorney, Queens County): $25,000

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $10,000  2023 United Federation of Teachers: $15,000

17. Letitia James (New York State Attorney General): $24,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTECOPE (NYSUT): $10,000  2023 VOTECOPE (NYSUT): $14,000 

18. Jim Owles Liberal Democratic Club: $21,000

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $10,000  2023 United Federation of Teachers: $11,000

19. Monroe County Democratic Committee: $20,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE (NYSUT): $10,000  2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $10,000

20. Robert Jackson (Senator, District 31; Chair of Civil Service and Pensions): $19,800

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE (NYSUT): $19,800

21. John W. Mannion (Senator, District 50): $19,400

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $7,800   2022 American Federation of Teachers: $11,600

22A. Philip Ramos (Assemblyman, 6th Assembly District; Deputy Speaker of NYS Assembly): $19,300

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $19,300

22B. Brian Kavanagh (Senator, District 27): $19,300

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $19,300

22C. Jessica Scarcella-Spanton (Senator, District 23): $19,300

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $19,300

22D. Elizabeth Crowley (lost bid for 59th District Senate seat): $19,300

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE (NYSUT): $19,300

26. Toby Ann Stavisky (Senator, District 11; Chair of Committee on Higher Education): $18,550

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE (NYSUT): $17,800  2023 VOTE COPE (NYSUT): $750

27. Sean Ryan (Senator, District 61): $18,404

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $9,154  2022 Voices of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $7,750   2023 Voices for Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,500

28. Thomas DiNapoli (New York State Comptroller): $17,566

Contributions: 2022 VOTECOPE (NYSUT): $15,066  2023 VOTECOPE (NYSUT): $2,500

29. Gustavo Rivera (Senator, District 33): $17,300

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $13,800  2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,000   2023 VOTECOPE: $2,500

30. Joseph P. Addabbo (Senator, District 15): $16,800

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $7,500   2022 VOTE COPE: $9,300

31. Cordell Cleare (Senator, District 30): $15,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $15,000 

32. Iwen Chu (Senator, District 17): $14,800

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $11,800   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,000

33. James Skoufis (Senator, District 42): $13,800

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $12,500   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,300

34. Lea Webb (Senator, District 52): $13,550

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $11,800   2023 VOTE COPE: $1,000   2023 New York State United Teachers: $750

35A. John Liu (Senator, District 16): $12,500

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $7,500   2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $5,000

35B. Brad Hoylman-Sigal (Senator, District 47): $12,500

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $11,000   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,500

37. James (Jim) Tedisco (Senator, District 44): $12,205

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $9,855   2022 NYSUT: $800   2023 VOTE COPE: $450   2023 NYSUT: $1,100

38A. Anna Kaplan (Former Senator, District 7 – lost re-election bid): $11,800

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $11,800

38B. Julie Shiroishi (lost bid for 39th District Senate seat): $11,800

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education: $11,800

38C. Kristen Gonzalez (Senator, District 59): $11,800

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $11,800

41. Michelle Hinchey (Senator, District 41): $11,734

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $9,234   2022 NYSUT: $2,500

42. Jeremy Cooney (Senator, District 56): $11,550

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $11,550

43. Democratic Committee of Richmond County: $11,500

Contributions: 2022 UFT: $3,000   2023 United Federation of Teachers: $8,500

44. Jessica Ramos (Senator, District 13): $10,500

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $9,000   2023 VOTE COPE: $750   2023 NYSUT: $750

45. Pete Harckham (Senator, District 40): $10,425

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $10,425

46. Rachel May (Senator, District 48): $10,350

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $10,100   2022 VOTE COPE: $250

47. Kings County Democratic County Committee: $10,250

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $5,000   2023 United Federation of Teachers: $5,250

48A. Cayuga County Democratic Committee: $10,000

Contributions: 2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $10,000  

48B. Adam Bello (Monroe County Executive): $10,000

Contributions: 2023 NYS United Teachers: $10,000

48C. Darcel Clark (District Attorney, Bronx County): $10,000

Contributions: 2023 United Federation of Teachers: $10,000

51. Monica Wallace (Assemblymember, 143rd Assembly District): $9,900

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,550   2022 NYSUT: $4,700   2023 NYSUT: $825   2023 VOTE COPE: $825

52. Peter Abbate (Former Assemblymember, 49th Assembly District): $9,500

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $7,800   2022 VOTE COPE: $1,700

53. Erik M. Dilan (Assemblymember, 54th Assembly District): $9,475

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $9,400   2023 United Federation of Teachers: $75

54A. Brian Cunningham (Assemblymember, 43rd Assembly District): $9,400

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $9,400

54B. Andrew Hevesi (Assemblyman, 28th Assembly District): $9,400

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $9,400

54C. David Weprin (Assemblyman, 24th Assembly District): $9,400

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education: $4,700   2022 NYSUT: $4,700

57. Samra Brouk (Senator, District 55): $8,300

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $8,300

58. Jeffrey Dinowitz (Assemblyman, 81st Assembly District): $8,150

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $4,700   2022 NYSUT: $2,500   2023 NYSUT: $950

59. Jamie R. Williams (Assemblymember, 59th Assembly District): $8,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,500   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,500   2023 NYSUT: $3,000

60A. Andrew Gounardes (Senator, District 26): $7,500

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $7,500

60B. Jabari Brisport (Senator, District 25): $7,500

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $7,500

60C. Liz Krueger (Senator, District 28): $7,500

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $7,500

63. Yudelka Tapia (Assemblymember, 86th Assembly District): $7,200

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700   2022 United Federation of Teachers: $1,000   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,500

64. Neil D. Breslin (Senator, District 46): $7,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $3,500   2023 VOTE COPE: $3,500

65. Al Stirpe (Assemblyman, 127th Assembly District): $6,830

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,650   2022 VOTE COPE: $500   2022 NYS United Teachers: $1,000   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,680

66. Elijah Reichlin-Melnick (Former Senator, District 38 – lost re-election bid): $6,800

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $6,800

67. Faculty Federation of Erie Community College: $6,043.40

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $2,469   2023 VOTE COPE: $3,574.40

68. Mike Gianaris (Senator, District 12): $6,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $1,000   2023 VOTE COPE: $5,000

69. Nader J. Sayegh (Assemblyman, 90th Assembly District): $5,900

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,300   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,600

70. John Brooks (Former Senator, District 8 – lost re-election bid for District 5): $5,500

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $5,500

71. Angelo Santabarbara (Assemblymember, 111th Assembly District): $5,300

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $3,100   2022 VOTE COPE: $1,500   2022 VOTECOPE: $600   2022 NYSUT: $100

72. Nily Rozic (Assemblywoman, 25th Assembly District): $5,200

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700   2023 NYSUT: $500

73A. Erie County Democratic Committee: $5,000

Contributions: 2023 NYSUT: $5,000

73B. Bronx Democratic County Committee: $5,000

Contributions: 2022 UFT: $5,000

73C. Alvin Bragg (District Attorney, Manhattan): $5,000

Contributions: 2023 United Federation of Teachers: $5,000

73D. Michael McMahon (District Attorney, Richmond County): $5,000

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $2,500   2023 United Federation of Teachers: $2,500

73E. Eric Gonzalez (District Attorney, Kings County): $5,000

Contributions: 2023 United Federation of Teachers: $5,000

73F. Andrea Stewart-Cousins (Senator, District 35; Majority Leader of NYS Senate): $5,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $4,000   2023 VOTE COPE: $1,000

The $4,700 Club: All of the following legislators (79A-79DD) received exactly $4,700 over the course of FY 2022-2023.

79A. Donna Lupardo (Assemblywoman, 123rd Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 VOTECOPE: $3,507   2022 Voice of Teachers for Education: $693   2023 VOTE COPE: $500

79B. Deborah Glick (Assemblymember, 66th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 VOTECOPE: $4,700

79C. Chantel Jackson (Assemblymember, 79th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79D. Grace Lee (Assemblymember, 65th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79E. Nikki Lucas (Assemblymember, 60th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79F. Chris Eachus (Assemblymember, 99th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79G. Daniel Rosenthal (Former Assemblymember, District 27 – resigned): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79H. Sarahana Shrestha (Assemblymember, 103rd Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79I. Phil Steck (Assemblymember, 110th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,700

79J. Mathylde Frontus (Former Assemblymember, 46th Assembly District – lost re-election bid): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $4,700

79K. Steven Raga (Assemblymember, 30th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $4,700

79L. Vivian E. Cook (Assemblywoman, 32nd Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $4,700

79M. Tony Simone (Assemblymember, 75th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79N. Manny de los Santos (Assemblymember, 72nd Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79O. Edward Gibbs (Assemblymember, 68th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79P. Vincent Argenziano (lost bid for 63rd District Assembly seat): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79Q. Jeffrion Aubry (Assemblyman, 35th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79R. Edward Braunstein (Assemblyman, 26th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79S. Aileen Gunther (Assemblywoman, 100th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79T. Juan Ardila (Assemblymember, 37th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79U. Jose Rivera (Former Assemblymember, 78th Assembly District – lost re-election bid): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79V. Dana Levenberg (Assemblywoman, 95th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79W. Demond Meeks (Assemblymember, 137th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79X. Brian Barnwell (Former Assemblymember, 30th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79Y. Marianne Buttenschon (Assemblymember, 119th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79Z. Jonathan Rivera (Assemblymember, 149th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79AA. Inez E. Dickens (Assemblymember, 70th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79BB. Alex Bores (Assemblymember, 73rd Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79CC. MaryJane Shimsky (Assemblymember, 92nd Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,700

79DD. Pamela Hunter (Assemblymember, 128th Assembly District): $4,700

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $3,950   2022 VOTECOPE: $500   2023 NYS United Teachers: $250

109. Karen McMahon (Assemblymember, 146th Assembly District): $4,675

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $4,675

110. William Conrad (Assemblymember, 140th Assembly District): $4,550

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,550   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,000

111. Gina L. Sillitti (Assemblywoman, 16th Assembly District): $4,300

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $4,300

112A. Carrie Woerner (Assemblywoman, 113th Assembly District): $4,200

Contributions: 2022 VOTECOPE: $3,450   2022 Voice of Teachers for Education: $250   2023 VOTE COPE: $500

112B. Kenneth Zebrowski (Former Assemblymember, 96th Assembly District – resigned): $4,200

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $3,550   2022 VOTE COPE: $650

114. Stacey Pheffer Amato (Assemblywoman, 23rd Assembly District): $4,150

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,400   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,750

115. Steve Englebright (Former Assemblymember, 4th Assembly District – lost re-election bid): $4,100

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $4,100

116. Peter Oberacker (Senator, District 51): $4,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $4,000

117. Steve Stern (Assemblyman, 10th Assembly District): $3,950

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,950

118. Catalina Cruz (Assemblywoman, 39th Assembly District): $3,800

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,700   2023 United Federation of Teachers: $100

119. Judy Griffin (Former Assemblymember, 21st Assembly District): $3,600

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $3,600

120A. Republican Assembly Campaign Committee: $3,500

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $3,500

120B. Billy Jones (Assemblyman, 115th Assembly District): $3,500

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $2,950   2023 NYSUT: $550

122. Kimberly Jean-Pierre (Assemblywoman, 11th Assembly District): $3,450

Contributions: 2022 Vote Cope Of The Nys United Teachers: $2,798   2022 Vote Cope Of Nys United Teachers: $652

123. Your Vote Counts: $3,200

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $3,200

124A. Chris Burdick (Assemblymember, 93rd Assembly District): $3,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,750   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,250

124B. Rodneyse Bichotte Hermelyn (Assemblymember, 42nd Assembly District): $3,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $3,000

124C: Robert Ortt (Senator, District 62): $3,000

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $2,000   2022 NYSUT: $1,000

127. Alicia Hyndman (Assemblywoman, 29th Assembly District): $2,950

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,950   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,000

128. Karines Reyes (Assemblymember, 87th Assembly District): $2,750

Contributions: 2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,750

129A. Charles D. Fall (Assemblyman, 61st Assembly District): $2,700

Contributions: 2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,000   2023 United Federation of Teachers: $700

129B. Steven Cymbrowitz (Former Assemblymember, 45th Assembly District – lost re-election bid): $2,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,700

129C. Sarah Clark (Assemblymember, 136th Assembly District): $2,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,700

132. William B. Magnarelli (Assemblyman, 129th Assembly District): $2,600

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $2,000   2023 NYSUT: $600

133A. Downtown Independent Democrats: $2,500

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers: $2,500

133B. Roxanne Persaud (Senator, District 19): $2,500

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,500

133C. Linda Rosenthal (Assemblymember, 67th Assembly District): $2,500

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,500

136. Patrick Burke (Assemblyman, 142nd Assembly District): $2,450

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,450

137. Jen Lunsford (Assemblymember, 135th Assembly District): $2,200

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,200

138. Harry Bronson (Assemblymember, 138th Assembly District): $2,100

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $200   2023 NYSUT: $1,900

139. Frank Seddio (Former Chair of Brooklyn Democratic Party): $2,010

Contributions: 2023 United Federation of Teachers: $2,010

140A. Jamaal T. Bailey (Senator, District 36): $2,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $500   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,500

140B. Michaelle Solages (Assemblywoman, 22nd Assembly District): $2,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $500   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education: $1,500

140C. Phara Souffrant Forrest (Assemblymember, 57th Assembly District): $2,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,000

140D. Nathalia Fernandez (Senator, District 34): $2,000

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $2,000

140E. Daniel Stec (Senator, District 45): $2,000

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $300   2023 VOTE COPE: $1,700

145A. Chelsea Reform Democratic Club: $1,700

Contributions: 2022 United Federation of Teachers

145B. Zellnor Myrie (Senator, District 20): $1,700

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,000   2023 VOTE COPE: $700

147A. Amy Paulin (Assemblywoman, 88th Assembly District): $1,500

Contributions: 2023 NYSUT: $1,500

147B. James Gary Pretlow (Assemblyman, 89th Assembly District): $1,500

Contributions: 2022 NYS United Teachers: $1,000   2023 NYS United Teachers: $500

147C. Monique Chandler-Waterman (Assemblymember, 58th Assembly District): $1,500

Contributions: 2023 Voices for Teachers (52 Broadway): $1,500

150. Mark Walczyk (Senator, District 49): $1,350

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $650   2023 VOTE COPE: $700

151. William Colton (47th Assembly District): $1,300

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,300

152. Dean Murray (Senator, District 3): $1,270

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $1,270

153A. Julia Salazar (Senator, District 18): $1,250

Contributions: 2022 VOTE COPE: $500   2022 NYSUT: $750

153B. Leroy Comrie (Senator, District 14): $1,250

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,250

155. Taylor Darling (Assemblywoman, 18th Assembly District): $1,100

Contributions: 2022 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $100   2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (NYSUT): $1,000

Grand Total: Just over $3.5 million

For those of you who are curious about our COPE contributions, some of the donations above are specifically earmarked “UFT COPE” or “United Federation of Teachers COPE” on the public reporting website, making those easy to track. Those donations for FY 2022 and 2023 can be found below:

2022 United Federation of Teachers COPE (Total: $76,600)

Kathy Hochul: $47,100

New York League of Conservation Voters Political Action Committee: $25,000

Kings County Democratic County Committee: $4,500

2022 UFT COPE (Total: $28,000)

New York Women Lead: $25,000

Democratic Committee of Richmond County: $3,000

2023 United Federation of Teachers COPE (Total: $25,225)

Jim Owles Liberal Democratic Club: $11,000

Kings County Democratic County Committee: $5,250

Eric Gonzalez: $5,000

Michael McMahon: $2,500

Democratic Organization of Queens County: $700

Charles Fall: $700

Erik M. Dilan: $75

We hope this series of articles have helped shed some light and unraveled some of the mystery surrounding our COPE donations. Our union leadership should be the ones disclosing our financial contributions, not making us fend for ourselves searching for breadcrumbs. Hiding this information from membership only makes us more skeptical. We must continue to demand, not request, transparency from our union leadership.

-David Ginsberg

A recent post on The Wire: Powered by Educators of NYC by Peter Goodman opposes the New York Health Act, the bill to create universal, publicly-funded, publicly-accountable comprehensive health coverage (“single-payer”) for every New Yorker.

The Goodman opinion focuses a lot on the point that many details of the system are not spelled out in the bill.  Of course not.  Does a union contract name all the thousands of medical procedures and drugs the health benefit might cover and the price for each?  But the bill spells out – in law – the key fundamentals that make clear that New York Health is the right choice for all of us, and far better than any other health plan, union or otherwise.

The NYHA specifies that anything covered by Medicare, Medicaid, state insurance law mandates, and any state or local public employee health plan will be covered for every New Yorker.  This includes long-term care (home care and nursing home care).  It’s dramatically broader coverage than any union health plan.

It guarantees no premium, deductible, co-pays, restricted provider network or out-of-pocket charges.  The bill has strong enforceable language guaranteeing fair and adequate payment methodologies and rates.

All guaranteed by law, not at risk every time a union contract is re-negotiated.

The plan will be publicly-accountable, not run by an insurance corporation accountable to stockholders.  The governor and legislators, and their families and friends, will all be covered by the plan, so they’ll have a keen interest in making sure it treats patients and providers as well as can be.  And 20 million New Yorkers will benefit by being in the same plan.

The bill spells out that it will be funded by a progressively-graduated tax, based on ability to pay.  For payroll income (anything subject to the federal FICA tax), the employer must pay at least 80% of the tax; the employer share could be more, especially through collective bargaining.  (For state and local public employees, whatever percentage of the health benefit premium the employer currently pays, the bill requires the employer to pay at least that percentage of the NYHA tax for the employee, going forward.)  The first $25,000 of a person’s income will be exempt from the tax; for Medicare enrollees, the first $50,000 of income will be exempt (acknowledging the federal money they draw into the system).

The tax will also apply to non-payroll income – e.g., dividends and capital gains – that is subject to the state income tax.  That’s where really serious income is earned in our economy.

The exact brackets and rates will be set by the governor and legislature when the plan is ready to be implemented.  That makes sense: today we don’t know what income levels and distribution, and health care prices, will be at that point.

Today, no one can tell any union member what their health plan will cost them or what the details will be in the next contract.  Union leaders constantly say that every time they’re at the bargaining table, they have to choose between protecting the health plan or other wages and benefits.

Many studies by major consulting firms (e.g., RAND) and academics have analyzed state and federal single payer plans, including the NYHA.  Almost all agree: the plan will produce billions in net savings over the current system.  By eliminating insurance corporation bureaucracy, marketing and profit, cutting what health care providers spend fighting with insurance corporations, and slashing drug prices using the bargaining power of 20 million “covered lives,” NY Health will save almost $60 billion a year.  After paying for long-term care and picking up out-of-pocket costs, the net savings will still be almost $20 billion a year.

Those savings, and the funding mechanism based on ability to pay, means almost every New Yorker will spend less than they now do for health care and coverage.

The article cites a report by a Canadian think tank called the Fraser Institute attacking the Canadian single-payer system.  Fraser is a Canadian equivalent of the extreme right-wing Heritage Foundation (the people now hosting Project 2025).

The article expresses concern about the growing power of for-profit equity taking over health plans and health care providers.  That’s a very important concern.  It is made possible by the concentration of economic power exerted by a handful of huge health plans and pharmacy chains.  We need a countervailing power serving the public interest.  The answer is a universal publicly-run and publicly-accountable single-payer health plan – the NYHA.

Some unions say they support a universal health plan but say it should be done nationally.  With the current climate in Washington, a national plan is not likely any time soon.  And a plan enacted in New York will be more favorable to employees and patients than one enacted in Washington.

Richard N. Gottfried is an attorney who served as a member of the New York State Assembly representing portions of Manhattan. He also served as chair of its Committee on Health. Born and raised in NYC, he is a product of New York City public schools. Richard graduated from Stuyvesant High School.

He has strong roots in teaching and labor.  His mother was a NYC high school math teacher from the early 1950s until she retired.  She was a UFT member from its earliest days, and a Teachers Guild member before that.  Richard learned about unionism as a child at the breakfast and dinner table.  His mother-in-law was a Long Island high school English teacher and NYSUT member.

Editor’s Note: Learn more about the Campaign for the New York Health Act, here.

The Wire is encouraging Gottfried and Goodman to join a Talk Out of School or special Wire podcast to further discuss their differing opinions on unions sponsoring NYHA.

Here is Brooklyn chapter leader and subscriber Chad Hamilton’s recent related response to Peter Goodman:

Please never mind the double-post of right-wing doublespeak here in the comments section from Peter Goodman, a sycophant of Michael Mulgrew and Unity Caucus. The reality is that NYHA has a carveout for public labor unions which requires the employer to cover a minimum 80% of the payroll tax breakdown. A larger percentage, up to 100%, is subject to collective bargaining.

In addition to providing healthcare for all New Yorkers, NYHA will save money for at least 90% of all New Yorkers. NYHA is supported by some of New York’s largest labor unions, including 1199 SEIU, the New York State Nurses Association, Communications Workers of America, and the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union.

The UFT Delegate Assembly, the highest decision-making body of the UFT, resolved in May 2015 that, “The United Federation of Teachers strongly supports the New York Health Act as a way to improve public health, boost the state’s economy and ensure that the basic right of quality health care is enjoyed by all New Yorkers… The UFT will work toward passage of this important legislation.”

Instead of meeting and working with the sponsors of the NYHA bill to resolve any outstanding concerns, Michael Mulgrew unilaterally defies the will of the UFT Delegate Assembly, and by extension, the will of dues-paying rank-and-file UFT members. Michael Mulgrew and his Unity Caucus enablers are unfit for office, and UFT members will vote them out in May 2025.

You can learn more about the New York Health Act by reading the independent studies conducted by the Rand Corporation and UMASS, or by clicking on either of these links:

nyhcampaign.org. www.nysenate.gov/sites/default/files/article/attachment/5024_jackson_nyha_brochure.pdf

This article was originally posted on the New Action blog.

Every two weeks, union dues and voluntary COPE donations come out of the paychecks of more than 100,000 active UFT members. Millions upon millions of dollars of our hard earned money go to maintaining, strengthening, and empowering our union each year. In fact, the UFT  “does not use any union dues money for political action,” and while a sizable portion of our dues (over 25%, according to Americans for Fair Treatment) goes to affiliates such as New York State United Teachers (NYSUT) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT), where the distinction between regular union activity and political activity may seem less clear cut, voluntary COPE contributions are the primary source of direct payments from our union organizations to politicians and political groups. Hopefully, the breakdown below of the 10 largest recipients of our various union funds alleviates some of the mystery as to who benefited most from our contributions from 2022 and 2023. This article is not meant to be an exposé by any means; it is simply meant to help our membership see where our money is going because we deserve to know. We are in no way encouraging members to cancel their union dues and/or COPE donations. Our union needs our support in order to thrive.

It should be noted that some of the dollar amounts may not be exact. These are all minimum figures. All research was done through:

https://publicreporting.elections.ny.gov

Each union donates money under several names (ex: NYSUT may be listed as New York State United Teachers, NYS United Teachers, NYSUT, etc.), making it extremely difficult to pin down exactly how much they donated. 

It should also be noted that NYSUT (600,000 members) and the AFT (1.7 million members) receive contributions from other teachers’ unions, so all money donated by them does not necessarily come directly from our pockets. However, it is safe to assume that some of it does. All that being said, we hope this article helps you gain some insight as to where our lobbying contributions go. Again, all dollar amounts are for 2022 and 2023, combined.

1. Progress NYS: $750,000

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $250,000  2022 New York State United Teachers: $500,000

Progress NYS is a Super PAC with ties to NYSUT that has been receiving a large chunk of money from teachers’ unions for a while. According to this article by Rebecca C. Lewis from 2020, over $1 million was given over from NYSUT and its “political fundraising arm, VOTE-COPE,” to help fund the campaigns of Peter Harckham, Martinez (likely Monica), Jen Metzger (lost her re-election bid to Mike Martucci), and state Senator John Mannion, who receives quite a bit of money from teachers’ unions, as you will see in a future article.

More recently, in 2022, another $1 million was given to Progress NYS through our affiliates, NYSUT and the AFT, according to this article by Erin Durkin from Politico. Durkin points out that the $1 million was used to help Kathy Hochul defeat Lee Zeldin in the 2022 gubernatorial race. Overall, the Progress NYS Super PAC essentially helps senate democrats (mostly) in their pursuit of public office.

2a. NYS Democratic Senate Campaign Committee (NYSDSCC): $255,900

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $117,300  2023 NYSUT: $113,600  2023 Voice of Teachers for Education (an arm of NYSUT you can learn more about here): $25,000

The NYSDSCC is led by Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins and is comprised of 42 New York State Senate Democrats, the vast majority of whom have received direct donations in the thousands of dollars from the UFT, NYSUT, and/or AFT over the course of 2022-2023. You can check out the entire list on their website (NYSDSCC members).  The most notable names who have received significant sums of money are Toby Ann Stavisky, John Mannion, Robert Jackson, Jessica Scarcella-Spanton, Iwen Chu, Jessica Ramos, John Liu, Gustavo Rivera, Lea Webb, Cordell Cleare, Kristen Gonzalez, James Skoufis, Brian Kavanagh, Brad Hoylman-Sigal, Jeremy Cooney, Rachel May, Peter Harckham, Sean Ryan, and Joseph Addabbo, all of whom have received 5-digit donations from the UFT and our affiliates over the last two fiscal years. More information will be posted on these senators in our next article.

2b. NYS Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee (NYSDACC): $255,900

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $117,300  2023 NYSUT: $138,600

The NYSDACC is yet another committee of democratic candidates. Much larger than the DSCC, the DACC totals 102 members, including Assembly Speaker Carl E. Heastie (discussed at length later in this article), Philip Ramos, Monica Wallace, Erik M. Dilan, Brian Cunningham, Jaime R. Williams, David Weprin, Jeffrey Dinowitz, Andrew Hevesi, Yudelka Tapia, Al Stirpe, Angelo Santabarbara, Nader J. Sayegh, and Nily Rozic, all of whom received $5,000 or more in campaign donations from the UFT, NYSUT, and/or AFT over the course of 2022-2023. More information will be posted on some of these legislators in a future article.

4. UUP Higher Education Action Fund: $250,872.44

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $89.971  2023 New York State United Teachers: $160,901.44

The United University Professions (UUP) Higher Education Action Fund is “the nation’s largest higher education union” (more info here). The UUP “uses donations to NYSUT’S VOTE-COPE fund to help elect pro-SUNY state legislators,” according to a posting on their website. One of the reasons why it’s so difficult to find out where our (UFT) money goes is because 25% of it goes to our affiliates (NYSUT and AFT primarily, although the AFL-CIO also receives a small portion) and our affiliates receive money from other teacher unions. However, transparency is key, so even though the money allocated to UUP may not have come from our union dues (but who knows?), the information was included here.

5. New York State Democratic Committee: $234,600

Contributions: 2022 American Federation of Teachers: $117,300  2022 New York State United Teachers: $117,300

You may be starting to notice a trend here when it comes to where a big chunk of the money from teachers unions seems to be going. Unlike the NYSDSCC and NYSDACC, the New York State Democratic Committee encompasses more than state senators. The NYSDC counts Governor Kathy Hochul, Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado, AG Letitia James, Comptroller Tom DiNapoli, Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins, Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie, and hundreds of other democratic legislators amongst its rank and file.

6. Eleanor Roosevelt Legacy Committee: $211,000

Contributions: 2022 NYSUT: $6,000  2022 UFT: $50,000  2022 United Federation of Teachers: $95,000  2023 United Federation of Teachers: $60,000

Finally, we get to see campaign donations made directly by the UFT. In total, the Eleanor Roosevelt Legacy Committee received half ($205,000 out of a total of $410,875) of all UFT campaign donations in fiscal years 2022 and 2023. According to their website, the Eleanor Roosevelt Legacy Committee “recruits, trains, and supports pro-choice Democratic women to run for state and local office throughout New York.” Their info page provides a bit more specificity, as it mentions that they helped fund then “little-known candidates like Kathy Hochul and Andrea Stewart-Cousins win their first elections.” The committee endorsed over 300 pro-choice female candidates in 2023, 160 of which were victorious. 

7. Kathy Hochul: $186,500

Contributions: 2022 American Federation of Teachers: $69,700  2022 Voice of Teachers for Education: $69,700  2022 United Federation of Teachers: $47,100

Governor Hochul is the first individual to make this list and she does so in a big way, bringing in nearly $200,000 from our teachers’ unions, including nearly $50,000 directly from the UFT. Despite all the money teacher unions have given over to Hochul (both directly and through Super PACs), it has been difficult to ascertain whether or not she appreciates our support. For the sake of this article, we will leave the politics out of it and focus strictly on her policies regarding public schools.

Mayoral Control: Despite an immense amount of pushback from educators, parents, and even democratic legislators, Governor Hochul was committed to extending mayoral control for Eric Adams, a notorious enemy of public education, for the next four years. A ruling came down that mayoral control would be extended for two years.  

Students and Social Media: In June 2024, Hochul passed the Stop Addictive Feeds Exploitation (SAFE) for Kids Act into law, which “prohibits social media companies from pushing ‘addictive’ algorithm-driven feeds to anyone under 18 without parental consent” (source: uft.org). Hochul also passed the New York Child Data Protection Act, which “prevents social media platforms from collecting data on children ages 12 and younger without parental consent and from children age 13 and over without informed consent.” 

Charter Schools: In 2023, Hochul revealed her FY 2024 budget and it was a blow to public education. Hochul reopened 22 closed charter schools (AKA zombie charters) throughout New York State; 14 of which were located in New York City. This was actually a decrease from Hochul’s original proposal, “which could have allowed more than 100 charter schools to open in New York City.” The UFT, who had backed Hochul without seeking input from its general membership, was not pleased. Do not be fooled by the letters next to candidates’ names. Pay attention to their actions.

Smaller Class Sizes: On September 8, 2022, Governor Hochul signed the class size bill into law that would reduce class sizes for NYC schools. While it remains to be seen how willing the City will be to enact these laws, Hochul’s support is certainly appreciated.

Funding: On the surface, the governor seems like an ally. After all, the governor originally approved $825 million (2.4%) in additional funding for New York State schools for FY 2025, $340 million of which would be going to NYC schools  However, if you look past the headline, a more grim picture quickly appears.

We can start with the fact that both City and State were expecting more money under Hochul’s original proposal. NYS had anticipated a $1.3 billion increase in funding, a difference of about $500 million from what the governor proposed. Additional funding for NYC schools was short $131 million from what city officials were estimating. These cuts occurred because of Hochul’s approved budget, which introduced two underhanded changes that are extremely detrimental to school aid - a change in the Foundation Aid formula and a change to the “save harmless” contingency, both of which you can read about in this excellent article by Julian Shen-Berro of Chalkbeat.

Hochul’s first change disrupts the formula for calculating Foundation Aid. Instead of using rate of inflation on a year-by-year basis, Hochul decided to determine funding by using the average rate of inflation over the last 10 years. Given our soaring inflation over the last few years, changing the funding formula to use a 10-year average decreases the amount of funding our schools receive.

The second change was just as subversive as the first. Hochul sought to essentially put an end to the “Save Harmless” contingency that ensures that schools will not lose funding if their enrollment drops. “Save Harmless” (also called “Hold Harmless”) has been enforced for decades. Liz Rozenberg of City & State New York explains that if Hochul gets rid of this provision that has served as a lifeline for many schools, "50% of the 673 districts that receive foundation aid will lose funds" Funnily enough, Hochul received so much pushback from both sides of the aisle on this issue that she removed her proposal to end “Save Harmless” a couple of months ago (more info here), so it will not appear in the FY 2025 budget. 

Teacher Recruitment: In 2023, Hochul signed state legislation to “spur teacher recruitment - with a focus on increasing diversity - through the state.” Hochul pointed out that New York State needs to add nearly 200,000 teachers over the next decade “to meet workforce needs.” We always hear about and witness teacher shortages firsthand in our schools, so any push towards increasing those numbers is a good thing.

As you can see, Hochul has done some good things and some terrible things for public schools and educators. Is she worth the political donations she has received? You decide.

8. New York State Public Employees Federation: $179,387.67

Contributions: 2022 AFT Political Action Contribution: $80,021.40  2023 AFT Political Action Contribution: $99,364.27

The PES is a 50,000 member organization not exclusive to teachers. According to the union’s website, PEF members “work in more than 3,000 different titles in every state agency, including nurses, social workers, doctors, engineers, counselors, parole officers, lawyers, IT specialists, teachers, habilitation specialists, therapists, and many more.” Like the UUP, this organization does not sound like it really impacts us, but the AFT must be contributing such large sums of money for a reason.

9. Working Families Party: $90,000

Contributions: 2022 New York State United Teachers: $45,000  2023 New York State United Teachers: $45,000

According to its website, the Working Families Party is a national faction that aims to improve the livelihood of everyday workers. Its members include legislators, district attorneys, judges, mayors, supervisors, trustees, and people of other high-power positions from 20 states throughout the U.S. There are over 175 members in New York, alone. Many are also members of the NYSDSCC and NYSDACC, including a vast majority of the legislators mentioned earlier who received big money donations from the UFT, NYSUT, and/or AFT. The interesting thing about these donations is that although there seems to be a lot of redundancy in terms of which legislators are receiving political donations, the Working Families Party often endorses different candidates than the UFT. For example, in the last couple months, the UFT endorsed eventual winner Micah Lasher in the Democratic primary race for New York State Assembly District 69. The Working Families Party supported his opponent, Eli Northrup, who received the second-most votes. Theoretically, this implies that donations to the Working Families Party (and other parties who support different candidates than the UFT) could be going to candidates that the UFT opposes.

10. Carl E. Heastie: $51,125

Contributions: 2022 NY State United Teachers: $25,000  2023 VOTE COPE (NYSUT’s non-partisan action fund): $1,125  2023 NYS United Teachers: $25,000

Heastie is the Speaker of the New York State Assembly, which may explain why he received more than double the donations of the next highest individual legislator. Heastie is a bit of a mixed bag when it comes to educational policy. According to this New York Times article from 2017, Heastie supported an extension of mayoral control, but refused “to bend to the Senate’s demands to increase the number of charter schools in the state as a condition to extend mayoral control of the city’s schools.” Heastie continues to support mayoral control, which has become an increasingly contentious issue during Eric Adams’ tenure. 

On the other hand, Heastie was supportive of the class size reduction act, which should serve as a benefit to students and teachers, assuming there are no detrimental caveats. The long term plan to decrease the maximum allowable number of students per class sounds like a great idea, although it remains to be seen if the City will actually abide by all of its stipulations.

On other issues, Heastie seems to be playing the fence. When asked about Hochul’s proposed changes to the Foundation Aid formula, Heastie said, “We would, of course, make sure the districts are whole, but we are open to re-examining the Foundation Aid formula. But we want to make sure that our rural and suburban districts aren’t harmed by any proposal.” Any type of concession that would favor Hochul’s agenda would be a tragic mistake that would take away major funding from our public schools. 

More articles will be forthcoming naming other large recipients of our unions’ lobbying efforts.

David Ginsberg is a NYC high school teacher, UFT chapter delegate and also a proud member of New Action caucus.

ICE-UFT has consistently been a beacon of equity, justice, and authentic representation for all UFT members. Our unwavering commitment to cultivating an inclusive and supportive environment for educators remains steadfast. Regrettably, Unity Caucus, under the misguided leadership of President Mulgrew, has chosen to resort to personal attacks rather than engaging in constructive dialogue and addressing the legitimate concerns of our members.

Our priorities remain steadfast:

1. Championing Fair Working Conditions: We are committed to ensuring that all educators are provided with a safe and supportive work environment.

2. Demanding Transparency: We are relentless in our pursuit for greater transparency in union operations and decision-making processes.

3. Empowering Educators: We are dedicated to equipping educators with the necessary tools and support they need to excel in their roles and advocate for their rights.

4. Revamping Our Dental Plan: We are determined to rectify the deficiencies in our current dental coverage to ensure comprehensive and accessible dental care for all members.

5. Safeguarding Changes to Active Member and Retiree Healthcare: We are committed to ensuring that all changes to healthcare plans for active members and retirees prioritize quality care without escalating out-of-pocket expenses.

6. Securing a Living Wage for Paraprofessionals: We are unwavering in our advocacy for fair and livable wages to ensure that paraprofessionals receive the compensation they rightfully deserve.

We challenge Unity Caucus, President Mulgrew, District Representative Shapiro, and Staff Director Barr to abandon their personal attacks and join us in addressing the critical issues that impact our education system. The strength of our union lies in our collective ability to unite and collaborate for the betterment of our schools and communities.

ICE-UFT remains resolute in preserving the integrity of our union and will not be swayed by these divisive tactics. We extend an invitation to all members of the UFT to stand with us in solidarity, focusing on the shared objective of enhancing our education system for the benefit of both educators and students. We will not be silenced. We will not be deterred. We stand firm. We are ICE-UFT.

This post was originally published on the Retiree Advocate site.

I learned about quilling at the December 2022 RTC meeting. Quilling is the craft of bending and rolling strands of paper into decorative objects. I wasn't expecting to learn about quilling when I went to that RTC meeting; I was expecting to debate the UFT's plans to move me, and everyone else at the meeting, into a for-profit Medicare Advantage plan. Tom Murphy, Mulgrew's man at the helm of the Retired Teachers Chapter, had other plans. He didn't want to talk about healthcare. He wanted us to learn about the craft of quilling.

At this time, Michael Mulgrew was pushing the NY City Council to change the law that stood in his way of moving us into Medicare Advantage. NYC Administrative Code §12-126 is a law that codifies the city's responsibility to pay for our healthcare. A few months earlier a judge had ruled that NYC retirees were protected by that law, thus denying Mulgrew the ability to charge retirees for remaining on GHI Senior Care if they chose to.

That ruling scuttled the Medicare Advantage deal that Mulgrew had originally negotiated with Emblem Health & Anthem. Now, in December 2022, Mulgrew wanted - desperately wanted - to amend the City Code and sign a new deal with insurance giant, CVS/Aetna. Even though there was no contract on the table, no writing on paper, no nothing. Nothing except some vague assurances from Aetna and some wishful thinking from Mulgrew.

This was of great concern to the several hundred UFT members at the December RTC meeting. But not to Tom Murphy. He didn't want to hear about it. He wanted us to sit through a presentation about quilling.

You may know the history from there: How municipal retirees organized, united, and stopped the City Council from changing the City Code. How the New York State Supreme and Appellate Courts have consistently ruled in favor of preserving our current health benefits. And how Mulgrew, and his man Murphy, still persist in siding with the mayor and the insurance companies, and to this day are working to undermine and privatize our health benefits.

Retiree Advocate/UFT has been fighting Mulgrew's plans since they came to light in 2021. Some of you know that Retiree Advocate has been working with tens of thousands of retirees from all the NYC municipal unions. We want to preserve our current health benefits. You may also know that a UFT chapter election is coming up in May. You may even know that I am running for RTC Chapter Leader, at the top of the Retiree Advocate slate.

It will be an interesting (and I think, wonderful) day when Retiree Advocate wins. Though it will seem strange. Unity has been in control of the chapter since the beginning of the union. Unity is all that most UFT members know. Unity is the familiar name that gets the automatic vote. Many UFT members don't realize that Unity isn't the UFT, just one of several political parties within the UFT. Retiree Advocate is one of those parties.

So, what will the Retired Teachers Chapter look like with Retiree Advocate leadership?

In many ways, the chapter will look much the same as it does now. We will still operate under the established chapter structure, with chapter officers, an executive board, and three hundred delegates to the UFT Delegate Assembly. We will encourage members to participate in non-partisan committees to strengthen and promote the chapter, expand benefits and services, and research topical issues.

Nothing will be torn down. Our beloved institutions - the institutions that we all helped build as union members - will remain intact, and hopefully be improved.

Our wonderful UFT institutions, such as the Si Beagle Learning Program, the Member Assistance Program, the UFT Welfare Fund, SHIP, the Retiree Legal Plan, and the fantastic new Paraprofessional Support Program, aren't going anywhere. They are cherished and will be protected.

And, of course, Retiree Advocate will continue the tradition of providing information to our members about important things like pensions, health benefits, and union campaigns.

We will still canvass and phone-bank for our UFT endorsed candidates. We will still have presentations and guest speakers at RTC meetings. We will still staff phones to answer member questions. We will still arrange retiree luncheons and social events. (And if we can possibly swing it, we'll have much better food at RTC meetings!)

But there will be differences.

The Retiree Advocate slate is filled with people with tons of experience, not only as UFT activists, but also as career-long educators and support professionals. Too many of our Unity colleagues accepted patronage jobs in the union's offices, away from the classrooms, away from the joy and hubbub of children, away from their school communities, and away from the crazy school administrators whom we all dealt with our entire careers. That is a big plus for Retiree Advocate.

We never lost our way. We stayed the course. We know what an effective UFT chapter is supposed to look like. We know what an effective chapter leader is supposed to do. Our highest obligation is to our chapter members - not to Medicare Advantage companies, not to New York City mayors, not to union bureaucracies, not even to union presidents.

So, here's how things will be different. We will bring democracy to our chapter, and regular order back to RTC meetings. We will run meetings according to Robert's Rules of Order, with question periods, motion periods, and resolution periods. With real debate - and real votes - on real issues.

No longer will RTC meetings be hours-long infomercials for insurance companies, or parades of laudatory epithets for union officials. You know how I feel about quilling. I love it. But we're not going to use it to avoid debate on important issues.

The voice of RTC members will take precedence. We will not only take questions but will also take comments and statements from an open mic, much as we see in public meetings around the city.

And most importantly, we will have full-chapter votes on issues of vital importance to RTC members, such as health benefit changes.

I think that the current leadership tends to patronize us. That will end. Tom Murphy doesn't even trust us to hold a microphone in our own hands. He acts as though debate will kill us. I don't believe that. He thinks that when we get angry with him, or with Michael Mulgrew, because they won't stand up for the health benefits we earned, we are being uncivil. That is not my take on it. I value civility, but I think there is no greater incivility than giving away our Medicare benefits.

So that's about it. Retiree Advocate isn't radical, we're normal. We've supported the union through thick and thin. We raised union families and taught our children union values. We're still here for the UFT, paying our dues, coming to the union hall, and trying to make our union stronger and better.

Now we're in the middle of a chapter election; an election that is not unlike the chapter elections going on, right now, across the city's schools. An election where both sides love the union and want to protect it from harm. An election where our differences mustn’t divide us, but they do set us apart. An election where one party, Unity, takes orders from the union president and wants to manage the decline of our health benefits, and one party, Retiree Advocate, that listens to the membership and wants to put a stop to the decline.

When I was a working teacher, I always wanted to elect a chapter leader who would stand for my rights. I wanted a chapter leader who would cooperate with the principal when they could, but would fight like hell when they had to. That's the kind of leadership the Retired Teachers Chapter deserves, and will get, with Retiree Advocate/UFT.

Bennett Fischer is a retired teacher and former UFT chapter leader. He is currently running for the RTC chapter leader position, along with 299 others on the Retiree Advocate slate.

Editor’s note: The will be a special virtual town hall for UFT retirees, facilitated by Retiree Advocate centered around the upcoming RTC election and “Getting Out the Vote to Save our Healthcare”.

It will take place on Monday, May 13th at 8 PM. Be sure to RSVP at: tinyurl.com/ratownhall

RSVP for RA Virtual Town Hall

Subscribe now

Three members of MORE-UFT have been on the UFT Executive Board since 2022: Ronnie Almonte, Alex Jallot, and Ilona Nanay. StrikeHot sat down with the three of them and discussed what they have learned so far and strategy going forward. 

StrikeHot: What motivated you to run for the Executive Board  and what did you hope to accomplish in your term on the board? 

Alex: The bigger picture is to hopefully enact some sort of change in our union and to pass some resolutions that would benefit the rank and file and push our leadership to do the right things. The way that our union leadership runs right now is frustrating. It's very much top down. But I also wanted to see what the inner workings of our union were like. So being on the board for the past year has definitely opened my eyes to how leadership operates and what their motivations are.

Ronnie: I wanted to run for the Executive Board  because I wanted to work alongside our allies in the opposition movement to amplify the issues that we, as full-time educators, see and have in our workplaces. We didn't have any illusions that we would be able to reform the union from the top down, so to speak. One, we don't have the numbers, but more importantly, top down change isn’t the way that you build rank and file power. That said, I did think that the Executive Board  has a place in the overall strategy of trying to build workplace power.

Ilona: Honestly, I felt compelled to run because, considering the majority of our caucus and workforce identify as female, it was critical that we reflect the diverse identities within our organization. At the time, I also wanted to continue championing social movement unionism within UFT sanctioned spaces to demonstrate an alternative to the business unionism that the UFT has historically advanced. With over a decade teaching history in the Bronx, the glaring disparities in students' learning conditions and staffs’ working conditions were evident. These challenges further emphasized the need for transformative change.

Parent activists mobilized, at the invitation of MORE members in 2017, to pressure the UFT Executive Board to defend teachers at the CPE1 elementary school.

StrikeHot: What do you think is the single most effective thing that the three of you did in your first year in office?

Alex: I think one of the most effective things we did was navigate how to work with our allies, because there’s a spectrum of different political views and motivations. So I think us three did a really good job of building trust with the people that we ran with and building up a coalition. Secondly, I think we did a really good job of holding our leadership accountable. Every meeting, at least one of us would get up and speak, ask questions, and more generally not take what leadership was telling us at face value. There was a palpable effect to that. It was obvious from leadership reaching out to us individually trying to get us to have meetings with them and from the way that they reacted to us, whether it was vitriol or whatever, during the meetings. 

Ilona: While the Delegate Assembly (DA) may provide a broader platform for driving change through resolutions, the Executive Board remains dominated by UNITY. Therefore, our strategy should focus on interest convergence, recognizing that the broader union community might not always be tuned into the intricacies of the Executive Board's dynamics. One of our notable successes was in bringing members directly into the space, allowing them to voice their concerns, thereby fostering consciousness and ensuring officer accountability. However, I firmly believe we need to reassess and balance how much energy, time and resources we invest in this realm of labor organizing. 

Ronnie: It definitely felt like being on the Executive Board this past year was almost kind of like a state of war, like we were always being attacked by the majority of the Unity caucus, or at least their loudest voices. I don't want to say the entire caucus. There's a carrot and a stick strategy on the part of Unity. I'm not sure. But I think what we've been able to do, to echo Alex, is to create cohesion as an opposition throughout this kind of battle. And I'm not sure about this, but I think one impact that we may have made—which is hard to kind to measure—is perhaps creating some tension or division within Unity itself. There have definitely been some Unity members who privately have been kind of open or agreeable to some of the issues that we have brought up, issues that are typically unanimously shut down during an Executive Board meeting. 

StrikeHot: What role has MORE played in your work on the Executive Board ? And how do you think the caucus could play a more effective role in the rest of your term? 

Ronnie: I think the work of the caucus is in general kind of fragmented. People have their passions or interests and they kind of just roll with it with a group of like-minded people. I don't think there was like an overarching strategy that really teased out what our participation in the Executive Board would be. Part of that is because you learn while you're doing it. This is something that's kind of new for us.I think most of what we were able to do was come up with resolutions and proposals along with the rest of the seven opposition Executive Board members. In addition, certain members took up particular fights without much coordination with the rest of the delegation. So even in the Executive Board, our work as MORE was fragmented. 

Alex: As Ronnie was saying, it's our first time doing it.  But, we didn't do any sort of reflection or interrogation of what our work was during the school year on the Executive Board. And I think we needed to do that more. 

I'm thinking about the Executive Board as a piece of the puzzle. And I think we should be clear about what our future goals are. This is a long-term project. What are we trying to do eventually? Are we trying to get officer seats? What does that mean? How do we do that? Part of that is putting our time and effort into getting MORE members elected to chapter leader and delegate positions. That's going to be a crucial piece for MORE over the next year.  

Ronnie: I agree with Alex. The question of “how do we support you?”, we've definitely been asked that question. And it's always been really appreciated. The thing is, though, that kind of support has to be structural, not individual. And it takes more than just showing up to that meeting. I think the best way to support people who are involved in work is by actually having a plan that has been built backwards from a bigger picture of who we are as a caucus and what are our goals, in light of who we are and what we're capable of doing. I don't think we really had that context.

We’re kind of flying solo, without really a sense of direction as to where exactly we're flying to. We can't do everything and our time is limited. So what work can and should we do? And then do we have the capacity to really invest in that? Even if it's a morally righteous thing to do, you know, we need to think more about how we can build, rather than just what we should do at the moment in the general abstract sense.

StrikeHot: What right now do you think are MORE’s big picture goals? Or what should they be? 

Ilona: I had hoped that our participation on EB might push the UFT to embrace a more active model of unionism, focused on rank and file engagement, in order to collaboratively address the pressing disparities in our education system. This included expanding restorative justice, advocating for the removal of police from schools, rallying support for the New York Health Act, promoting transparent and community-centered contract negotiations, and championing a culturally responsive curriculum and reduced class sizes, among other things.

Alex: I think for me, the biggest goal is getting as many people elected to chapter leader and delegates as we can, so that we can pack the delegate assembly. I know that's not going to necessarily transform our union, but I think it'll take us a step in the right direction to do that. Because I think one of the biggest—if not the most successful—campaign that MORE has waged was the last time that we had a campaign to get people elected. The campaign was really successful, and it was very energizing to do that. And then on top of that, electing more delegates and chapter leaders would help to expand the caucus as well. To be in those spaces, the unfortunate truth is you have to be either delegate or chapter leader. Going forward, especially this year, it's going to be critical for us to reach out to rank and file members and to talk to our co-workers. I've already started doing that, talking to people about running for delegates, encouraging them to run for chapter leader. Because we just need people in those spaces. We should be the ones that are helping to drive what our union is doing, because we respond to what rank and file members want. And I think that's part of the reason why I'm in MORE, because it's rooted in what rank and file members want for our union and what's best for our schools and communities and so on and so forth. 

Ronnie: I think the point of our caucus first and foremost is to contend for power in the union. To do that, we need numbers. And to get numbers, we need to build both through identifying activists or leaders who maybe have been unaffiliated or maybe this is their first kind of form of activism, which I think MORE has prioritized. I think we also need to—and I think the MORE has overlooked this—recruit from the already existing rank and file leaders throughout the union. Some of these leaders are in Unity, but many of them are not. So that's to say, we need a kind of program or strategy that is focused on recruiting both new and existing leaders. Now, I think this upcoming chapter leader and delegate election year is going to be really crucial for us. We’ve got to see this campaign as a way to build power. Now often, power is talked about on the left, or among progressive educators, as being top down or bottom up, which I think can be helpful to an extent. But I think there could be a problem there when we counterpose it, too. The thing is, the infrastructure of the union has to be engaged with. So that means contending for power in official union spaces, which are tightly controlled by the leadership. Unfortunately, those are the spaces where we can really interface with the 100,000 plus members of the union.  And so I think what we should be leading with when we recruit people is this idea that we need to be a strike-ready union. We need to be a strike-ready union not because we think that we should strike right now, but because that tactic, a strike, is implicit in what we think we need to reform about the union. A successful strike would mean that the chapters are strong and led by rank and file. 

Strike Hot: What have you guys been able to do together with the other people in the United for Change Coalition? Are there any cases where you maybe haven't been able to work together as effectively? 

Ilona: Working within the coalition presents its own challenges. The varying values and visions within our coalition occasionally led to strategic misalignments, resulting in tensions that, at times, played out publicly in Executive Board meetings. This divergence underscores the importance of coalition-building and ensuring that those we are in coalition with are also champions of social justice and also agree to our Points of Unity. 

Alex: We found a lot of common ground with the other caucuses we’ve worked with.

We're all united in believing that Unity is not doing a good job running our union. We all also came together on certain issues, such as tenure and discontinuance in high school districts. Where I think we had differences sometimes had to do with tactics. We should be strategic about how to confront Unity, and also about what resolutions we’re bringing to the floor. If we do get resolutions passed, what does that mean? How are we going to hold the union accountable, to make sure that these things are carried out? I think there's also some differences in how members of our coalition view our relationship with Unity, in that some of them believe that we shouldn't be working with Unity at all. I take a more pragmatic approach to it:sometimes working with them is going to be necessary especially Janella Hinds around some high school issues. There will be situations where we cross paths with Unity, and we’ll agree with them on certain things. There will also be a lot of things that we won’t agree on. And also there was once or twice where resolutions were brought to the floor by opposition coalition members where they didn't inform Ronnie, Ilona and I beforehand. But do we leave our coalition colleagues hanging out to dry if we're ideologically opposed to some of the things that they bring up? If we're not showing solidarity in the Executive Board, you know, that could also lend to the Unity caucus seeing that and using it to their advantage. That's something that we need to talk about. What are we going to do in those spaces? How are we going to support each other? Can we be  clear in our communications about what we're bringing to the floor, so that none of us are blindsided and we all know what to expect?

Ronnie: In general, we worked really well as a team of seven. There were times when we weren't in alignment, but that is  to be expected. We're in different caucuses. We're individuals with sometimes conflicting ideas about what to do next Maybe one kind of question, which also extends to at least the MORE caucus (if not the whole education left) is who exactly is the enemy and who's an opponent. I see Unity as a political opponent, even if their strategy feels like a personal attack. I do think one of the goals is to push those who wield the power to wield it in a way that's aligned with how we think it should be. And the actual enemy is the boss, because they're the ones who ultimately have the authority to decide funding and the quality of our working conditions. Now, we can say that the union bureaucracy is really weak in fighting back against the boss. And that's enough to consider them a political opponent, but the employer is who we bargain with. And so anyway, sometimes I think that that gets confused. 

I think our best work as a team came toward the end of the school year during the contract shit show. The seven of us did a really good job of acting on our instincts. I understand that fight was also had in the negotiating committee but unfortunately that meeting was secret. It’s hard to really mobilize people around fights that happen in secret, in a space that's hidden. But fortunately, in the Executive Board we were able to make all the arguments to the UFT officialdom about why the contract was a bad one, why we should be going back to the negotiating table, and why ramming through the contract was, at odds with how a democratic union actually arrives at agreements and decisions.

StrikeHot: Alex, you mentioned working with Unity, and with Janella Hinds in particular, on a few issues. Maybe you guys could just talk a little bit about what that was like and what the challenges were in terms of working with Unity. 

Ilona: My tenure on EB has shown me the limited influence our group of seven has on the Executive Board, given the predominant UNITY presence, which often adheres unwaveringly to its party line. This was never more obvious to me than when an overwhelming number of UNITY members, including Janella Hinds, spoke out against a resolution to remove abusive admin. Even in moments where we were able to work with VP Hinds on issues like keeping the Charter Cap, or demanding greater transparency and equity with NYC's Education Budget, it has never been more evident to me that true power resides with rank-and-file engagement. Though there were moments when we could strategically harness the union's resources to back issues and/or campaigns that MORE supported, these were instances of interest convergence, and the real transformative potential lay in grassroots organizing at our worksites. I am constantly reminded of something Jia Lee, a founding MORE member says, that we have to look out for power not up. When are able to organize collectively we are an unstoppable force – we don’t have to wait for union officers or electeds to harness that. 

Alex: I mean, to be quite honest, I don't want to say Unity the enemy, but they are. They have a whole system of patronage, and that's something they have over MORE, the fact that they can literally, materially, dole out jobs, money, and benefits to people who join their caucus. It's extremely apparent, and it's a well-oiled machine. Experiencing it firsthand on the Executive Board, you see how it works. I do have to give them credit. They do their community events. They have a lot of reach in a lot of different schools. And they have members who are committed to their project, who will do anything to make sure that Unity remains in power. It’s extremely taxing because there's just seven of us in a room of 100-plus people at the Executive Board twice a month on a Monday, after a long day of work, getting yelled at, literally. I think each one of us, all seven of us, at some point or another got yelled at by somebody in that space.  Any little critique, any little thing that you say about the work that's being done in the union, Unity members take it extremely personally because they see themselves as the union. So, whenever any of us pointed that out, and whenever any of us said anything that might have been taken as criticism, people immediately jumped down our throats. They said some really nasty stuff, literally shouted people down, accused us of being traitors, andbeing anti-union, just for raising questions or resolutions that needed to be raised. So, in terms of working with Unity as a group, it's impossible. But I think where we did find some common ground was on the high school Executive Board. Janella was amenable to some things, and in the beginning of the school year, she reached out to me personally a few times. But I also see that, as part of their strategy, right? It's the carrot and the stick. I don't think Janella is reaching out to us because she particularly wants to be our friend or really support us; I think it's politically prudent for them to do that sometimes because we are a loud opposition. 

But there are some ways that we can make inroads with a few Unity members. I mean, there were even some times where I was able to find some common ground with Leroy. He helped us out with some things. And, you know, at the end of the day, I like to think we are in a union, and there are some things in common that we have. 

Ronnie: There have been moments where we've been able to work with Unity, and we've never foregone that opportunity because it's important. The thing about being in the union is that you don't pick who your co-workers are, so you don’t pick who the union members are. It’s not like a voluntary organization. It's work. So that means that we need a degree of patience, and I think friendliness and openness, when we work with people. That bridge has always been open, and we've crossed it a few times to work with Unity. For example, we’ve been able to work with them on a tenure resolution, and on a resolution in support of the teachers from the Dominican Republic who were exploited by DOE principals. We may not like it, but Unity runs the UFT, and it does have members who are not paid staff but actual educators and our co-workers. They control the resources that we can't replicate to access and to potentially mobilize the membership. That's why we're in the union in the first place, because we think this institution is historically important for the working class, and we know we'd be a lot worse off, as New York City educators, if we didn't have one. We can’t make our own, so this is an institution that's worth fighting for.

UPDATE:

We want to thank you for supporting the Fix Para Pay petition. The calls for a living wage and fair contract for New York City paras have resonated and they are earth-shattering.

In less than a week, we have surpassed over 1700k signatures — and the totals are still growing strong! Over 65% who have signed on are NYC paras who are struggling to survive in the NYC area without a living wage. Almost every signature is a UFT member who stands with paras in this fight. The others are stakeholders in our public schools.

THE NEXT STEP: MAKE OUR VOICES MATTER IN THE 2024 PARA CHAPTER ELECTIONS

We need our leadership to hear our voices!

That is why UFT Paras for A Fair Contract will be running a slate of representatives for the citywide UFT Paraprofessional functional chapter election that will be held from May 9th to June 13th.

Our union proud and union strong community of paras and UFT members believes that it’s time to organize for a meaningful change by pressing the issues of a living wage and a fair contract at the collective bargaining table. With rising inflation, skyrocketing costs, and Mulgrew making us pay more for our healthcare plans, we are left no choice.

We are also are committing to further mobilize to ensure the para chapter and our school chapters are strong.

We are resolute in our mission: Fighting for respect and dignity for paras by achieving a living wage and a fair contract for NYC paras.

Lip service, empty promises, political grandstanding, symbolic gestures, luncheons, certificates, digital handbooks, more PDs and CTLE opportunities, will not do.

BE THE CHANGE: LET'S RUN TOGETHER ON THE UFT PARAS FOR A FAIR CONTRACT SLATE

Are you ready to take back our union? If you are a UFT para and want to run with us in this election, we want to connect with you. There are over 250 para delegate representative seats within the UFT para functional chapter that are open in this election. Learn more here: https://www.uft.org/your-union/chapter-elections-2024/chapter-election-faq

We intend to run as many qualified candidates who want to join us in solidarity to organize and bring about the change we sorely need in our beloved union.

We must become the change we all seek by filling those seats with rank and file, hard working members like you.

Our existing team of para leaders and UFT activists is experienced and ready to help. Please submit this form no later than April 2, 2024.

If you interested in joining this slate for meaningful change for paras, complete the form below to connect with us. If you are interested in joining this slate for meaningful change for paras, go to: http://joinslate.fixparapay.org

Join Our Election Slate

MORE ON THE PETITION’S PROPOSED RESOLUTION FOR A LIVING WAGE

Mulgrew’s Unity caucus, the entrenched, stagnant and establishment union leadership that has had sole control of our union for over 60 years, has rejected our calls for a comprehensive bargaining plan for a living wage and a fair para contract.

They failed to pass all of our proposed resolution, only acknowledging to educate members about pending legislation. They gutted the heart of it at the UFT executive board and delegate assembly by not including the provision to create a comprehensive and robust plan.

SO WHAT DO WE DO NEXT?

We organize, mobilize and educate members. And, we vote them out!

We relentlessly march forward as a member-driven labor movement, together.

As union proud and union strong community of paras and UFT members, we assert that it’s time to organize for a meaningful change by pressing the issue at the collective bargaining table. We also believe we must organize to ensure our para chapter and local school chapters are strong.

We will not stand for the status quo. We soundly reject: sub-inflation pay raises, the further erosion of our healthcare and pension benefits, our rights being trampled, and a tone deaf, current leadership stifling our individual and collective voices.

Let’s stand as ONE to join together to be heard even as those we entrusted at 52 Broadway, UFT headquarters, have become more and more disconnected from those of us working hard in the classroom and school communities.

Get involved, now.

We’re here for you!

Have a question or concern? Email us at info@fixparapay.org

Visit FIXPARAPAY.ORG

Have you had trouble finding a dentist who will accept UFT Welfare Fund reimbursement rates?

Have you had to pay large amounts out of pocket for dental work that wasn’t covered?

Did you know that the Welfare Fund has an almost one billion dollar surplus? And has had been taking in almost $100 million more than it spends every year for the last five years?

A group concerned UFT members put together this survey to share your input on the current state of our dental benefits and how they could be improved.

Please share your thoughts by taking a minute to fill out the survey, and then share this with your colleagues and fellow UFT members.

Your feedback will be help improve the Welfare Fund!

Fill Out Survey Now

Mulgrew and his UFT Unity patronage entourage continue to make up rules as they go — a la carte. After, losing 2 para seats in last year’s para chapter special election … they simply changed decades of rules for this upcoming chapter election, without consent.

Active functional chapters’ election procedures have never had slates as part of their process. Until yesterday for the para chapter, exclusively.

The only 2 places where slates have been allowed in our UFT elections has been in general elections and retiree chapter elections. In fact, this is stipulated in the retiree chapter’s bylaws. (The issues with winner-take-all election slates is worth noting, but at another time)

Notice that in the new para chapter election rules, the Unity bosses have even required a minimum amount of persons for a para slate to be implemented. All in an effort to win back the 2 seats Unity lost in a direct, fair and democratic election, last year.

This is the same union leadership that hates losing control so much that they changed the rules on the overwhelming OT/PT contract vote at the whim of emails from those upset with the vote — canceling the original vote.

These same technocrats have failed to properly seat the 2nd vice chair of the para committee with the same privileges and compensation as her predecessors after she won the last election. Why even have elections if the non-Unity winners cannot exercise their mandates from the union electorate?

Serious questions to legitimacy

Where is the deliberative vote within this chapter to make a major change to their election rules, Mr. LeRoy Barr and Mr. Mulgrew?

Their bylaws exist.

Where was this major change brought to the UFT Executive Board or the Delegate Assembly for a vote?

In what universe do we continue to allow them to make ad-hoc, draconian decisions for this union and its democratic processes?

There was a time that at the very least a performative vote would be conducted, in a hall filled with patronage and sworn caucus oath keepers.

There are no general by-laws for elections, or for most any other bodies, in this union for ONE reason only: to maintain Unity’s hegemony.

Unity exists for one reason: self-preservation.

This is anti-union.

Unity leadership: Where democracy goes to die.

Dear President Biden,

My name is Marianne Pizzitola. I am a retired member of the FDNY EMS and participant in the 9/11 World Trade Center Health Program. For the last few years, I have been president of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees that we organized when New York City’s Municipal Labor Committee and then Mayor Bill de Blasio decided to force 250,000 retired civil servants off of our traditional Medicare and onto a predatory for-profit Medicare Advantage Plan. 

I really appreciated your State of the Union address the other night. As retired civil servants, who share your lifelong commitment to public service, we know how disempowering it can be when your age is used against you to marginalize you from consequential conversations. Perhaps saddest of all, is that while we have had success so far in holding onto our precious Medicare through the New York Court system, it’s been our own unions that we helped build that have become our fiercest opponents.

During your speech you referenced that thanks to the Affordable Care Act “over 100 million” Americans “can no longer be denied health insurance because of pre-existing conditions.” We wanted to alert you that even as your administration has been working to expand access to healthcare for Americans, the privatization of Medicare, through the increasing reliance on private sector Medicare Advantage plans, is causing seniors to have their access to healthcare greatly restricted by way of prior authorizations and outright denials. Seniors can also be denied Medicare Supplemental coverage due to pre-existing conditions or age. Many of us are getting forced off Traditional Medicare and into these plans even though our doctors and hospitals do not accept them.

In 2022, the New York Times and Kaiser Health News published in-depth investigative pieces which raised serious questions about the nation’s largest Medicare Advantage insurers including Aetna, the latest MAP provider the City of New York is attempting to force us into. The news outlets confirmed that the insurers were on the radar of regulators who had documented a sector-wide practice of so-called “upcoding” when insurers would say patients were sicker than they were to secure a higher reimbursement from the government, while using prior authorizations as well as outright denials of care to reduce their costs and increase their profits.

Last July, our group filled two Amtrak rail cars and headed down to Washington, D.C. to participate in a Capitol Hill rally to “Save Medicare” that was organized by Be a Hero, the universal healthcare advocacy group started by the late Ady Barkan where we met several hundred activists and members of Congress who shared our concerns about the privatization of Medicare.

At the rally we met Meagan Bent, whose father Gary Bent, was a retired University of Connecticut physics professor of 23 years. He also had been an Ordnance Corps Officer in the US Army for 12 years serving several research centers, as well as the U.S. Military Academy at West Point. He died last March after his Medicare Advantage insurer, using an algorithm and artificial intelligence, denied him access to skilled nursing and acute therapy that had been prescribed by his neurosurgeon. 

Bent was 82.

“Our family continues to struggle with the question: Why are people who are only looking at patients on paper or through the lens of an algorithm making decisions that deny services judged necessary by people’s healthcare providers?” Meagan Bent told us. “People that have interacted with them [the patients] personally and, sometimes, have known them for years.”  

“This year, for the first time more than half of all beneficiaries are enrolled in Medicare Advantage instead of traditional Medicare,” Sen. Warren told us. “Medicare Advantage substitutes private insurance companies for traditional Medicare and that private coverage is failing with Medicare beneficiaries and taxpayers. It’s all about the money. Private insurers are in Medicare Advantage to play games to extract more money from the government. Experts estimate the Medicare Advantage insurers will receive more than $75 billion in over payments this year alone.”

Last month, U.S. Representatives Pramila Jayapal (WA-07), Rosa DeLauro (CT-03), and Jan Schakowsky (IL-09), along with 60 other lawmakers, called on the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to enact urgent reforms to Medicare Advantage (MA) plans writing that MA plans were “fraught with waste, fraud, and abuse, often sacrificing patient outcomes for higher corporate profit.”

“Corporate health insurers offering MA plans are harming vulnerable patients across the country and endangering the solvency of the Medicare Trust Funds,” the concerned House members wrote. “Supporters of MA claim the program reduces costs. Unfortunately, the MA program has never saved the government money. Other recent data has shown that the bottom 5 percent of MA plans are responsible for 10,000 preventable deaths every year.”

The House members note that CMS pays 6 percent more per enrollee than it would for traditional Medicare coverage, wasting billions of dollars every year.

We are hearing from retirees across the country that despite these higher costs, insurers administering MA plans provide consistently worse coverage. Representatives Jayapal, DeLauro, and Schakowsky cited research that “recently found that patients covered by privatized MA programs are significantly more likely to die in the month following surgery for stomach, pancreatic, or liver cancer compared to those in Traditional Medicare.

I was encouraged by your reference during the State of the Union to the longstanding gender gap that exists when it comes to medical research and that your wife Jill was “launching the first-ever White House Initiative on Women’s Health Research” in recognition of this longstanding inequity. We'd like to meet with her.

Those of us women who are in the 9/11 WTC first responder community know all too well about the consequences of medical research that skews to the male cohort. Under the ground rules of the 9/11 World Trade Center Health Program, individuals who document they were first responders are entitled to free lifetime annual screening for dozens of WTC-linked cancers. Civilian survivors, which includes many of our members who worked in lower Manhattan at their municipal agency offices but were not first responders, have to display symptoms first before they can apply to participate in the 9/11 WTC Health Program. 

Currently, close to 72,000 of the first responders in the 9/11 WTC Health Program are males and just 10,200 first responders participants are women. By contrast, the 9/11 WTC survivor cohort includes 22,000 men and 18,700 women. Because of the preference given to testing first responders, who were overwhelmingly men, the prevalence of female reproductive cancers in the female cohort was missed for many years. In fact, it was only just last year that the World Trade Center Health Program finally added uterine cancer, including endometrial cancer, to the List of WTC-Related Health Conditions.

“With the publication of this rule, a critical gap in coverage for women in the Program has been eliminated,” wrote WTC Health Program Administrator John Howard, M.D on the occasion of the announcement. “All types of cancer, if determined to be related to 9/11 exposures, are now covered by the World Trade Center Health Program, providing women equal access to the treatment they deserve.”

A considerable number of the members of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees are public employees who were ordered back to their desks in lower Manhattan and western Brooklyn in the immediate aftermath of the 9/11 attack based on the representations by the City of New York and the U.S. EPA that the “air was safe to breathe.”

There was no Zoom back then. Today, many of our members, both first responders and civilian survivors are dealing with chronic illnesses directly related to their post-9/11 WTC occupational exposure to the toxic air and can’t afford being left to the documented precarity of Medicare Advantage.

Seventy-two hours after the 9/11 attack, Whitman, told reporters that "the good news continues to be that air samples we have taken have all been at levels that cause us no concern." Two years later, an investigation by the EPA Inspector General found that the agency "did not have sufficient data and analyses to make such a blanket statement" when it did.

"Air-monitoring data was lacking for several pollutants of concern," the Inspector General found. The report stated that President George W. Bush's White House Council on Environmental Quality heavily edited the EPA press releases "to add reassuring statements and delete cautionary ones." The IG also found that the Council described the readings as just "slightly above" the limit, despite the fact that samples taken indicated asbestos levels in lower Manhattan were double or even triple the EPA's own limit.

One of  our most active members, I am proud to say, is Evelyn Jones Rich, who retired from the City University of New York 30 years ago, and at 90 years-old is an active member of the Professional Staff Congress and the executive director of the New York City chapter of the Americans for Democratic Action. Evelyn was one of the original Freedom Riders, who along with Rep. John Lewis, were on the front lines of the civil rights struggle.

She's an inspiration to us all.

In the 1950s, after President Eisenhower signed an executive order integrating places of public accommodation in the nation’s capital, Evelyn and her fellow activists picketed D.C. restaurants, theaters, and anyplace else that was resisting. “I am in the winter of my life, but I am going out with my boots on,” she told me.

The federal government’s role in our life-altering exposure is well documented and we would appeal to you to help us in our quest to hold onto the Medicare benefits we worked for our entire career serving the public. 

What’s left of our lives depends on it.

Marianne Pizzitola is the president of the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, leading the court fight against the city’s plan to force retirees into Medicare Advantage

Editor’s Note: Some time ago, we compiled the following document with compilation of links, as a dossier of sorts, to show that the Democratic Party, since the Biden-Harris 2020 campaign, along with the American Federation of Teachers and AFL-CIO, has shifted in policy to openly supporting the privatization of Medicare and seeking a nationalized healthcare system that includes privatized, subsidized Medicare.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1TmGybt3FwmrVOAxRaL-gd5AD0H-lRs3tV9JjtciTuHU/

The plea by Marianne to Biden is very much needed. Yet, will it fall on deaf ears among those complicit in this shift in policy within the Democratic Party and major unions? We see the Trump administration also followed this path towards privatization, as well.

Retiree Advocate/UFT is running against Unity caucus in the Retired Teachers Chapter elections this May. In the coming campaign you will hear Tom Murphy and Michael Mulgrew tell you that Retiree Advocate/UFT is somehow anathema to Union. You will hear that we are working with forces that would destroy unions. That is not merely speculation on my part. We've already been hearing it from both of them at RTC meetings, Delegate Assemblies, Executive Board meetings, and virtual town halls.

Of course, nothing could be farther from the truth. We are the union. We are the grassroots, rank-and-file members who make the UFT strong, and we know how to do something that the Unity caucus has stopped doing a long time ago: We know how to fight, and we know how to organize.

Retiree Advocate/UFT is working with grass-roots union retiree groups from across the city: police, fire, DC-37, plumbers, carpenters, CUNY professors, electricians, nurses, and city administrators. These are our union brothers and sisters. These are members of Marianne Pizzitola's NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, whose lawsuits have stopped the city from dumping us into Medicare Advantage. These are activists from groups like the Cross-union Retirees Organizing Committee, that have organized rallies, demonstrations, and political actions in collaboration with Retiree Advocate/UFT. That's Union.

Yet, you will hear Tom Murphy and Michael Mulgrew disparage us by saying that we're engaging in politics, as if politics isn't serious, as if politics is a bad word.

Have you been to an RTC meeting lately? If you have, you've seen Murphy and Mulgrew roll their eyes at our healthcare questions. You've heard them accuse us of making speeches. They call us the crazies. They avoid our questions as often as they can, and they condescend to us when they can't. They fill our chapter meetings with mind-numbing fluff, with slide show after slide show, and with endless homages to themselves. RTC meetings have turned into one big insurance company infomercial. They infantilize us. They treat us like we're taking our last breaths and that political debate will kill us.

But wait a minute: We are very much alive, very capable of debate, and we are engaging in politics. We are proudly engaging in politics. We are engaging in politics just like Michael Mulgrew does every time he opens his mouth. We are engaging in straight up union politics, as is our right and is our imperative. We are retirees and we no longer have a contract with the city, but we do have a social contract with our union leaders - a contract to keep their promises and protect our health benefits. Michael Mulgrew and Tom Murphy are not honoring that contract, and if challenging them on that is called "politics" well yeah, it's politics.

We spent our careers in the union and we pay union dues, even in retirement. We lobby for the union, we canvass for the union, and we love the union. We raised union families and we taught our children union values. We kept the union functioning in good times and in bad, and now more than ever we need a union that is responsive to us. We need a union that keeps its promises to us. Michael Mulgrew is supposed to work for us, not us for him. Tom Murphy is supposed to represent us, not the insurance companies.

And unlike the patronage professionals of the Unity caucus, we spent our entire careers in the overcrowded classrooms, the cramped therapists' closets, the ill-equipped nurses’ stations, and the public-facing secretarial desks of the NYC public schools. We did the beautiful, messy, down in the trenches, glorious, real work of teaching the children of this city. We didn't merely talk the talk; we walked the walk. We didn't bolt the classroom for a gig at a UFT office. We are not of the privileged class of patronage employees who swore a loyalty oath - not to Union, but to a faction - so they could be whisked from their classrooms and transported to the childless offices at 52 Broadway.

We did the work. It is the Unity leadership who are detached from the life of the union. It is they who are convinced of their own righteous infallibility. It is the patronage professionals of the UFT Building who have lost their way. Unity fights for Unity jobs and patronage perks. We fight for our healthcare and our lives. The Unity caucus is out of touch with union values, union democracy, and union reality. And it is the Unity caucus that will find itself on the short end of the ballot box in the Retired Teachers Chapter election this spring.

Learn more about Retiree Advocate

Bennett Fischer is the Retiree Advocate/UFT candidate for RTC Chapter Leader

Every three years, each individual school elects its chapter leader, delegate(s), paraprofessional representative. Functional chapters and retirees also elect their representatives around the same time.

All UFT members have a right to run for office, nominate other members and vote for candidates. Union representatives will be responsible for supporting and informing members; communicating members’ views, priorities and ideas to the union; and representing members at the Delegate Assembly, the union’s highest decision-making body.

While, to my knowledge, our union leadership hasn’t yet announced the dates for these elections, typically they share election details and processes by April.

To this end, New Action/UFT’s experienced network of chapter leaders, delegates and organizers wants to partner with you to mobilize for your school chapter’s election.

New Action is a community of union proud and union strong UFT members.

Join us in the fight for a better, mighty union. Together.

Connect with us. To learn more, go to: abetterunion.newaction.org

Connect with NAC

Also check us out on …

Facebook: facebook.com/newactionuft

X/Twitter: x.com/newactionuft

Instagram: instagram.com/newactionuft

WhatsApp: tinyurl.com/nacwhatsapp

A note from Nick: At the chapter level, no matter how good the contract is on paper, our contractual rights are only real if we enforce them. At the citywide level, our union policy is only strong if the delegates of our many chapters compel UFT leadership to make it so.

Good chapter leaders, who take the time to learn the contract and are willing to go to bat for any and all of their members, are critical to making sure our rights are enforced, serving what are essentially the union forms of both judicial and executive functions. In addition, chapter leaders and UFT delegates both serve a legislative function - to set union policy, at least in the few fleeting moments when UFT leadership allows an earnest debate and vote. To that end, we need delegates who come ready to introduce or debate resolutions that matter, even when that means standing up to UFT leadership.

If you want to represent your chapter, either at the school level or at the citywide level, talk to us at NAC. We have decades worth of experience to offer.

A group of retired teachers chose to take back their retiree chapter! Let's support them. If you are available to support them in a kick-off event, tomorrow, in front of UFT HQ, join them for a day of celebration to launch their campaign!

Retiree Advocate/UFT, a caucus of retirees within the United Federation of Teachers, will open its campaign to win control of the 70,000+ member UFT Retired Teachers Chapter in the spring chapter elections.

Candidates will be introduced at the press event and will greet the public immediately following, at the White Horse Tavern, 25 Bridge Street, New York, NY.

Retiree Advocate/UFT (RA) is fighting to preserve the Medicare benefits that UFT President Michael Mulgrew, the Municipal Labor Committee, and the NYC Office of Labor Relations are trying to take away from NYC municipal retirees.

What: Retiree Advocate/UFT Campaign kick-off event

When: Friday, February 16, 1pm

Where: 52 Broadway, New York, NY - in front of the UFT

Editor’s note: Clearly, this election for the retiree chapter is a referendum on President Michael Mulgrew. The embattled Mulgrew is the self-proclaimed architect of the unpopular, highly litigated, privatized Medicare Advantage Plan that he, along with the City and MLC, seek to force on all city retirees.

Many UFT members are frustrated with Mulgrew’s handling of the depletion of our benefits, like healthcare and pensions, by acting unilaterally and his stifling of union democracy.

The Retiree Advocate slate of officers and 300 delegates will receive cross-caucus and independent members’ support and endorsements.

The New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees, a labor organization with over 20k retired municipal workers, including retired educators, and led by Marianne Pizzitola, has also signaled support for the Retiree Advocate/UFT member-driven campaign to take back their union.

Visit the RA Facebook page to learn more.

Visit RA Facebook page

The majority of UFT members working today will retire with a ‘Tier 6’ pension. Most of us know that Tier 6 is objectively worse than the pensions of members who joined the UFT before us. But New Action / UFT has run the numbers and it’s much worse than we realized. In this presentation, we lay out in detail the millions of dollars that Tier 6 members stand to lose financially because of our ‘join date.’ And while our current union leadership talks of minor ‘tweaks,’ we lay out some ways we might work together to truly get the pension truly fixed.

All UFT members are welcome.

Join NAC-UFT, Thursday, February 1 at 5:30 PM for an informative webinar about the state and future of our Tier 6 pensions. Learn what our union leadership is NOT telling us. We will make a call for action regarding Tier 6. We need it FIXED — SOONER THAN LATER!

RSVP, right now. Space is limited. Go to: register.newaction.org

RSVP: Tier 6 Webinar - New Action UFT

The majority of UFT members working today will retire with a ‘Tier 6’ pension. Most of us know that Tier 6 is objectively worse than the pensions of members who joined the UFT before us. But New Action / UFT has run the numbers and it’s much worse than we realized. In this presentation, we lay out in detail the millions of dollars that Tier 6 members stand to lose financially because of our ‘join date.’ And while our current union leadership talks of minor ‘tweaks,’ we lay out some ways we might work together to truly get the pension truly fixed.

Join New Action-UFT, on Thursday, February 1 at 5:30 PM for an informative webinar about the state and future of our Tier 6 pensions. Learn what our union leadership is NOT telling us. Join us in a call for action regarding Tier 6. We need it FIXED — SOONER THAN LATER!

RSVP, right now. Space is limited. Go to: register.newaction.org

RSVP: Tier 6 Webinar - New Action UFT

Most UFT members are aware that major changes are coming to our healthcare. The MLC and Michael Mulgrew requested proposals from insurance companies that would cost the City less money. Essentially, healthcare cuts for all City workers.

The reason Mulgrew and the MLC are looking to save the City money is the calamitous 2014/18 UFT/MLC agreements in which they guaranteed the City endless billions in healthcare savings in exchange for mediocre raises. Mulgrew has never explained this decision, and membership deserves a full explanation. We can only guess that Mulgrew felt extreme pressure to deliver raises after failing to come to terms with the Bloomberg administration for years. Reasoning aside, we owe the City money because of Mulgrew, and after failing to force retirees into Medicare Advantage Plans, Mulgrew left us in the position of being on the hook for it.

We know that EmblemHealth (partnered with United Healthcare) and Aetna are the two front-runners for our new plans.  What will our new healthcare plans look like?

Here are 6 predictions: 

1. Good news up front, I predict our healthcare will remain premium free. This is not because Michael Mulgrew and the MLC love us or have a solicitous relationship towards us. Simply put, the political calculus disfavors premiums. Being the UFT president who lost premium free healthcare would be a mark of disgrace on Mulgrew’s legacy and would put in danger the Unity caucus’s stranglehold on the UFT. Mulgrew and the MLC will work to find more camouflaged ways to save the City money and will tout the premium free nature of their new plan despite it being a diminution of our healthcare and compensation. This is after Mulgrew used premiums as a scare tactic. In November 2022, Mulgrew and the Unity caucus leadership drummed up fear that if their plan to foist Medicare Advantage Plans onto retirees was unrealized, premiums would be necessary for in-service members. Either Michael Mulgrew has figured out how to avoid this (unlikely) or this was him misleading and manipulating his constituents. Currently, the retirees’ plan to fight their former union has worked, and the Advantage Plans have been enjoined by a judge. Those promised savings haven’t been realized, and Mike is in big trouble.  

2. The Plan will remain a PPO, in name only. Political calculus will again force Mulgrew and the MLC’s decision. They would be happy to force us all into a traditional HMO like they have done to new members, but fully understand this would be poisonous to their future electoral prospects and unacceptable to their constituents. To solve this, they will create a new PPO that will operate similarly to an HMO. 

   An HMO or Health Management Organization, like HIP, requires participants to see in-network doctors exclusively, except in emergencies. HMOs are far more restrictive and often require prior authorizations before procedures and referrals before seeing specialists. A Preferred Provider Organization or PPO, like our current plan GHI-CBP, allows participants to see in-network healthcare providers or receive reimbursement for some of the cost of out-of-network providers. They do not require prior authorizations or referrals to see specialists. PPOs generally give participants more freedom, but cost more. 

   3. We will need a Primary Care Physician or PCP to make referrals in order to see a specialist or pay for a larger fee. Any added layer of complexity or hardship in receiving healthcare saves the City money. Participants are less likely to see a specialist if they must first see their Primary Care Physicians or pay a fee to skip their PCP. Therefore, members will be more likely to be treated by less expensive non-specialists. You have allergies, a skin condition, stomach issues, etc., you can no longer go directly to your specialists of choice without getting a referral or paying more. The choice will be to pay with your hard-earned money or pay with your time, but you will pay a price. 

   4. The plan will feature added prior authorizations. Prior authorization saves the healthcare companies money by allowing them to decide how medically necessary a procedure or medicine is. If they deem it unnecessary, they can deny coverage. You and your doctor no longer get to make decisions about what treatments are appropriate or necessary for you, now the insurance company gets to decide. This also comes with the added responsibility of gaining prior authorization on your own if your doctor is not in-network, which is a hardship few members will wish to deal with. 

   5. The plan will feature prohibitive out-of-network costs and bureaucratic hardships to force us to use in-network providers. While the plan will technically allow you to see out-of-network providers, making it a PPO and not an HMO, it will be expensive and difficult in practice to see out-of-network providers. This will essentially force the vast majority of us to use only participating providers. If the cost doesn’t force us to use their preferred providers, having to secure prior authorization and submit onerous paperwork for ourselves will.  

   6. We will see increased co-pays. Mulgrew and the MLC fear premiums. It would be unprecedented for there to be no premium free option for New York City public employees. Co-pays can accomplish the same thing while allowing them to brag about maintaining premium free healthcare. Tiered co-pays, which Mulgrew and the MLC have already used to help shape our decision around which urgent cares we use, could help them do the same for more medical providers and hospitals. Co-pays will eat into our recent sub-inflationary raises, and Mulgrew and the MLC will shape your choices in medical treatment by hitting you in the wallet for choosing providers they didn’t select for you. 

Let’s review Michael Mulgrew, Unity caucus, and the MLC’s record on healthcare. Previously, healthcare was one of the primary reasons people joined public service. Currently, our healthcare is mediocre at best, with GHI-CBP freezing their pay rates for doctors for years and adequate mental health care services nearly impossible to acquire. I have personally lost doctors as a result of this, and I know many members who have as well. Our welfare fund is also greatly diminished, and it has become difficult to find dentists that will accept these paltry rates. Mulgrew blames rising healthcare costs, which are admittedly out of control, but then agreed in the 2014/18 agreements to find the City 600 million dollars in savings every year in perpetuity. Costs are rising, as are our debts as a direct result of Mulgrew and company. We elected Mulgrew and Unity to make decisions about our union, not our health.

We deserve full transparency and a vote on any changes to our healthcare. Our lives could be at stake. 

The author of this article is an anonymous in-service New Action-UFT caucus member.

Sign the Healthcare Referendum Petition

I'm still reeling from Tuesday's retiree chapter meeting and then I get deja vu all over again while watching Morning Joe, with former Dem Senator Claire Caskill bragging about the record amounts of drilling Biden is doing. That's a sure way to capture the votes of the young people who see climate change as an existential threat.

It's surreal to watch how they talk about all the great Biden stuff but can't understand why the polls are so low, especially within his own coalition -- They admit that Biden hasn't laid out a second term agenda -- only talks about what has been done while ignoring what hasn't been done. A guest says people have to have a real sense that a second Biden term will make a difference in their lives. It's not enough not to be Trump. But no worries. They think people will come to their senses, especially after Tom Murphy rouses the masses in the UFT retiree chapter meeting. So, watching Morning Joe this morning is like a nightmare repeat of Tuesday's RTC meeting where I was more convinced than ever that Trump will be our next president.

December 21 - last day of fall/first day of winter -- brrr.

Tuesday started off peaceful enough. The day began with a gym, swim and sauna. Done by 8:30 AM. Downloaded the flyer for Retiree Advocate to hand out at the RTC Dec. meeting later that day. Dropped by the FedEx on Lexington and 40th St and the ladies there were so helpful in sending the pdf to the copier. Then off to oatmeal and coffee at the Pret at Park and 40th, followed by the library on 40th and 5th and then off to check out the Bryant Park holiday fair and the ice skating - watching, not skating. Then off to Grand Central to head downtown.

So I was pretty mellow when I got to 52 Broadway to meet with the Retiree Advocate crew with leaflets and sign up sheets for RA. We got a pretty good response to our leaflet - a lot of people seemed to know us and wanted a copy. One guy referred to the last meeting where we saw a presentation on seniors avoiding fraud when "the biggest frauds of all were sitting up there running this union and RTC." 

And once again the frauds were in action.

So.....I spent an angry hour and a half at Tuesday's Retiree Chapter meeting. I wasn't the only one pissed. Arthur wrote about the meeting from a remote point of view. (When Is the Best Time to Dump UFT Unity?) 

Here's a sense of the meeting from Arthur:

...when someone actually has a question, Murphy interrupts her relentlessly. That’s off topic. That’s not a question. Murphy sarcastically calls her “nice.” The woman wants to know what AFT’s position is on Medicare. The woman says if the whole city gets off of it, the program may be in danger. Murphy snidely says, “Thank you,” over and over again, until some Unity hack finally grabs the mike from her. 

Lucky for Arthur he wasn't in the room where there was a lot of rage from both sides -- Unity hacks upset at how dare anyone challenge them. And he missed out on those stale bagels in cellophane wrappers. At the top of my platform for the RTC election would be promising to bring back real bagels and real pastries - strudel for sure. Maybe lox. Arthur also missed some awful xmas cookies. But you know me - I ate the bagel and the cookies.

I usually don't get too excited at the shenanigans by the gang running the UFT/Unity Caucus syndicate and its retiree chapter subsidiary, but I had to listen to stuff that set me off. At one point Tom Murphy made a mistake and actually pointed to me for a question but when he recognized it was me he looked horrified and said "NO" and pointed in the other direction. He should make better use of the UFT welfare eyeglass fund. 

The meeting, as usual, got off to a rousing start with moments of silence for death notices. (I wanted a moment for the death of our healthcare). RTC leadership loves death notices - which may explain why they want us off Medicare and in a MedAdv managed care program, a sure way to increase death notices. 

I can't wait for Murphy to filibuster an entire RTC meeting dedicated to moments of silence, though a recent meeting dedicated to the death of George Altomare where he comes back to life to sing Solidarity Forever - and he means Forever - repeatedly because Murphy couldn't hear it well enough, qualifies. Murphy should make better use of the UFT Welfare hearing-aid fund.

I was sorry to hear of the death of Bernie Zemsky, longtime Unity Caucus member, who soured on the leadership and communicated his feelings to people in the opposition. I was told he was fired by the union and sued them and there was a settlement but he had to sign an NDA. I had planned to get in touch with him to ask him to run with RA in the chapter election. He probably would have.

Ooops. I gave Bernie away. Look for Unity to rescind the moment of silence at the next meeting. 

When I'm gone I want one minute of people screaming at the leadership "U Suck!"

"Why aren't we talking about retiree issues," someone calls out a few minutes into the meeting. The meeting reinforced the inept AFT/UFT gang as part and parcel of the inept Democratic Party leadership which is a major reason the Trump phenomena exists. And yes, we retirees get the danger Trump presents. Don't waste our time beating our heads over it and take care of our healthcare. We don't need to go to a meeting to tell us how bad Trump is and how good Biden is. Trump is strong because the Dem Party is so inept. And it's not only about perceptions but policy.

Using UFT Retirees a political force while ignoring their health needs

This meeting was about the role for retirees for political action. Randi's NYT Sunday ad warning about the Trump danger to democracy was referenced. How ironic to talk about democracy at an undemocratic UFT meeting. 

• Has Mulgrew been a threat to democracy?

Using the Trump threat as a way to distract people from the healthcare issue is not a surprise. The Trump threat is real but so is the healthcare threat the UFT foisted on the retirees. 

What will kill us first? Trump or Aetna? 

The idea that getting the UFT retirees wired up about the Trump threat in the face of the assault on our healthcare by our own union is what made this meeting surreal.

The major theme in the opening presentation by John Ost, AFT Director of Political Mobilization was all about how Trump is a danger to democracy and is leading Biden in all areas. DUHHHH! He was interrupted constantly by Mulgrew riding in a car trying to talk but all we heard and saw was static -- which is how I always view Mulgrew talking. 

Arthur's report:

Murphy says we’ll bring on a speaker from AFT, but we’ll interrupt him whenever Mulgrew sees fit to show up. As soon as the guy starts to speak, he’s interrupted by Mulgrew, evidently in a car, and no one in the room can hear him. After we waste time on that, Mulgrew says he’ll drop in on the meeting later.

Back to Ost. But of course it's not the fault of Biden or the inept Democrats, which includes our UFT leadership from the top national down to the locals they control. UFT/AFT is inbred with the right/central Dem Party -- which is controlled by the corporate wing. They will sit by while the Israeli lobby wipes out the progressives. 

John Ost posted charts - he charted us to death about how much of a danger Trump was and how bad Biden was doing in the polls. I kept calling out WHY? But they are not interested in WHY and when you don't want to know WHY, you will never have an answer. The WHY is that the corporate Dem agenda sucks and alienates the progressives and opens up Biden to weakness on both flanks. 

And they don't get why young people are deserting Biden in droves? Student debt - inept. Climate change - inept. Healthcare improvement: inept. Note: Biden ran on extending Medicare. Don't just blame Republicans. Biden never mentions it.

So they talked about Biden bringing down drug prices and medicare negotiating for lower drug prices. But always watch what they don't say: the delay until 2025, that it's only a few drugs, etc. A Unity former VP made a point that Medicare and Social Security would be in more danger if Trump won? I slapped my head -- The UFT leadership has been a threat to Medicare so far, not Trump, who is one of the few Republicans who chastise them for talking about cutting Medicare -- one of his few redeeming points - even if he's probably lying.

You see the problem is that the wonderful work Biden has done is just not getting through. Like people who can't pay rent or buy a house should bow down.

In the first minute of the presentation I was more convinced Trump may win than ever because these people are so clueless. They are hoping to beat Trump by getting states to not put him on the ballot or the courts to convict him. Why so many people are either supporting Trump and rejecting Biden? Not interested.

And how about those Dems in states like Florida, Massachusetts and Tennessee manipulating or cancelling primaries to protect Biden? Dems are not a threat to democracy? 

Biden's insistence of running may end up being the biggest threat to democracy, enabled by his enablers in support groups like the UFT.

We heard a long report from the UFT’s new political director, Venecia Wilson.  

Arthur reports:

She is charming as she relates a few personal anecdotes. I had expected her to answer the question, but she doesn’t. She then talks about Santos and says the GOP has picked a candidate for his seat, but we’re waiting to hear from the Democrats. Oddly, I heard yesterday the Democrats had picked Tom Suozzi, and a member later brings it up. (It’s a little disconcerting our political director seemed not to know this.)

I try to get a question in on Suozzi who is to the right of Hochul but Tom ignores me again. Joel Burger shows Newsday which announces Suozzi and leaves egg on their faces. Did they not know or were they hiding that this is the guy we are going to be asked to support? Not all good news on Suozzi either as he's blamed for running a dumb primary campaign against Hockul which helped Republicans in numerous ways -- maybe even the House loss is partly his fault with Santos replacing him.

Mulgrew walks in and he's in a good mood --- I'm glad he wasn't driving the car. He's handling the heckling with a hearty "Happy holidays". 

Back to Arthur.

Mulgrew shows up at 2:15. Says this chapter will work harder than any other chapter. Other people have to go into classroom. Evidently, he assumes we have nothing else to do. He criticizes corporations who want unfettered control. This strikes me as ironic. Mulgrew, despite professing that the Delegate Assembly is the union’s highest decision-making body, opposes the NY Health Act, twice endorsed by the DA. He himself has unfettered control.

Murphy, to his evident dread, has to allow questions. He says there are “lots of health question, or statements posing as questions,” in yet another barb at those of us who want to keep our insurance. Belittling us yet again, he snaps, “Here’s an apt question,” which turns out to be about Tier 6.

Murphy finally allows ONE question on health care to reach Mulgrew’s ears.

Sarah Shapiro—Why are you more concerned with the city’s health than our health? NYS Supreme court found Advantage would cause us irreparable harm. Isn’t that enough of a reason to preserve the coverage we have now?”

Mulgrew—We are at war with the health care industry. We can’t just say no, no, no. We see around the corner with what will happen in the future. We will make sure every member gets the best health care with the same benefits, I know the city’s appealing. Keep hearing the rhetoric and the same lines. Responds “Happy New Year and God bless” to people. I support your right to your opinions. I will give you facts and you have a right to agree or disagree. Moving on to next question.

Mulgrew did not answer the question. He implies we are contrary imbeciles, and suggests he has vision, but offers absolutely no supporting evidence. I’m glad he’s not in my class writing a persuasive essay. (He should be glad too.)

There are a few statements on health and welfare. Notable is this one:

Bennett Fisher—Retiree Advocate had very well attended general meeting. Discussed health care going forward. Discussed health care with UFT other unions, and NYC Retirees, Very happy most recent lawsuit went into our favor. If anybody has interest in learning more about RA, please come see us and sign up.

Murphy tried to interrupt, but Bennett got to complete his statement. There was another speaker, and then Murphy loudly cried, “Meeting Adjourned!” Clearly, there was nothing he wanted in life more than to end this meeting.

Bennett was speaking under Good and Welfare which is where anyone can get up to the mic and say something. Well, not everyone. I'm waving my hand and shouting Good and Welfare. "Meeting adjourned" says Murphy, 20 minutes before it was supposed to end.

More info on the Suozzi story:

NYT: Inside the Secret Meeting That Cleared the Way for Tom ..

Politico: Not everyone’s welcoming back Tom Suozzi

Anna Kaplan doesn’t like George Santos. And she isn’t so sure about Tom Suozzi either.

“After almost a year of this district having embarrassing representation, Tom Suozzi thinks voters on Long Island have forgotten that he abandoned us to George Santos,” Kaplan, who is running in the 3rd Congressional District as a Democrat, said in a statement. “The Democratic Party is a pro-choice party, and unlike Tom Suozzi, I will always stand up for a woman’s right to choose — period.”

That was just a preview of just some of the attacks that fellow Democrats will make against Suozzi after the longstanding, though divisive figure in New York politics launched his own campaign Tuesday to win back his old seat.

Suozzi “abandoned” the Long Island district last year, forgoing re-election to challenge Gov. Kathy Hochul in the Democratic primary from the right.

Team Hochul viewed Suozzi as a nuisance, at best. And she slammed him for initially supporting the Hyde amendment, which bans federal funds like Medicaid from being spent on abortion care.

Norm Scott is a longtime union organizer and activist. He is the author the Ed Notes blog.

At this week’s DA, Michael Mulgrew put forth a used car salesman pitch  presentation about why our healthcare is about to change. His speech itself is in my minutes, and the PowerPoint that displayed behind him can be found here. There wasn’t much new here, and my most recent article on healthcare changes, which has apparently been read over 15,000 times, is still as relevant post-presentation as it was pre. That’s the article I recommend if you’re looking for materials to distribute to your chapter (a printable version can be found at the end).

Nevertheless, a new article is needed to address a few of the claims made both in Mulgrew’s talking points and in the presentation that was playing behind him. In this post, I’ll work through some analysis of some of the major Unity claims:

1. False Claim #1: Healthcare changes are inevitable because of rising costs; the UFT could just ‘let the worst changes happen’ and blame the City, but instead is doing something ‘no union has ever done before’ and is working with the City to get UFT members the best case scenario. Mulgrew is correct that healthcare costs are going up, but he greatly diminishes his own responsibility in manufacturing this healthcare crisis. We are in debt to the City, because Mulgrew had the masterful idea to promise billions in healthcare givebacks in exchange for a few years’ worth of cost-of-living adjustments. He did so without our informed consent, using his usual tactic of giving no time for delegates to read or analyze agreements before forcing through a vote. Ironically, the debt is coming due now, when we’re on a new contract – one which did not get us raises anywhere close to inflation. An inflation adjusted pay cut means that these healthcare cuts are going to hurt even worse. While Mulgrew conveniently states that NYC is rare in having premium free healthcare, he conveniently compares us to non-unionized work forces or to workforces with similarly unmilitant unions. We just saw a plethora of unions on the west coast, such as UTLA, get double our raises with no reduction to their healthcare benefits. Their secret? They aren’t afraid to strike. In other words, if instead of working with the City to shrink our benefits we fought the City to prevent them from shrinking them themselves, we’d be far better off. As Mulgrew has said time and time again, Adams is misconstruing the financial situation of NYC – there’s plenty of money to be used on our healthcare; our union leadership just doesn’t have the guts to fight for it. Indeed, the ‘genius’ of the plan to work with the City to realize cuts was undercut by Mulgrew himself, when he admitted that the current administration is not working well with the MLC to change our healthcare – and only appears to be in it for the cost savings. Go figure. Maybe we should have fought them instead?

2. False Claim #2: We will only choose a health plan if it is as good or better than what we currently have. This is fundamentally impossible. What is conveniently omitted from Mulgrew’s presentation is that our Request for Proposals (RFP) is seeking 10% cost-reductions in our plans. Those cost reductions aren’t for us – indeed we may end up paying higher copays, premiums, or losing care in order to get that 10% reduction for the organizations seeking these cuts. And yes, one of those organizations is the City; as Mulgrew made clear yesterday, these cuts are not just to make more money available for the UFT welfare fund (prescriptions, eyeglasses, etc). The City is looking to make money as well. One of the ways we know for sure that we won’t be on a ‘better’ plan is that Mulgrew admits we may lose providers. For anyone who has ever had a major medical situation (a chronic condition or an upcoming surgery) and lost their specialist or surgeon; they know this can cause irreparable harm to UFT members.

3. False Claim #3: One place we are seeking improvements is mental health. Look, I don’t doubt that this is somehow on the agenda somewhere. But it’s unlikely to work. Why? Because Emblem, UnitedHealthcare, and Aetna – the finalist companies – all performed terribly on a recent mental health audit, indicating that 85% of providers listed are actually ‘ghost networks’ who don’t provide services to our members. Gee, we’re really going to fix this problem by going to Aetna (which failed the audit) or a 10% discount version of GHI (when Emblem also failed the audit).

4. False Claim #4: Our UFT Welfare Fund is the best in the country. Arthur Goldstein wrote a good piece debunking this, so I’ll leave you to his link. The only thing I’d add is Mulgrew likely made this point to justify why UFT is against merging welfare funds to save money. That’s right – we could get healthcare savings by just merging the welfare funds of different unions, but that would screw up Unity’s patronage mill.

5. False Claim #5: The New York Health Act isn’t the best solution to our healthcare woes. This wasn’t a claim Mulgrew made yesterday. Indeed, I think one reason he didn’t call on opposition was because he knew we might point out things like that the UFT has twice voted in support of the NYHA but Mulgrew refuses to follow that order. But, as many people have noticed, Mulgrew actually made the case that for-profit healthcare is the problem. NYHA would solve all these issues without us taking cuts to our healthcare, so why isn’t Mulgrew just doing as the DA ordered and fighting to get that legislation passed?

6. False Claim #6: The DA is the highest decision-making body in the UFT. As point 5 indicated, we can pass all the resolutions we want; Mulgrew will still find a way to get around them if he disagrees. Moreover, none of us are getting a vote on this – none of us. Mulgrew is going to cut our healthcare, alongside other members of the MLC, without giving any of us a vote.

That’s where our UFT healthcare petition comes in. We already have about 10,000 signatures but need about double that to get a referendum to force a vote before the UFT makes major healthcare changes. Do you think you should be consulted before you are thrown off GHI-CBP and onto Aetna or some 10% discount version of GHI-United? Then make sure you and everyone in your chapter signs this petition.

Nick Bacon is a member of the UFT’s Executive Board and a Co-Chair of New Action Caucus of the UFT. His writing can be read at https://newaction.org/

Download & Print Article

Healthcare Referendum Petition

Bacon: Ready to lose GHI-CPB?

She provides play by play commentary to Mulgrew’s answers to retirees at the meeting about the implementation of the City’s proposed Medicare Advantage (MA) that he helped design. She debunks his gaslighting myths about the elimination of choice while highlighting the attempts to institute copays within the existing health plan. She shares insight into the limited networks and other issues surrounding primary care visits, procedures and services within the proposed inferior MA plan, also.

Take the time to watch and listen.

Also, read Arthur Goldstein’s account of the meeting, here. He also provides context and analysis about Mulgrew’s whoppers at the RTC meeting.

Here is a taste. Goldstein writes:

Mulgrew later came out with another whopper. Upon being asked why UFT wasn’t opposing the city’s move to impose copays on GHI Senior Care, he said those copays were only temporary, a stopgap. Well, I’ve been using city health care since 1984, and I have never seen copays reduced. They just go up and up. (You will certainly think twice about visiting an urgent care when the copay is a hundred bucks.)

Mulgrew Takes Us As Fools

It was written by Claudia Irizarry Aponte of The City

Sign up here to get the latest stories from THE CITY delivered to you each morning.

After a raucous group of students at Hillcrest High School charged at a teacher who’d been spotted on social media holding a sign reading “I Stand With Israel,” Schools Chancellor David Banks visited the Queens campus to meet with students and counter reports about the motives of those who protested while waving Palestinian flags.

“This notion that these kids are radicalized and antisemitic is the height of irresponsibility,” Banks said. “I for one will not accept that at all.” 

“This is the ultimate teachable moment,” he added. Yet before the schools chancellor asked for understanding for students who’d demonstrated, Department of Education employees had received a very different message from their boss.

On Nov. 8, ahead of a planned citywide walkout by high school students to demand a ceasefire, Banks issued a memo that many teachers interpreted as barring them from exercising their right to free speech — even outside the classroom. City rules already bar teachers from expressing personal political views in class, but Banks went further, specifically citing guidelines for social media and other non-classroom expression that “crosses a line when it disrupts the school or work environment.” 

Teachers who spoke with THE CITY say they are not getting guidance on how to handle productive discussions with students, many of whom are personally impacted by the conflict or by anti-Palestinian, Islamophobic and antisemitic rhetoric.

“I understand how teachers saw that memo — they saw that memo as ‘Shut up, don’t talk about it,’” said a Sheepshead Bay high school civics teacher, who spoke to THE CITY on the condition of anonymity given the “heated climate” around the war. “Rather than follow up that memo with ‘Listen, I need you to check your politics at the door but we also need you to encourage kids to have discussions, here’s the framework, here’s the guidelines.”

The Hillcrest incident was an extreme but not isolated instance of the Israel-Hamas war playing out in a U.S. workplace where public service or interaction is part of the job — and workers feel they can’t remain silent.

Some labor unions outside New York City have joined the fray in support of Gazans and the Palestinian cause — and faced blowback. In Iowa federal court, Starbucks is suing Starbucks Workers United, the union representing baristas at hundreds of U.S. cafés, for trademark infringement over a pro-Palestine social media post published and then deleted by the union. 

In New York City, with a large Jewish population and strong support for Israel pervasive in local politics — aside from left-aligned groups like Democratic Socialists of America — unions are confronting a more challenging task of managing demands that they support a ceasefire in Gaza with concerns about maintaining tolerant and inclusive workplaces — all while supporting workers’ rights to express their own points of view on their own time. 

Union locals have caught flak from their own members about their official positions on the conflict. About two dozen United Federation of Teachers members walked out of a Nov. 15 delegates assembly after a push to pass a resolution calling for a ceasefire failed to come to a vote.

The union had already put out a resolution, just four days after the Oct. 7 Hamas attacks, calling to “end the cycle of violence” in Israel and Gaza.

Following the Hillcrest incident, UFT President Michael Mulgrew released a statement narrowly focused on the incident. “The UFT has been working with the individual teacher, school safety, the DOE and the NYPD,” he said. “The union will continue to send staff to the building and to work with the administration, DOE safety personnel, school safety, and the NYPD to restore and maintain a safe environment for faculty, students and staff.”

In response to the Banks memo and the Hillcrest conflict, union spokesperson Alison Gendar provided a broad statement of support of all their members to THE CITY: “The UFT protects members’ rights, whether that’s free speech or the right to feel safe and respected in the workplace. Each case is unique.” 

Suit to Stop Ceasefire Resolution

Some unions are having a harder time than others keeping the peace between factions of their own members. 

Earlier this month, public defenders working for the Legal Aid Society won a temporary restraining order to block their fellow union members from voting on a statement calling for a ceasefire. Meanwhile, union members who supported the ceasefire resolution claim management improperly intervened in protected union activity by publicly condemning the union’s internal actions.

“We, as union members, are appalled by management’s interference in union activities, and certain members’ anti-labor and anti-democratic actions, to stoke fear in voting members,” Dany Greene, a Legal Aid attorney and member of ALAA UAW Local 2325, said in a statement last week.

City government employees, including teachers, are bound to standards that bar them from expressing personal views or participating in direct action — even on personal time and on social media — that can disrupt their work environment. 

The issue last came to a head during the Black Lives Matter protests in the summer of 2020, where city workers walked off the job en masse to protest police brutality, the death of George Floyd, and the NYPD’s excessive use of force during demonstrations that summer. The hundreds of workers who participated in the protest had also criticized then-mayor Bill de Blasio’s controversial overnight curfew in a signed public letter.

The demonstrations that summer spawned City Workers 4 Justice, a group of New York municipal workers pushing for racial equity. But Jeremiah Cedeño, a former city worker and leader of the group, said that the current political climate eclipses even the divisions that summer — and that the city’s steep budget cuts have made workers even more fearful of speaking out.

“It’s the fear of losing their jobs, like, ‘If I post “let Gaza live” or “free Palestine,” am I going to lose my job?’” Cedeño said. “And given that this is the mayor who’s in the middle of his own scandal, and this is the mayor who’s passing harmful budgets, folks are like ‘I don’t want to be a casualty.’”

But the reality for teachers is that confronting the Israel-Hamas war while on the job may be unavoidable — and part of the solution for heading off polarizing attacks and bringing about understanding.

The city Department of Education took a small step last month by publishing a five-page reference guide for teachers that includes links to resources for educating against antisemitism and Islamophobia and background on the Israel-Hamas war. A copy obtained by THE CITY was most recently updated on Nov. 3, weeks before the Hillcrest incident.

Still, teachers say they crave more resources and action to address the Israel-Hamas conflict in their classrooms, whether by establishing working groups and workshops for teachers or creating a history curriculum. Media literacy, educators who spoke with THE CITY said, is also a huge barrier for students, who increasingly get their news from social media, especially TikTok.

“He said this is a ‘teachable moment,’” the Sheepshead Bay teacher said of Banks’ Hillcrest remarks. “We’re not being given the framework or resources and guidelines for how to approach the situation right now — like we were for Black Lives Matter, during the climate change walkouts” and on gun control, he added.

Some teachers dismissed Banks’ Nov. 8 memo, saying that it merely reiterated established rules.

“Unless you’re saying something that’s hate-filled, I think most of us understand that we have First Amendment rights,” said Daniel Alicea, a UFT activist and public school teacher in Queens.

https://www.thecity.nyc/2023/11/30/israel-gaza-activism-labor-unions-struggle/

THE CITY is a nonprofit newsroom that serves the people of New York.

This story was originally published by THE CITY. Sign up to get the latest New York City news delivered to you each morning.

Editor’s note: Articles published by THE CITY for free under the Creative Commons “BY-NC-ND” license.