Retiree Advocate Town Hall: The ARISE Campaign
I am excited to be working on a UFT election campaign through Retiree Advocate.
Our first event is a Town Hall this Sunday at 7:30. Please register if you are available. Hope to see you there
Attend the Retiree Advocate Town Hall on Sunday, January 12 at 7:30PM . Register Here: https://shorturl.at/96KuP or use the QR code in the flyer, below.
Like
Comment
Share
A Math Question: the Crazed Carpenter
Yesterday I heard that a current union activist teacher, math teacher, was influenced to become a math teacher, in part, from reading this blog. Wow, even if that’s just a little true… Pretty cool. And then I was thinking I should write about math again. And today I was doing a problem with a friend on a car ride, and it was too hard, so we did this one again. So why not share it? Here goes:
A crazed carpenter perfectly attaches legs to the edge of the seat of a stool, except he pays no attention to where around the seat each leg goes. They could end up perfectly separated by 120º (and it stands), or they could be clustered together (and the stool would not stand). Any arrangement is possible. What is the probability that a 3-legged stool created by this crazed carpenter will stand?
and the legs attach to the edge of the seat
Credit to Bertie Taylor of the old Compuserve Science/Math Forum (or SIG?). Bertie called it the “Mad Carpenter” problem because in his dialect “mad” meant “crazy.” Alas, when I google Bertie I get nothing, and when I google “Mad Carpenter” I get a lovely bed and breakfast that offers no math problems whatsoever.
Resolutions – Out with the Old?
Last year I tried a creative list of resolutions. Traditional resolutions are aspirational – be a better person, eat less – and are set ups for “fail once, give up” – so I avoided them. Instead, I made doable resolutions. Here’s how I put it:
And then I made 10 resolutions. I kept some:
It would be easy to resolve to read more, travel more, eat less and better, start a math book club, hike more, lose weight, blog more, make more “State of the Union” episodes, and visit more cool things in New York. But as well-meaning as each of those resolutions are, I don’t think making them is meaningful, not when we know in advance that good intentions might not play out. Resolve not to be late anymore? Well, I would like that, but I know this is very difficult for me. It’s not just about trying harder.
I kept 6 of the 10.
- Have a good birthday! I needed one resolution that felt like a resolution. And three score is a lot. I should have a day or two to smile about it!
- Do not download games to my phone. I deleted all of them, one at a time, last summer and fall. I miss them – but like withdrawal – not like nostalgia. My screen time dropped immediately. Stay the course. Solid resolution.
- Visit all the NYC zoos. And the Aquarium.
- Track my vitals. Won’t promise to lose weight or get more fit. But I resolve to pay attention.
- Keep flowers in my apartment. I may grow some. I may buy some. I may buy plants that flower periodically. But this is easy, and flowers make me happy.
- Log my books. I won’t resolve to read more – see above – but I am recording my reading, whether a whole book or part of a chapter, in my “Book Book” – a black and white cover bound composition book.
It was a great birthday – friends at a bar – and a cold weather walk with friends in Van Cortlandt Park. The no games on the phone gets easier over time – that really was a bad habit. I got to all the zoos – including Prospect Park just 2 weeks ago. (Bronx is the best!) Getting the IDNYC free membership helped. Tracking my vitals was easy – I just do it. And logging the books was easier than it should have been – how can I read so little? I’ll say more, below.
I partially kept 3 of the 10
- Log my hikes. I won’t resolve to hike more (even though I mean to). I will resolve to record them though, in my “Hike Book” – a black and white cover bound composition book.
- Say yes to more social invites. I was out last weekend – at the sort of thing I usually miss – and it felt good.
- Reread my advice to myself. I think kids asked for advice for a yearbook quote. And this is what I came up with, here: “Speak the truth. Work for Change. It’s not about you.”
So I came closest on the hikes. I logged everything out of the city. But I confess to skipping some Van Cortlandt Park hikes, and walks in the NY Botanical Gardens and Central Park. Just not sure they should qualify when so much is on concrete paths. Except no excuse for skipping logging Van Cortlandt – I don’t think it happened often. Number 2, I definitely missed a few invites for no good reason – and accepted a few. I need to shift that balance. And “Speak the Truth; Work for Change” – well, yes, but no, it’s never good enough. Always keep working on this.
I failed on 1 of the 10
- Ride as many of the NYC ferry lines as I can. Even Rockaway.
I did not ride a single ferry this year, except back and forth once to Staten Island.
And this year? I am not going to make a resolution of something where I’ve already succeeded (flowers, zoos, vitals) I am going to repeat a few that bear repeating. And a few additions.
A comment about reading. I will not resolve to read more. But I’m going to repeat the book logging resolution because I read SO LITTLE. Look at this: 1 Hitler’s Empire by Mark Mazower (serious, hard, took me a while). The Annotated Alice (2 Alice in Wonderland and 3 Through the Looking Glass) by Lewis Caroll (Charles Dodgson), edited by Martin Gardner. 4 Mutiny on the Bounty by William Bligh (edited for younger readers). 5 Gut: The Inside Story of our Body’s Most Underrated Organ by Giulia Enders (this was good – popularly written – I think most people could read, enjoy, and learn from it). 6 Red State Revolt by Eric Blanc (about the teacher strikes in AZ, OK, and WV – some good info, but some of the analysis felt “gee whiz” and other parts felt strangely interpreted). 7 A History of Tea: The Life and Times of the World’s Favorite Beverage by Laura C. Martin (uneven, different parts written with strangely different voices. The history was weird, especially of colonialism.) And 8 First Farmers: The Origins of Agricultural Society by Peter Bellwood (Tremendous. I did struggle at times, but well worth it. And as soon as I finished I went looking for an update – because he left us with open questions. And indeed, it has just been updated. I’m looking forward).
But that’s it! Not enough. Even though Mazower and Bellwood needed longer, 8 books in a year?
So, Resolutions for 2025:
- Ride as many of the NYC ferry lines as I can. Back on the horse, so to speak.
- Log my books. I will keep recording my reading, whether a whole book or part of a chapter, in my “Book Book” – and I hope that will motivate me to be more consistent. Let’s also patiently wait and see if any fiction appears.
- Attempt long walks (notice, “attempt” – that’s fair). Broadway from Bowling Green to the City Line. Maybe City Hall to Coney Island. Could I try a shorewalkers’ walk along the shore of Manhattan? That sort of stuff. Bella walked from the GW to the Tappan Zee. See, I’m not even going to pretend I’m going to try that one.
- Keep a record of when I eat take out. Seriously. It’s too easy to max out salt, fat, carbs, fried stuff, and sugar without even trying. I guess I need a book. A Take Out Book.
- Spend more time outside of NYC. This year I had one one-week trip (MN, SD, ND) and weekends here and there (Cambridge, Lansing, Mohonk). Not nearly enough.
- This year I am using my IDNYC to get three free memberships: NYC Ballet, Museum of Modern Art (with PS1), and Flushing Town Hall (with reciprocal privileges for the Queens Museum). So let’s get five for one: at least one NYC Ballet rehearsal, MOMA, PS1, one event at Flushing Town Hall, and one event at the Queens Museum.
- In the spirit of what’s worked, and all my new membership, yet another book – performances, movies, museums: I’ll log this stuff in an Arts not on TV Book.
- Five major NYC Botanical Gardens: NYBG (easy!), Queens Botanical Garden, Brooklyn Botanical Garden, Snug Harbor, and Wave Hill
- Have a good birthday! A real resolution. And three score and one odd is my last prime for a while. I already got the shirt.
And that other stuff? Blog more? Lose weight? Be on time more? They’d all be good. I might try. I will try. But silly to make those resolutions.
Retiree Advocate is running as part of ARISE
Retiree Advocate is running in the Spring 2025 UFT election…
as part of a coalition:
ARISE
| ARISE – the Alliance of Retired and In Service Educators – is comprised of Retiree Advocate, along with the Movement of Rank and File Educators, and the New Action Caucus, and is open to others ready to fight for a better union for all of us. Retiree Advocate stunned the leadership of the United Federation of Teachers this past May, winning the leadership of the Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC). This was the culmination of our fight against the imposition of Medicare “Dis”Advantage. Bennett Fischer became Chapter Leader. We won 10 officers, 15 members of the RTC Executive Board, and 300 member delegates. Most importantly, we now represent the 73,000 retired UFT members. Since coming into office, we have already begun to achieve a record fighting co-pays for our retiree and in-service members, winning the right of the Delegate Assembly to approve any changes to our healthcare, and establishing a new retiree healthcare committee and UFT/RTC Labor Solidarity Committee. It’s not all easy. Mulgrew’s Unity caucus still creates obstacles. But we are working every day. Our overwhelming spring victory immediately pointed to the future – Retiree Advocate clearly has a major role to play in the upcoming May 2025 election. And Retiree Advocate’s role will be at the heart of ARISE. We bring knowledge and experience. We are retired chapter leaders. We are organizers. We bring votes. With 63%, we just won the biggest upset in UFT history. Our partnership in ARISE, with MORE and NAC, is powerful. We have the potential to take leadership of this union in tumultuous times. Unfortunately, a small group has declared itself ready to run, not only against Unity, but also against the traditional caucuses: Retiree Advocate, New Action and MORE. This group, made up in part of current and former members of Unity caucus, rejects working with caucuses, and with the organizing skill and experience that comes with them. They have even suggested that division is ok. That’s not a road to victory. Our coalition, ARISE, has room for independents. We have kept the door open; we have invited them in. They have rejected us multiple times, but we will keep trying. Our best route to victory over Unity is to build ARISE into the most powerful coalition it can be. Our best route to bringing the other group around, to getting them to join together, take their place as part as a unified slate, is to build ARISE into the most powerful coalition it can be. You can do your part. |
| Read the ARISE Platform Volunteer to join our coalition of working and retired educators’ campaign for the upcoming UFT Elections |
Try Substack?
Seems like the popular new thing. Here’s my first try – it’s about yesterday’s UFT Retired Teachers Chapter meeting – first ever not run by Unity. (Spoiler – we did pretty well. Bennett Fischer set a good tone. And the chapter is sending a resolution on health care to the Delegate Assembly)
Read The UFT RTC Sets a New Tone, Adopts a Motion on JD Organizing in Retirement on substack.
Prime Palindromes
I haven’t done a math puzzle in a while. Maybe a year? But I play with math. A lot. If I see puzzles, why not share them?
What is the largest 4-digit prime palindrome?
Prime – a number whose only factors are 1 and itself. “Number” here clearly means Natural Number, or in many text books Counting Number, a number from the set {1, 2, 3, …}, a positive integer… Except we exclude 1 itself. The smallest prime is 2. The rest of the primes are odd. And we know there is not a biggest prime. Hmmph. I should write up some prime basics. But not here.
Palindrome – a word that reads the same backwards and forwards. Like KAYAK. Or a phrase that reads the same forwards and backwards. Like “A man, a plan, a canal, Panama.” Or a number that reads the same forwards and backwards. Like 99. Or 121. Does 7 count? Good question.
Largest? That’s easy.
4-digit? Any number with four digits. 1000 is the smallest. 9999 is the largest. There are nine thousand of them (if this surprises you, see if you can convince yourself that it is correct.
And that’s it:
What is the largest 4-digit prime palindrome?
Brace yourself
I argued a few days ago that the investigations around Eric Adams’ people were a big deal, but not THAT much of a big deal. Every mayor has had scandals. And I lived through Koch. You’ve gotta show me more than some campaign finance violations, shake-downs, and small time bribes. Turkey. Ed Caban. Banks, Banks & Banks. Winnie Greco. Lisa Zornberg. I wrote:
That’s a lot. Could be a lot more. Has reached his highest level appointees. Could it reach him personally? Maybe. Could it force him to resign? Probably not, even if we wished it did force him. After all, this is New York.
Since I wrote, Banks resigned as schools commissioner (effective December 31), and Health Commissioner Ashwin Vasain resigned. That’s biggers. But no indictment of Adams himself… until…
Adams is getting indicted tomorrow. Big scandal. New York scale. Up there with Koch – and maybe more than that, since Koch was never touched. This is a big deal, even for jaded New Yorkers. Like me.
Cue the celebrations? Nah. I’m not a fan of Eric Adams. Most of my friends, same. We will cheer for a moment. Or a day. But, two things. First, there’s something weird about a growing scandal, in New York City, but where none of the targets is a white man. (How come the papers aren’t talking about this? Funny, same papers who never mentioned the ethnicity of the targets in the Koch scandals. Two-thirds Jews, one-third Italians. And pretty much no one else. You knew that, right?)
The second reason to delay celebrating… who is now the favorite to be New York City’s next mayor? I mean, after whoever finishes Adams’ term? The answer, brace yourself, is probably…
Andrew Cuomo. Who spread COVID in nursing homes, leading early on to the highest senior citizen COVID death count in the country. Who ordered his staff, on NY State time, to work on producing his book. Who helped the Republicans keep control in the NY State Senate for a decade. Who routinely opposed progressive legislation. Who tried to throw the Working Families Party off the ballot. And who had a dozen women complaining of forcible touching. He put his hands where women did not want them, and used his power to get away with it.
Andrew Cuomo, who only beat ethics charges when the Ethics Board was dismantled.
I bet the Times endorses him (if they still endorse? Do they?) or at least they hit “like.” They do that for candidates who claim to oppose racism, and promise to never do anything to address it. I bet Republicans endorse him. No better chance for them to get one of their own into Gracie Mansion. Cops will support him, and the promise of no increase in oversight. And all the “moderate” Democrats.
So yup, glad Eric’s gone. But it’s not time to cheer. Not yet.
31 More Days in Kursk in Maps
From ISW (Institute for the Study of War). All the maps are at the same scale. One map every other day, from August 26 through September 21. The previous post was one map per day, August 7 through August 22. Those maps are at the bottom of this post.
These maps start all blue (territory in Russia where Ukrainian armed forces were present) – the yellow is where the Russian military has claimed to have advanced – the red is where ISW (an anti-Russian military think tank) confirms that the Russian military has advanced.
Some of the spread of the blue may have been a bit misleading. The Ukrainian Armed Forces were using mobile groups that bypassed strongpoints and leapt ahead – it was not always the case that all of the blue was under their control. Nonetheless, by the end of the first week of September, Ukraine controlled an area within Russia about half the size of Rhode Island (I used an overestimate in my previous article). And since then we can see a slow but steady reconquest of these territories. This process is slower than the Ukrainian incursion.
Two notes on the current situation. Off the map (but in an inset on the last five maps) is an area to the west, a bit of the Kursk Oblast that is cut off on one side by the Ukrainian border, and two sides by the River Seym. Ukraine is trying to cut off the fourth side by reaching Glushkovo (on the right of the map). After taking some settlements, they have stalled, but fierce fighting is occurring there now.
A second note – Looking (at the 16 maps) at what remains of the “blue” – it looks like a rectangle, on a slant. And the upper half of that rectangle is no longer adjacent to Ukrainian territory. If you examine the map below, find the “main” road that goes southeast (Sudzha) to northwest (Korenevo). Ukrainian soldiers are around the northwestern parts, but Russian forces are not far from threatening the middle of that major road.
Here’s the same bit, different scale, as displayed by Rybar (his maps are a bit too complicated):
The Kursk incursion was probably a recognition that Ukraine cannot win a war of attrition. It got good press in the West. It harmed Russian morale. Shock value. But the territory taken – most will be lost. Ukraine does not seem to have the capacity to hold it. Zelensky mentioned a buffer zone – perhaps they can hold onto that much. But not likely enough to use as a major bargaining chip. If the goal was to force quick peace talks (I don’t think that’s so), it seems to have failed. Ukraine did draw tens of thousands of Russian troops to the region – but the Russian Armed Forces did not draw men away from its main lines of attack in Lugansk and Donetsk, where offensive action has continued unabated. The attack shook up the Russians, but it also shook up Ukraine’s government.
Something clear, the value of individual towns in Donbas – to both sides – is greater than the value of groups of towns in Kursk. The Ukrainian attack did not draw Russian forces. They stayed in Donetsk. There is more population. There is more industry. Both sides value it. And as “big” as the region is, its only a fraction (lower left) of Kursk (light-colored region, which is itself small within Russia:
Let me close by repeating my close from last time:
I have been reading a lot about this war. I hate this war. I hate the killing and destruction. I hate the loss of life. And I am fascinated by, and absolutely terrified of, the massive use of drones – observation, loitering munitions (essentially flying bombs), heat sensing… But while I hate this war, I read a lot about it, mostly, and ironically, from two deeply pro-war sources – ISW is one of them (I only reluctantly linked, and that’s because I used their maps), and one of the Russian milibloggers (military bloggers), the Fisherman (Rybar, Рыбарь), is the other.
That’s it. I wish this would end. But in the meantime, I pay attention.
August 7 – August 22:
After all, this is New York
There are weirder cities. There are more corrupt cities. There are more bizarre cities. But New York City rolls them all together, and New Yorkers roll with it. At least that’s my answer for why I am not too focused on the legal problems of people who somehow know current Mayor Eric Adams. Know him, and were appointed by him, or work (worked?) with people appointed by him.
I’m not a fan of Eric Adams. I voted against him. I hope these current scandals force him out, or at least make him a non-factor in next year’s mayoral race. But this is New York.
Bill de Blasio’s reaction to corruption charges was that New Yorkers didn’t care – and so he didn’t pay attention. He racked up an impressive stack of them – a lot were about his family – some were about donations – some about pay to play. Don’t you remember the police detail that used to drive Dante to school? Don’t worry, I forgot about it too. https://www.nydailynews.com/2021/12/26/nycs-outgoing-mayor-de-blasio-dodged-criminal-trouble-despite-myriad-investigations-over-his-two-terms/. No federal investigation. But at least one serious charge a year. But this is New York.
Mike Bloomberg, ironically, had fewer real scandals, although his biggest, CityTime, was a doozy. That was a massive contract – massive corporate corruption – although it did not touch Bloomberg personally. Then there’s the Deutsches Bank construction – where failing to enforce construction regulations – violations were repeatedly reported! – led to a fatal fire. His sexist remarks are legendary and gross, though not corrupt. His appointment of a rich woman he knew from cocktail parties to head New York City Schools was cronyism, not a crime. (I still don’t know why Michael Mulgrew refused to oppose the nomination of Cathy Black as Schools Chancellor. The members were ready to fight. She was completely unqualified. I don’t think it was a caucus thing. You shouldn’t back down every time your opponent seems powerful. Trust me.) Back to Bloomberg: https://fair.org/home/bloombergs-scandals-ignored-or-underplayed-by-press-cheerleaders/ Big contracts, friends, influence… it was there. But this is New York.
Giuliani, the slime, has a shorter list. The Bernie Kerik stuff didn’t hit until Rudy had slithered off into the sunset, never to be seen again (don’t we wish that were true! Spoiler alert, he keeps reappearing, more disgusting each time). But Giuliani actually tried to stay in power by cancelling the elections. Not corrupt. Criminal. Dangerous. But do we remember? After all, this is New York.
Dinkins had less than the others, but his tainted contracts were genuine corruption as well. He just didn’t have the personal involvement that made the others, for a time, so headline grabbing. But yes, parking violations (though not on the Koch scale) and Lockheed were actual corruption. This is New York.
Adams scorecard
- Funnelling money from Turkey into his campaign in return for some considerations
- Police chief and his brother? A security firm making money, illegally, through connections. Edward Caban. Forced to resign. (Notice, by the way, the New York Time rarely used Caban’s name. 90% of the time they referred to him as the NYC Police Commissioner. They are just tenuously a New York City newspaper – and their readership on the whole is not especially familiar with NYC and NYC government)
- Bribery involving Schools Chancellor David Banks’s brother (and other brother), and of course contracts.
- Winnie Greco
- Lisa Zornberg resignation
That’s a lot. Could be a lot more. Has reached his highest level appointees. Could it reach him personally? Maybe. Could it force him to resign? Probably not, even if we wished it did force him. After all, this is New York.
Am I crazy? Let me leave you with this article from 37 years ago. And if you were not around, let me tell you about one person missing – Donald Manes, Queens Borough President, who was under indictment when he killed himself.
Something to think about…
WHO’S WHO IN THE NEW YORK CITY CORRUPTION SCANDALS
By Marianne Yen
August 25, 1987 at 8:00 p.m. EDT
CONVICTED STANLEY FRIEDMAN
Former Bronx Democratic boss sentenced March 1987 to 12 years in prison for conviction on racketeering, conspiracy and mail fraud charges for his dealings with the Parking Violations Bureau. LESTER SHAFRAN Former Parking Violations Bureau director sentenced March 1987 to six months in jail and $48,600 in fines for conviction on racketeering, conspiracy and mail fraud charges. MICHAEL LAZAR Former transportation commissioner sentenced March 1987 to three years in prison and a $200,000 fine for conviction on racketeering, conspiracy and mail fraud charges. GEOFFREY LINDENAUER Former Parking Violations Bureau deputy director sentenced July 1987 to two years in prison for conviction on racketeering and extortion charges. ANTHONY AMERUSO Former transportation commissioner convicted of perjury, scheduled to be sentenced Sept. 22. JAY TUROFF Former taxi and limousine commissioner sentenced on June 19 to four months in jail and a $25,000 fine for conviction on bribery charge. FRANCIS X. SMITH Queens Supreme Court justice convicted of perjury in a grand jury investigation of cable television franchising; awaits sentencing. RICHARD RUBIN Top aide to Queens Democratic Party official sentenced March 1987 to 5 years in jail and a $700,000 fine for a State Assembly no-show job scheme. JOHN McLAUGHLIN Former president of the Health and Hospitals Corp. sentenced to six months in jail for lying on financial disclosure forms and stealing from former law clients. ALEX LIBERMAN Former chief lease director pleaded guilty to extorting more than $1 million in bribes; is serving a 12-year prison term. WILLIAM BRENNAN Former State Supreme Court justice convicted of bribery; is serving a five-year prison sentence. STANLEY SIMON Former Bronx borough president indicted on extortion, perjury, tax evasion, and obstruction of justice charges in connection with the Wedtech scandal. Awaits trial on Nov. 9. MARIO BIAGGI Ten-term Bronx congressman indicted for allegedly receiving bribes from a Brooklyn shipyard company. The case is scheduled for trial Monday. In addition, Biaggi was indicted on extortion, perjury, tax evasion, and obstruction of justice charges in connection with the Wedtech scandal. That trial is scheduled to begin Nov. 9. MEADE ESPOSITO Former Brooklyn Democratic boss indicted with Biaggi on charges of taking bribes from a Brooklyn company. JOHN ZACCARO Real estate broker and husband of former Queens congresswoman Geraldine A. Ferraro was indicted October 1986 on extortion and bribery charges in a Queens cable television franchise scandal. Twenty-six supervisors and inspectors in the school construction unit of the New York City Board of Education were indicted in May 1987 by a Brooklyn grand jury on charges of conspiracy, grand larceny and receiving bribes. All are awaiting trial.
RESIGNED VICTOR BOTNICK Chairman of the Health and Hospitals Corp. resigned June 1986 after admitting that he lied about his academic credentials. THEODORE TEAH Bronx representative on the City Planning Commission resigned in June 1986. Currently under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office in connection with cable television contracts. His attorney has said he resigned public office so he could seek private employment. BESS MYERSON City cultural affairs commissioner resigned in April 1987, one day after a report to Mayor Edward I. Koch found she improperly influenced a judge in city contractor Carl Capasso’s (Myerson’s boyfriend) divorce case. The U.S. Attorney’s office continues to investigate official misconduct and bribery allegations against Myerson. HORTENSE GABLE State Supreme Court justice resigned June 1987 after a mayoral report said she ruled in favor of Myerson’s boyfriend in his divorce case after the cultural affairs commissioner gave her daughter a job. The U.S. Attorney’s office and the State Commission on Judicial Conduct are still investigating the allegations. GERDI LIPSCHUTZ Queens assemblywoman resigned in March 1987 rather than face censure by the State Assembly after testifying under immunity that she created two no-show jobs. MORRIS TARSHIS Director of the Bureau of Franchises resigned in May 1987 amid allegations of misconduct in awarding cable television contracts. He has declined comment.
UNDER INVESTIGATION ROBERT GARCIA Bronx congressman under investigation by the U.S. Attorney’s office for possible involvement in the Wedtech scandal. He has denied wrongdoing. HARRISON GOLDIN The city comptroller is under investigation by the city’s Department of Investigations for calling investors on behalf of inside-trader Ivan Boesky. He has denied wrongdoing. ISRAEL RUIZ State senator from the Bronx under investigation by four state agencies for allegedly improperly using his influence to win state money for a real estate venture in which he held an interest. He has said he did not benefit from the venture. MANFRED OHRENSTEIN State senator from Manhattan under investigation by the Manhattan district attorney for alleged illegal legislative hiring practices. He has said the hiring practices were legal and carried out on the advice of a lawyer. FRANCISCO LUGOVINA Former head of the Bronx Democratic Committee under investigation by the Bronx district attorney’s office for being paid more than $50,000 a year by a company bidding for the Bronx cable television franchise. He has denied wrongdoing.
Dental Improvements? Not Today
Why did I so easily believe the rumors that Mulgrew would be announcing improvements to dental today? We could just call me a sucker and call it a day. But nah. Let’s dive in.
I said it. I repeated it. Unity was poised to announce dental improvements. The announcements would likely come at Town Hall (today – and I wasn’t there because retirees were not invited – don’t know why) and at tomorrow’s Chapter Leader meeting. And the meeting came. Mulgrew gave a long presentation. Didn’t mention dental. Someone asked. He said they’d started an RFP (Request for Proposal). That’s it. That’s nothing. No dental improvements. Not today.
I heard rumors, starting late August. I heard they might be improving dental. It made sense to me. So much so that I believed the rumors without digging deeper. Why did it make sense?
The UFT Welfare Fund has significant assets. Surplus has been growing year after year. A year ago they were sitting on $866 Million. That’s a huge amount of money. About two-and-a-half years’ worth of expenses. Big, very big reserve. And growing. It’s certainly over $900 Million today, maybe pushing towards $1 Billion. And five years earlier it was $384 Million. They’ve been squirreling away quite a bit of loot.
The UFT Welfare Fund has had a positive balance sheet year after year for over a decade. The $58 Million they netted in 2023 is the SMALLEST amount they have made (it’s not called profit, but it feels a lot like it) in the last six filings. They averaged an $89 Million annual surplus (can’t call it profit) over that period.
Everyone knows that UFT’s dental plan has issues. Even their supporters say it. My dentist is quite clear about the reimbursements being way too low; that other unions have better plans. Other UFTers have compared, and found that PSC has significantly better coverage. No implants. Low reimbursements. Our teeth matter! Come on!
It’s been 8 years since UFT dental reimbursements increased. Eight years. What hasn’t gone up in eight years (that we care about)?
Delegates tried to raise this last April. Unity and Mulgrew did not want this on the agenda, and they got their way – but by 3 votes! Know what happened in June? The Retirees (including me) beat Mulgrew and Unity: they lost 300 delegates, we gained 300 delegates. In that new reality, dental was going to come up sooner or later.
In my mind, it all made sense:
- They have a huge and growing pile of cash
- Everyone knows their plan is inadequate, even their strongest supporters
- There have been no increases in 8 years
- They barely kept this off the agenda in April (by 3 votes). It is likely to come up, and they are very likely to lose when it does.
Easiest thing for Mulgrew and Unity to do? Get out in front of it – make some moderate improvements – cut off the opposition. When I heard the rumor – it fit. Unity was finally going to get something right.
But today Mulgrew talked about drug prices and Ozempic and a request for proposal and family leave. Go negotiate better dental coverage for members? Nope – Unity wants to instead negotiate a lower price for the Welfare Fund (a major source of patronage jobs). Couldn’t they do both? Get more service while lowering prices? And here’s the real answer – you lead with what matters. Going the request for proposal route – they are looking at price cutting.
So, dear readers, my apologies. I got your hopes up. I thought we would get something without a fight. I got this wrong.
But I promise you this. Retirees will find a way to put dental back on the agenda. We will find a way to get the Welfare Fund to take some of the money they have collected to provide benefits, and actually use that cash to provide benefits. Our dental benefits cannot be an afterthought. For those who are putting the bottom line first – no. Our members, their working conditions, their salaries, their benefits, we come first.
How Many Delegates?
The governing body of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) is the Delegate Assembly. In theory. In practice for many years the DA has been a rubber stamp for the Executive Board, which in turn has been a rubber stamp for the Administrative Committee (AdCom) – essentially the officers and friends.
In two decades the DA had rarely if ever (scratching my head for examples – I don’t want to write never, but maybe?) not done what the officers have asked. Until the pandemic.
The officers, the leadership of the union, has been tightly controlled by Unity Caucus. They use winner-take-all voting and patronage jobs and perks (and the promise of jobs and perks in the future) to keep their people in line – and to try to keep their people’s contacts in line. They run DA rehearsals, I think it is called “debate club,” so that Mulgrew can practice. Debate Club also plants questions – so Mulgrew knows who to call on to get a softball question. Unity distributes written statements, so that when Unity delegates get the floor, they are reading words that Unity has written. At the DA, delegates are instructed to follow Unity leaders. And if they are not sure, Secretary LeRoy Barr signals Unity delegates by taking off or putting on his glasses.
And it’s been fairly effective. Unity District Reps scold Unity members if they ever vote the wrong way. And in the past, they actually watched their chapter leaders vote, so they could tell. When LeRoy thinks delegates are confused, he slows down, and exaggerates the glasses gesture.
A few things changed during the pandemic. Delegates joined by telephone only (at first) and then by telephone or in person (that’s how it is now). That meant that Unity delegates who were at home could vote as they wanted… and some did. In person voting is now by clickers, not raising cards, and even here it is easier to vote without a Unity enforcer looking over your shoulder. Hybrid DAs also made attending easier – there was a new group of delegates who had never been in person, and had not internalized any of that dynamic.
And those changes led to other changes. Unity has some close votes in 2021 and 2022, even on procedure. In April 2021 the DA rejected some political endorsements (I don’t think the DA had ever done that before). The following year there were more close votes, and some losses for Unity – not many – but enough that it was no longer a shock. Just this last April Unity defeated a resolution to increase dental benefits (kept it off the agenda) – but just by 3 votes.
And then the Retirees Voted
This past June there was a huge upset in the retiree elections: Retiree Advocate beat Unity. In the winner-take-all system not only did we win all ten officers (I am now Assistant Secretary) we also won all fifteen Executive Board seats (with 63% of the vote).
And delegates were also up for election. Retiree Advocate made a bold decision in August or September 2023 – if we were going to seriously contest the election, we would not run just 100 or 120 or 150 delegates. We were going to run 300. Several of us, including me, worked for months to make that true. We recruited 331, and were done months before Unity.
Delegates are winner-take-all. 300 delegates. And Retiree Advocate won all 300. I am now a delegate. My last DA was June 2022. My next will be October 2024.
300 out of How Many?
In terms of delegates – quite a lot. Let’s start with how many delegates there are.
Every school gets at least two: the Chapter Leader is a delegate, and at least one more person is a delegate. There is a provision for schools that are bigger to get more delegates. I think a school gets a second delegate at 150 members, and then an additional for every 60 additional members. (but maybe that starts at 90, not 150. I really don’t know – and I’m hoping someone will clarify). But ok, every school gets at least two, and a huge school would get, what, six?
How many schools are there? More than 1600. Less than 1900. Call it 1750. That times two would be 3500. Throw in 500 delegates for bigger schools (wild guess). And now 300 for retirees. Maybe 450 for other functional chapters. 100 Executive Board. I’m getting nearly 5000 delegates. The DA has about 5000 delegates.
But in December 2021 a delegate asked about quorum, and Mulgrew said quorum was 732. And quorum in the UFT is one fifth of the delegates, which would imply there were 3660 delegates. And I have no idea – is it 3660? is it about 5000? I should ask someone who knows. But here’s what I do know:
How Many Delegates Come to DAs?
I scoured minutes from James, from fall 2021 through April 2023, when he suffered a stroke, and from Nick after that. I recorded any votes that they noted – as long as they gave full results. With the current system vote numbers are announced, no one guesses at how many cards are up, but there is a count from the phone, a separate from the hall, and a combined total. Quite often James or Nick got part, but not all, of the results. I did not include those. I got 89 full results. The highest was 1070 votes. The lowest was 560 votes. Average was 790 votes.
We can look at the votes over time. There may be a general increase. Post-pandemic rebound? I don’t know. (The pandemic is not as scary today, but it’s not really over, is it?) Or is it just an artifact from two high-turn out DAs: January 2023 and November 2023? The increase IS counter-intuitive. When new delegates are elected, the following October (there’s no DA in September), the DA is flooded with new delegates, but that number drops off in November, and keeps slipping over the next three years. Do we see the opposite happening? The average in 2021-22 was 678, the next year 773, and last year 817. I’m not sure. (The data is incomplete, but there is no reason to think that the sample is skewed.)
The marks on each vertical line represent the vote totals at that month’s DA. The month labels don’t quite line up – sorry.
So October 2024 will be the first DA after spring chapter elections. There might be a big surge, that then dies down. But do we have a baseline of 900, a surge to 1800, and we sink back to 1200 regularly? Or do we have a baseline of 700, we surge to 1200, and sink back to 800? I am going to guess – just a guess – that after October, votes will hover around 1000 total for the rest of the year. So a bumper crop in October, and then about 1000 delegates at the rest of this year’s DAs (remotely or in person).
What does that mean for Retiree Advocate?
To answer that, we need to look at how close these votes have been. And in fact, most are not close. Think about it – we see resolutions against charter school expansion – to recognize new holidays – to support people facing environmental disasters. Apple pie resolutions. And even where we disagree, sometimes the discussion is over, and we vote overwhelmingly to “call the question” and move on to the actual vote. Of the 89 votes I have counts for, 55 were decided with 90% or more on one side. But 13 votes were decided between 33 and 66%. And for all of these votes, the margins were less 300. And for four votes, the margins were less than 20 votes.
So you know what this means for Retiree Advocate? It means that our delegates would have made a decisive difference on several votes, including, for example, the April 2024 vote on putting improved dental benefits on the agenda. Unity barely blocked delegates from debating the resolution 482 – 479. With Retiree Advocate’s 300 delegates there, the outcome would have been reversed. By the way, we may not get a chance to beat Unity on Dental. Rumor has it that Mulgrew’s people saw what we see, and are improving dental benefits (announcement later today?) before we have a chance to push the issue.
The marks on each vertical line represent the vote totals at that month’s DA. The month labels don’t quite line up – sorry.
Take a look at these margins. The tight ones might have been reversed. But how many votes will RA flip? Think about 300 Unity retiree delegates who we just voted out. I don’t know how many came to DAs. I’m guessing 150, half. And I don’t know how disciplined their voting was, especially when they were on the phone, and their votes couldn’t be tracked – but I figure Unity’s retirees were fairly loyal. So say Unity loses a margin of 125-25 = 100 votes. And RA, how many delegates will come to DAs? We are working on that. We could get 250 at some DAs. Routinely we should be over 200. And while we do not plan to “whip” votes – that’s a bit insulting to intelligent delegates, even if Unity did it – on obvious issues like Dental we should get close to 100%. So call that 200. And combine them, minus 100 for Unity, plus 200 for us. We would have flipped many 200 close votes, some 200 margin votes, and maybe even some 300 margin votes.
At a 300 vote swing, that’s 14 of the 89 votes listed here – which is about half the votes from the last three years. Could we change the outcome of 30 votes? So yeah, that’s a lot. And we have not talked about how our 300 delegates will change the agenda. Real impact.
Just wrapping up this thought – Retirees will have 200 – 250 delegates at any given DA, replacing maybe 150 Unity delegates. And I think the DAs will be mostly 800 – 1000 delegates. We will be a 20% – 30% bloc. How’s that? Ready for some change?
Other Delegates
Many delegates are not affiliated with a caucus. Understandably, they are the least likely to attend (though I would encourage EVERYONE to come. It’s one meeting, less than two hours, once a month, you can join by phone, and you officially make UFT policy. And better than that, this year you might have real chances to make a difference. The Delegate Assembly will no longer be a one-party show). There will still be many Unity delegates, starting, ex officio, with about 100 UFT Executive Board members. There will be New Action delegates, and MORE delegates, probably more MORE than New Action, but combined still fewer than the retirees.
The Paraprofessional Chapter has 260 delegates. While the Retirees were beating Unity, an insurgent campaign won Paraprofessional officer and Executive Board positions. By margin, it was a more impressive victory – 74% – 26%. (We, Retiree Advocate, won 63% – 37%, of course with much higher vote totals). But the insurgents, Fix Para Pay (FPP), did not win a single delegate. What happened?
First off, it really was an amazing margin. Hats off to the nine winners, who took on all of Unity. They were brave, and refused to be intimidated. Unity played dirty tricks, campaigned dirty, bullied, made outrageous personal attacks – and none of it won them any votes. There was a guy who signed on to run as the FPP chapter leader candidate, and then when it was too late to change him, announced he was supporting Unity. Unity also changed the rules, so that Executive Board and Officer candidates could not run for delegate as well. That cost FPP 9 delegates. But even had they not, delegates would have been 251 Unity, 9 FPP. FPP did not recruit a slate of delegates (the way that Retiree Advocate recruited a slate of 300 delegates)
The candidates did an amazing job, but needed help. If a caucus had helped, it would have immediately realized that delegates were at stake, and helped the FPP champions recruit and do the paperwork and the legwork. That goes for New Action, MORE, or Retiree Advocate. Any one of the three would have been able to assist FPP finding delegates, and would have been able to directly offer some delegate candidates. I don’t know the para chapter, so I don’t know if recruiting a full 260 was possible, but I’m guessing it would have been.
It seems that the FPP candidates did have some assistance – individuals? Some of the campaigning they clearly prepared themselves – regular letters and communications which are so important. But some of the memes, and support, and videos…probably had help. Also, did FPP come up with that name, the nine of them? If so, brilliant – a real winner. Fix Para Pay. Or did a supporter come up with it? Still brilliant, a winner. Either way. But despite some great campaigning, and a great name, there was a problem. So how did individuals know how to create clever memes, but did not know to suggest a slate of delegates? That’s where individuals are just not able to match the work of a caucus. Caucuses may move more slowly – but by bringing together the collective thoughts of many, they are far less likely to overlook major opportunities. Also, caucuses bring together the collective work of many. A huge piece of work may be daunting for individuals, but caucuses can distribute the labor, and make big projects seem possible. If a caucus had been directly involved, FPP would have been much more likely to get the delegates right, and not leave that part of the slate blank. They could have prevented Unity from scooping up 260 delegates that Unity should have lost. Unity will have up to 260 delegates at DAs that they should not have had.
And what would that have meant?
If there were 260 FPP delegates, say 150 to 200 come to any given DA. And there are 300 Retiree Advocate delegates. And we expect 200 to 250 to be at any given DA. That would be combined 350 to 450 FPP+RA delegates. Out of perhaps 800 – 1000 delegates. Here’s the math. 350/1000 is 35%, that would be the minimum. 450/800 = 56%, which would be the maximum. Between 35% – 56%. Stopping Unity nonsense. Overruling, where necessary, the chair. Extending discussion when Mulgrew tries to cut it off. And passing resolutions to improve our jobs, our benefits, and our lives. This is what we lost.
Some of the dark blue dots on the left are Unity, but also New Action, MORE, and independents. Mulgrew-skeptical delegates may have been in the majority in the diagram on the left – but of course we are dealing with the diagram on the right. Damned reality.
No sense crying over what might have been. And clearly individuals can do valuable work. But for the serious labor and strategizing of a campaign? We should remember this.
And today we look forward to three years of Delegate Assemblies with a huge block of Unity delegates replaced by a huge block of Retiree Advocate – independent thinking delegates. Three hundred of us. The Delegate Assembly will not be the same.
Trends, Notes: Prior UFT Election Results
There is a big UFT election coming in the spring of 2025, and people are already talking about it. The retirees’ shocking victory over Mulgrew and Unity in June has understandably led to speculation, rumor and scheming.
For as long as I have been a teacher, and well before that, “Unity” has controlled the UFT, and other group or groups have contested the election. The caucuses have always included “New Action” with a varying array of other opponents or allies. Politically, all have been progressive, except Solidarity. Just looking at the percentages does not really reveal what is going on. Here’s a link to some data, if you are curious.
Just summarizing the contenders helps a little: 2004 Unity, allied with New Action, opposed by ICE/TJC (who won high schools only). 2007 Unity, allied with New Action, swept ICE/TJC. 2010 same. 2013 Unity, allied with New Action swept MORE. 2016 MORE/New Action won the high schools. 2019 Unity swept against 3 divided groups. 2022 a united opposition won the high schools. That’s hard to follow, isn’t it? History lesson? Some other time.
What we really need is some analysis. Much of which I have previously written up. Here’s the big four conclusions:
Unity’s In Service Vote
There is a long-term downward trend in every division for Unity. The graphs are a little bumpy, but downward.
A detail that’s worth knowing – with the increasing numbers of K-8 and 6-12 schools (including many of the new Bloomberg schools) there are many 6-8 teachers who get categorized as Elementary or High School.
In any event, the average teacher change for Unity is -7.8% each election. The average functional chapters change is -4.0% each election.
I wrote a whole long paper – this downward trend has nothing to do with how the “oppositions” are doing. Unity has had dips when the opposition dips, and has had a bump when we’ve gone up too. Maybe the best way to understand it – we are not winning away each other’s votes. We are each mobilizing (or not mobilizing) our own votes. We fish in separate ponds. And Unity’s ponds are drying up. (or there is an algae bloom, or some pollution, but enough of this metaphor.)
Unity’s lost votes might have something to do with the switch to appointing District Reps (instead of Chapter Leaders electing them). Elected District Reps were fierce campaigner (I think they broke rules to push Unity) and had strong relationships with the CLs, who they needed to push the Unity vote in the schools. Weingarten severed that link when she ended that system. Sure, DRs appointed by Randi (and now by Michael Mulgrew) are extremely loyal to the President, but they no longer command the same degree of loyalty from their CLs, and are not getting out nearly the same vote. Down 50% in two decades. Ouch.
Oh, if that trend holds (and it shouldn’t, it’s just a rough guide) they will lose another 620 teacher votes this coming election.
“Opposition” In Service Vote
If you lump together all the opposition votes, compare them election to election, what jumps out? The totals don’t change much. Exceptions? Jumps of about 1500 votes when the groups united in 2016 and 2022, and a disaster in 2019 when 3 small groups opposed Unity individually.
Looking at each division – Elementary School, Middle School, High School – even Functional – same pattern. (and delete 2019, and there is some evidence for a slow, long term absolute rise. That chart is in the link, just above.)
Do they know you? Do they like you? Do they trust you?
Campaigning at its best is a face to face activity. And getting someone to vote for your team, ask those three questions. And campaigns are largely about groups. But sometimes an individual can play an outsize role. James Eterno worked with ICE, and then MORE, then Solidarity, then UfC. No matter what else you say about James, he was an effective campaigner. He got into schools. People knew him. He talked to people. They liked him. He worked on people’s behalf. They trusted him. And he earned votes. Usually these things are hard to quantify, but we are lucky. In 2016 James worked with MORE in its alliance with NAC. Solidarity was on its own. But in 2019 James worked for Solidarity. What happened to Solidarity’s votes?
That’s 268 in the high schools, 10 in the middle schools, and 297 in the elementary schools. But James passed away this year. In MORE or New Action, the group would continue to reach those voters. But James worked in ICE and, alongside, I guess, Solidarity, which do not function as cohesive groups, but collections of individuals. Those teachers in Queens might know someone else from ICE, they might even like them, but they won’t trust them.
That’s 575 votes, majority could well be lost. In addition, I don’t think Solidarity will have an impact. I doubt that they ever brought very much to the table (except an inflated vote total in 2019, when James worked for them, when the opposition was splintered, and when the traditional opposition, New Action, ran a very partial slate.)
Retirees!
Retirees are a different matter. For years Retiree Advocate took about 15% against Unity’s 85% in Chapter elections, and the various oppositions combined got 11-16%. Unity was as high as 89%, as low as 84%. Amazingly consistent (explanation with data).
There’s a good reason. Retirees do not face abusive principals, or issues with tenure. They don’t have to transfer, or deal with their CAR, or letters to file. There are no new DoE mandates, no bulletin boards. And no new contracts. Nothing to change your mind about who to vote for. Retirees vote in union elections they same way they voted in their last in-service election. And they, more or less, never change. Eventually retirees pass on, and younger retirees take their place. So there is a slight long term trend towards opposition groups.
And nothing would have changed this, ever. Just protect our pensions and our health care, and the votes will keep coming. But Unity decided not to protect retirees’ health care. I’m not footnoting this – if you read this far you know about the Medicare Advantage fiasco. But here’s what happened: Opposition jumped from 15% to 30%, 30% once again… and then Retiree Advocate ran an amazing campaign this spring. We recruited like never before. We mobilized. We did the one-on-one campaigning. “Each one, reach one.” And we went from 30% all the way to 63%. It was astounding.
Absent any other evidence, we should assume this number will roughly hold still. I think over time though, if Unity continues to control the union, they will undermine the leader of the Retired Teachers Chapter, and our support will suffer. Today, right now, our support is at its peak.
And, oh yeah, numbers. We would gain 7946 votes, Unity would lose the same number. Swing of 15,892.
What’s this mean?
Roughly, if we did the same thing we did in 2022 –
- We would lose maybe 500-600 that James Eterno would have contributed. Probably a bit less – but enough to note.
- Unity would lose 600-700 – because that’s what they have been doing.
- Regular in-service opposition votes would stay steady.
- Retirees would add almost 8000 for us, take away almost 8000 from Unity.
And – ?
That would be a swing of 15,900 – 16,100 votes. And what did Unity win by? 15,018.
If we did essentially the same thing as last time, MORE, New Action, Retiree Advocate, we would be favored to win.
Giving Back
There’s a presumption that if you had a pretty good career, and are enjoying a relatively easy retirement, that you might want to spend some of your retirement time helping others. Makes some sense to me.
There’s another idea, that having finished one career, and having some time, you might pursue some brand new interest. Also makes sense to me.
And yesterday I got an email from the UFT – about exactly this. Was I giving back, or had I found something new and exciting to do. There will be features in the New York Teacher in sections called “Giving Back” and “Second Act” – clever.
Arthur pointed out, correctly, that this email says it is from the Retired Teachers Chapter, but we are the leadership of the chapter, and had not heard about it. That doesn’t bother me so much. It’s feel good stuff. Let people talk about themselves. I don’t mind them doing something right and crediting us. Though it might have been nice to tell us.
But Arthur also pointed out that his “Second Act” has been as a journalist – writing about what is wrong with our union. Hmm. I do enjoy reading Arthur’s work, and encourage you to follow him. It really is a second act, too, since Mulgrew’s lawyers got Arthur’s old blog, his first act, shut down.
But whatever, Second Acts and Giving Back are cool things to do. Whatever, whichever, fill out that form. Do you volunteer with immigrants? Do you clean up a local park? Do you use your academic skills to help a community organization? That’s Giving Back. Write it up.
Did you open a travel agency? Are you studying massage? Became a chef? That’s a Second Act. Write it up.
And if your “Second Act” is a little different. If, unexpectedly, you have found yourself deeply involved in protecting retiree healthcare (from Adams and Mulgrew) – if you have become an organizer – if you spread the word – if you have gotten involved trying to repair our union – if you are now a Delegate for the first time – write that up too. And that’s the coolest – if your “Second Act” really is a form of “Giving Back” – shouldn’t the world know about how amazing you are?
Write it up. And please leave a comment here.
Andrew Cuomo (still) has much to answer for
Couldn’t blame you for missing it, with all the news this week. Disgraced ex-Governor Andrew Cuomo went to Washington to testify about nursing home deaths in New York during early in the pandemic. The MAGA panel tried to make him look bad. He tried to blame Trump. Here’s the full testimony. Here’s a news report before the hearing. Here’s Cuomo trying to lawyer his way out of it. And here’s a news report after the hearing.
It’s been a while. You probably remember that Cuomo resigned – but you may not remember why. Disgraced former governor. We say “disgraced.” But do you remember why?
There were allegations of sexual harassment, verbal and physical. That’s what most people remember.
And then allegations that he had Executive staff (people working for the state of New York) work on his book about how brilliantly he fought the pandemic. This was a pretty serious ethics violation, but the ethics panel itself had problems, and all its decisions were overturned. In the end, Andy pocketed over $5 million, much of it the fruit of the labor of government employees, doing their boss’ private work. Fewer people remember that. But proven corruption?
There was also what a jerk he was to people around him. That’s not why he resigned. But it is, when his world seemed like it was about to crumble, so many people who knew him well just watched it happen, and smirked.
But then there was this. At the start of the pandemic, when everything was a mess, patients were being discharged from the hospital, alive. Cuomo had assumed emergency powers. And he ordered that elderly patients, out of the hospital, go back to their nursing homes (the lawyers will say I got the details wrong. Let them). He sent thousands back, and infected thousands more. At some point that spring, if New York Nursing Homes were the 51st state, they would have been the state with the worst death rate in the country. It was horrible.
Perhaps worse, as the first wave of the pandemic subsided, Cuomo realized how bad this looked, and juiced the numbers to make it look like fewer died in nursing homes. He made a mistake in March, and compounded it by “lying with numbers” that summer.
Here’s a nursing home scandal time line (from Alessandra Biaggi, but I reprinted it). What’s missing is at whose behest Cuomo jiggered the policy. Stefanik (see below) suggests that it may have been at the request of the Greater New York Hospital Association.
He can be disgraced for harassment, for assault, for corruption, for mismanagement with fatal consequences, and for coverup. It doesn’t have to be one. They can all be true.
So the Republican house panel calls him in. It’s all about COVID and nursing homes in New York. They are vile. It’s all political. They try to show that Cuomo messed up. Hmm. They are vile and political. Slime. But on the other hand, they are right, Cuomo messed up, and then compounded it.
Cuomo responds by claiming he did nothing wrong. And blaming Trump. Well, yes, Trump was horrible. I saw the news conferences. “One day it will all go away” Trump lied. But Cuomo did nothing wrong? Pants on fire.
It’s easy to forget the details. Cuomo seemed so smart next to Trump (and de Blasio? meh) Here’s what I wrote about them then. Cuomo seemed smart and competent in comparison. In comparison with Trump and de Blasio. Talk about a low bar.
But Cuomo? Dishonest. Braggart. Loudmouth. Bully. Remember when Cuomo took away our spring break (and Mulgrew supported him)? Remember when Cuomo said he would never close schools? Jerk. Before he realized he’d messed up on nursing homes, he said, facing the camera, and addressing himself to parents “You will explain to them. Grandma and Grandpa will die.” No, he was no genius, no hero.
Trump can be an incompetent liar. And Cuomo can be a mismanaging jerk. Both can be true.
And as far as COVID – Trump’s response was abysmal. The US still has more COVID deaths than any other country. He blathered nonsense, and worse. But Cuomo, for his poise, left New York with the 7th highest case rate and 11th highest death rates in the country, trailing a handful of smaller, mostly southern and Appalachian states.
North Country representative Elyse Stefanik, a real slimeball, asked Cuomo to apologize to New Yorkers in the back of the chamber who lost parents and grandparents during the spring of 2020. He declined.
Stefanik is a slimeball. But Cuomo still has a lot to answer for.
Better Dental? Elections have consequences
The insurgents won the Retiree Election in the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) in June. We took office in July. This summer has been about getting set up, getting ready. Every officer, every executive board member of the Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC) ran as part of the Retiree Advocate (RA) slate. We’ve met several times, made plans for Labor Day, are working on plans for the first RTC meeting on October 22.
We also won all 300 retiree delegates to the UFT Delegate Assembly. Those delegates will start, in October, voting on policy for the entire union. And those 300 delegates, if the rumor is true, have already changed things.
Three hundred delegates is a lot. The UFT has, I don’t know, about 5000? But at any given Delegate Assembly (DA), somewhere between 400 and 1200 seem to vote. So 300 is a lot.
Of course, not everyone will attend every DA. When Unity had the 300 retiree delegates (this winner-take-all system is sick), it was hard to tell, but I think they often brought fewer than 100 retirees. So one thing we have been working on is a system to get more RTC delegates to attend DAs and participate. We’ve generated some real enthusiasm; I’m optimistic.
And if we have 200 – 250 delegates showing up – there’s the obvious question – to do what? Largely, listen to the reports, listen to the debates, make up their minds, and vote. This is a huge change. Barr takes his glasses off or puts them on, to signal Unity delegates how they must vote. Unity operates with “plants” in the assembly with scripts, and Mulgrew knows to call on them. Unity delegates read statements that were prepared for them, not their own words. That’s gross. And we (RA) are not operating like that.
But will RA or the RTC delegates bring matters before the Assembly? Of course. We were elected to change things. And looking at the issues and motions and resolutions from the last few years, several things stood out. We are angriest about Medicare, and what Unity (and Mulgrew, and the Welfare Fund) tried to do to retirees. Furious. But Mulgrew has backed down.
Aggravating, Annoying, UFT Dental Coverage
Another issue that came up easily brought together in-service and retired members: the UFT Welfare Fund’s dental coverage. Reimbursements have not increased in almost a decade. They are fairly low, even compared to other unions. My dentist won’t go “in network” because the reimbursements for cleanings, fillings, and crowns are way too low. Members find that implants aren’t covered, or are covered so minimally that they are left with big bills. Many dentists accept our plan, but then bill on top of it. Dental has UFTers annoyed…
Dental coverage costs money. But the UFT Welfare Fund has been stockpiling large amounts of cash. A decade ago they had a reserve that would not quite cover the payouts for a single year (if money ever stopped coming in, which it won’t). This year the Welfare Fund has almost three year’s reserve. That’s a lot! (2013 – $252 million; 2023 – $866 million). Also, the Welfare Fund, since 2016, has run a “surplus” of between $40 million and $100 million each year. This is not called “profit” because the Welfare Fund is “non-profit” – but you get the idea. They’ve managed to squirrel away – it’s getting near a billion dollars – and it is growing rapidly – while members are having trouble finding dentists.
Last April some Delegates brought a motion to the Delegate Assembly – it said, in essence, spend a little of that gold on improving our dental care. Unity used a procedural trick to defeat the motion – and they did stop it – but the margin was three votes. 3. One, two, three. Are you thinking what I am thinking? What difference would 300 new, independent, make-up-their-own-minds RTC delegates make? Mm-hm.
(For the April vote, see the details below, and the text of the resolution, at the bottom of this post.)
At the following two exec board meetings Welfare Fund representatives tried to justify Unity’s quashing dental improvements. Prescription drugs are costly, they said. They are holding money aside for Ozempic. They are doing a better job than the PSC (the CUNY Professional Staff Congress, that actually has better coverage than ours). When they were coherent, they were not compelling. There really was not good response
Elections have Consequences – 300 Delegates make a Difference
Clearly a dental resolution was going to be in the cards. We would have won. And we would have shown the whole Delegate Assembly that the 300 new delegates make a difference. We would have shown the whole UFT. Elections have consequences.
But Unity figured this out.
Later this month, probably at the Town Hall on September 17 or the Chapter Leader meeting September 18, UFT leaders will announce a plan to improve our Dental insurance. It will be something. It probably will not be enough.
But remember – the people bringing you these changes voted NO on improving dental in April. What happened? 300 new retiree delegates happened. Independent voices at the DA, that’s what happened. Even before the first day we show up, our presence, or rather, the rumor of our presence, is already forcing Unity’s hand. Those footsteps Mulgrew is hearing? That’s us.
Elections do have consequences. We just won a dental victory without firing a shot. I wonder what we will change next.
April 17, 2024 Motion to Improve Dental Care – Unity blocked it from the agenda:
April 2024. In hall: 47 yes, 184 no. On the phone: 432 yes, 298 no. Total 479 yes, 482 no. The motion failed.
Resolution to Raise Welfare Fund Dental Reimbursement Rates
Whereas, the UFT Welfare Fund’s dental plan reimbursement rates to dentists have not increased since 2016 and result in high out- of-pocket costs to members, and
Whereas, more dentists would participate in our plan if the reimbursement rates were higher, and
Whereas dental health is crucial to the mental and physical well being of members and their dependents of all ages, and
Whereas, based on the last 5 years of tax returns, the UFT Welfare Fund has brought in an annual average revenue of $94 million above what we spend, and maintains net assets of $800 million as of 2022, more than twice the fund’s annual expenditures, and
Whereas, since the Dental Schedule was last updated in 2016, benefits paid by the Welfare Fund has increased by only 11.6%, whereas the Welfare Fund’s investments have grown by 212%, and
Whereas UFT Welfare Fund reimbursement rates are less than other New York City municipal union welfare funds, for example PSC pays dentists more for every single dental procedure, including $341 for resin crowns, while the UFT Welfare Fund only reimburses $100 with a $150 copay, and
Whereas a recent rank-and-file initiated survey of hundreds of UFT members showed that 54% of members found it hard or extremely hard to find a participating dentist, 64% have had more than one dentist tell them they don’t participate in the plan because reimbursement rates are so low, and half of those surveyed have spent more than $1000 on dental care in the past year, therefore be it
Resolved that the UFT resume publishing the Welfare Fund annual report on our website, and make a detailed financial report on the Fund at annually to the Executive Board, and be it further
Resolved, that the Welfare Fund report to the Delegate Assembly the cost of providing members with the same level of reimbursement as provided by the PSC to its members and be it further
Resolved, that the UFT engage members with a comprehensive survey about how to use the excess revenue to improve welfare fund benefits and be it further
Resolved, that the UFT Welfare Fund raise reimbursement rates by at least 75% by the end of 2024, in a way consistent with maintaining a healthy reserve.
16 Days in Kursk in Maps
From ISW (Institute for the Study of War). All the maps, except the first, are at the same scale. One map per day, August 7 through August 22 (and yes, that’s 16, not 15. Think about how many maps there were August 7 through August 10. Not 3. That’s math.)
It’s not clear what the objective is – to boost morale? to harm the enemy’s morale? Those have been met, to some extent. To take territory? To take more territory? To create a buffer zone? To hold territory? Zelensky mentioned the buffer zone – which is likely part of the objective, making all of those objectives, which may be met. To cause a leadership or command and control crisis? Hard to say, but that might be, partially, a side-effect. To pull Russian divisions out of eastern Ukraine to defend Kursk? That hasn’t happened.
The area in blue today is about the size of Rhode Island.
The blue part is still getting bigger, but not as rapidly as ten days ago. I think it helps to see the maps when reading the latest news.
Oh, one more theory, floating through rumor mills, and I’ve also seen it in print: the objective or an objective might be – to have territory to trade when negotiations finally begin.
I have been reading a lot about this war. I hate this war. I hate the killing and destruction. I hate the loss of life. And I am fascinated by, and absolutely terrified of, the massive use of drones – observation, loitering munitions (essentially flying bombs), heat sensing… But while I hate this war, I read a lot about it, mostly, and ironically, from two deeply pro-war sources – ISW is one of them (I only reluctantly linked, and that’s because I used their maps), and one of the Russian milibloggers (military bloggers), the Fisherman (Rybar, Рыбарь), is the other. I guess I could put up Rybar’s maps, but they are far more detailed, and harder to parse at a glance.
Won in court, won at the ballot
No matter what anyone says…
Medicare Advantage for UFT Retirees was defeated, by retirees,
- In the courts and
- In the Retired Teachers Chapter election.
Check. And mate.
Mulgrew can make up excuses… but he was still supporting privatized medicare before the last appeal failed, and still boosting it before his retiree election slate got wiped out. He argued Medicare Advantage’s merits in his campaign literature. And he sent his lawyer to consult with NYC’s attorneys during the last appeal, while they tried to stave off defeat.
Today Mulgrew announced that the UFT was no longer supporting Medicare Advantage. And he gave excuses. Weak excuses. And he left out “because the retirees forced me. They beat me in court, and they beat me in union elections.”
Retired Teacher election… What if?
What if the election were held tomorrow? And what if all the results were the same as 2022? Except the retirees were the same as the election that just happened?
Let me explain.
Unity controls (controlled?) just about everything…
The party, actually “caucus” that runs the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) is called Unity. And Unity has controlled the union from its founding. Really controlled it. They do not have all the chapter leaders (stewards) but they dominate the rest. They have had all of the officers, for 3/4 of a century, with one exception for one term (Michael Shulman, New Action, High School VP for one term, then Unity changed the rules so that that could not occur again, without a sweep. They have had all the exec board positions – except they’ve lost the high schools, at least in recent years, more than they’ve won them (but that’s 7 seats out of 102), and back decades ago they lost the middle schools once or twice. Unity controls the “functional chapters” (secretaries, nurses, etc) – with a notable loss of the Occupational Therapists / Physical Therapists an election ago, and a footnote on the Paraprofessionals this time who contested and won some positions, but not Chapter Leader or delegates.
… but not the RTC
And now the Retirees. In an earthquake, the Retired Teachers Chapter voted Unity out of the leadership. 24.9% of eligible retirees voted for Bennett Fischer, and 14.7% voted for Tom Murphy. So the edge is big, 63% – 37% of those who voted, but because turnout was ok, almost 1 in 4 voting for Retiree Advocate (and Bennett) is a big deal. Consider the last general election, 2022, where Mulgrew got 16% beating Camille Eterno’s 8.4%. By comparison Bennett’s 25% is pretty big for a UFT election. Just to fill in a bit, Retiree Advocate also won 300 delegates (how many delegates are at the delegate assembly? 5000? More? Less?). I have been posting – my own mini-victory post – an account of realizing what was happening (we used to call this a tick-tock – but that now means something else) – and some thoughts on campaigning and how I’d missed the prediction.
Think about the 2022 UFT election
For as long as I’ve been around, there has been Unity, and there have been others. Sometimes the other groups unite for an election – sometimes not. Using numbers that go back for two decades, I came up with three points:
- The retiree vote was stable, about 85-15%, for Unity, until the news of Medicare Advantage broke in 2021, and then it shifted to 70-30%, and now 37-63%. These numbers involve significant numbers of Unity voters switching sides, but also voters dropping out, and new voters coming in
- The Unity vote has been slipping for all in-service categories, with minor blips, but a major twenty year downward trend. From 2004 to 2022, they’ve lost about half their teacher votes. These votes have NOT in general gone to opposition groups. Unity supporters quit voting.
- The opposition group, totaled, has stayed pretty level over the same period. It generally goes down when the divisions are bigger, and goes up when the groups run together. Best two years, unsurprisingly, were 2016, when MORE and New Action ran together, and 2022 when a coalition called United for Change formed. Worst was 2019 when the divisions were bitter. In service totals (rounded) were: 6100, 6200, 6400, 5800, 8500, 4600, 8300. The ebbs and flows with these numbers do not correspond to opposite movement in Unity’s numbers – these are not Unity voters.
So Unity has been slipping. And in 2022 the opposition groups were united, which clearly generates extra votes. UFC won the high schools, and the middle schools were in range… but that’s only 7 of 103 seats, with another 4 that might have been possible.
Here’s the actual 2022 turnout numbers:
And here’s the actual 2022 results:
But what if…?
What if retirees voted in 2022 the way they did just now? Let’s change the table, and see.
An important note… retiree votes are “capped” at 22,000 23,500, to prevent us from outweighing in-service members in union-wide votes. So instead of the raw totals 17,227 RA, and 10,115 Unity, I am inputting 13,861 14,806 for UFC (which RA participated in) and 8139 8694 for Unity.
Fantasy results – 2022 – but with 2024 Retiree Numbers*
* Revised. The retiree cap is no longer 22,000, but now 23,500, leading to a slightly higher “fantasy” margin for United for Change
Look, there’s a lot of variables in play. These numbers do not represent an election that actually happened – I combined numbers from two elections. But we should not be talking about whether Unity will lose a division or two in 2025 – the overall vote is at stake.
I have not engaged in discussion, so I don’t know. I don’t know if an “opposition” will unite in 2025. I don’t know if the surge in retiree votes was a blip, and if it will revert to the mean. I don’t know if Unity will continue bleeding support. I don’t know how big that para vote was. But assuming a unified opposition? Big assumption – but assuming it – Unity would be favored to win elementary seats only, and middle school would be a toss up. The opposition would be favored to win high school, functional, and sweep the at-large positions.
Some considerations if this vote did happen
This would mean all 12 officers, 86 or 90 of 102 Executive Board seats, and 750 delegates to the AFT Convention. It would mean a voice on the national stage (or voices) that have previously been shut out. It would mean an opportunity to bring in democratic changes in the UFT, such as proportional representation, and ending winner-take-all, in a way that would be hard to undo (ironically, after one election cycle, this would guarantee Unity a voice, if it continued to exist).
On attitude – an open leadership would be more accessible to the membership. And we would also make sure that policies and proposals were reaching members in schools… we could reinvigorate the act of having a chapter or union-wide discussion. (We know, some resolutions are passed, filed away, and… nothing. We could stop that).
On policies? Certainly health care. Dental. Support for chapters in crisis. A platform discussion would be a serious thing – because it would have real implications. Where do we agree? What priorities could we agree to move? I like looking at the Retiree Advocate 2024 platform – both practical and progressive. But obviously there are more than retiree issues only. The 2022 UFC Platform was a mix of feel-good items and policy proposals. We would certainly want to look at that, especially in regards to items that we would jointly prioritize. Certainly this union needs to relearn how to mobilize membership. And as we do that, we will be capable, as a union, of doing more good for our members, our students, our city. Right? The question is not just a platform… we would be proposing change that we would be in a place to make happen.
How to make this happen?
It would be foolish to aim for 51%. A winning campaign would shoot much higher. In RA’s victory, because our margin was large, there was no challenge. Things would be different if it were close.
Certainly aiming for less than a unified coalition would be self-defeating. Too much is at stake for anyone to declare they would be satisfied with 7 or 11 Exec Board seats.
We would have to look at what went right and what went wrong in 2022. In some ways this will be easier, because there are fewer players. But clear guidelines will help. Who actually is at the table? Putting platform and division of position up front could establish better trust.
New Action has a leafletting operation – extensive, but with some questions about the impact. I think it is an essential part of a campaign, but not the only part. MORE did strong one on one work in some schools, and some text banking and phone banking. Those are very valuable. But there is a pretty big gap… outreach into schools and districts where we are not. Flyering a school where we have no one is better than not flyering, but has little impact. And one on one conversations can’t happen where we don’t have people. After actually forming a coalition, that outreach would be the biggest challenge.
Retiree Advocate’s recent victory helps provide some guidance. Certainly social media helped. We have, among us, bloggers (with more influence than me!) The NYCOPSR would have significant impact (the same or similar number in absolute terms, but less in relative terms since most of the votes will not be from retirees). But the ground game, the outreach – we would need to match that. “Each one – Reach one” would be pivotal. Leveraging personal networks into campaigning, and then GOTV work. And we could not run a symbolic slate. All the officers, all the exec board positions, and all 750 delegates. That’s because we would be running to win – but also because those 750 delegates would bring our ground game to life.
Will this happen? Lots could go wrong. Could it happen? Look at those numbers. You tell me.
The Retired Teachers vote – What I missed
If you asked me to predict the Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC) election in the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) a few weeks ago, I would have said “we have a chance, but we are underdogs.” If you begged me for a number, and I trusted you not to repeat it, I might have said “43% – 57%, best Retiree Advocate result ever, but not yet enough to win.”
And it turned out, I was wrong. Not only did Retiree Advocate win, but we (I am part of Retiree Advocate, or RA) won big, it wasn’t close. Retiree Advocate beat Unity Caucus 63% to 37%. What did I miss? (Spoiler, I had all the evidence, but I ignored it.)
I have not worked with Retiree Advocate before. I wasn’t retired until two years ago. I had not previously seen their campaign up close. Each year RA ran 100 or so candidates – all the officers (10) and exec board (15), but not all of the delegates (300). As I understand it, the biggest part of previous campaigns was a one-page flyer. In RTC elections, ballots are mailed to retiree homes. Election rules include with the ballot a one-page flyer from each caucus. There also was some flyer distribution, and some social media. There may have been some phone calls? It was a credible campaign, although the result was usually a symbolic 10%-15% of the RTC vote.
(Three years ago, news of Mulgrew and the MLC’s Medicare Advantage plan broke during the election. RA added one line to its flyer – but that one line, and word of mouth, led to a surge in votes – 29%. A year later, in the general election, RA as part of a coalition also won 29%. Perhaps the damage to Unity was done, and this was the new reality?)
- Here is discussion of retiree voting patterns and numbers from 2022: The Retiree Vote
- Here is discussion of numbers for the election that just happened – 1 day before – Some Numbers
So what took an underdog campaign and turned it into a winner? Well, the easy answer is correct: Medicare Advantage. Retirees did not want Medicare Advantage, and instead of backing down, Unity doubled down. Mulgrew kept supporting the City’s appeals (at first openly, later you could tell because Mulgrew’s lawyer was helping the City) – and even on Unity’s election flyer they wrote that Medicare Advantage was better than our current health care. This was, for the most part, a one issue campaign.
But what were the mechanics that turned Unity’s pigheaded commitment to a scheme that enraged retirees into the votes that defeated them? UFT elections are generally low-turnout affairs… and Unity has loyalists… and was starting with a huge built-in advantage (all the jobs, all the positions, all the publicly facing stuff) and a voting record (16000 to 6500 in the last chapter election).
10,000 more votes than last
But the results came in. And we pulled in over 10,000 more votes. How did we get them?
NYCOPSR
The biggest single source was the support of the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees (the group behind the law suits that have stopped the City/MLC/Mulgrew Medicare Advantage plan). Marianne mentioned us multiple times, had several of us on her YouTube shows, and pushed her supporters within the UFT RTC to vote for us.
Advertising, flyering, and media seems to have been a bigger campaign than in the past. We were in front of UFT borough offices, at events, even in complexes where concentrations of UFT retirees live. We took advertisements in Patch and the Chief and other publications. We got letters into local and community newspapers, and even into the Voice of the People in the NY Daily News. Compared to previous campaigns, I think this was a bigger, more organized effort. And it probably moved votes. Yet we know that this sort of indirect campaign helps, and helps set a tone, but that it takes direct campaigning to change many minds, to get individuals to mail in a ballot.
Retail campaigning , partially by accident, partially by design, was huge. One on one. Friend to friend. Acquaintance to acquaintance.
300 Candidates
Retiree Advocate made a crucial decision to run a “full slate.” ie 300 candidates. In the previous election we had run about 120. We made this decision because we wanted to present ourselves with a full ticket, wanted to underline that this was a real campaign, that we were an actual alternative. RA might have been a protest vote in previous elections – in this election we were a real alternative (even if we thought victory unlikely). And so it was important to us to run the full 300. (note: I was involved with the “candidate committee” where we coordinated recruitment).
It turned out not to be easy to get to 300. We asked RA members first. And people who had run with us in the past. And we stalled out around 200. Of course, we started early, so this was early December. We dug deeper – we reached out more broadly. And we brought more in. Late December Marianne put out an appeal, and then another, to UFT Retirees, and there was good response. And crucially, we asked candidates to reach out to more candidates – and ended up with people we had never met. We didn’t just get to our number (331) – but we broadened as we got there – and we began to activate our candidates in the process of building the campaign.
A couple more notes on the candidates. We asked all RA candidates to read and accept (not necessarily agree with every line, but accept) our platform. And the overwhelming majority did. As we got closer we did lose a few people – four rejected the platform, some never responded, a few changed their minds, a couple were UFT Retirees, but not members of the RTC, one woman passed, someone was trying to run on both RA and Unity’s slates – but we had our 300. We also were aware that Unity was having different struggles filling its slate. Some people were on their list who reported not being aware they were, others agreed but only after multiple calls. Some prominent names were missing. They seem to have finalized their 300 significantly later than RA.
As we moved into April and May, it turned out that among our 300 candidates, who included people Retiree Advocate had not known before this year – some from the NYCOPSR, many from friends of friends or colleagues of colleagues – among our 300, some of whom had already recruited candidates – we had campaign activists.
Each one, Reach one
We had 3 overlapping lists – the Retiree Advocate listserve – a Retiree Advocate mailing list (which we migrated to nationbuilder) – and our candidates. My work was mostly with the candidates – but there was some similar work with the lists. I have to say, the candidates we had already managed to – almost inadvertently – semi-activate during the recruitment period. This was pushing on an open door.
We asked candidates to develop expanded lists of who they could solicit for support. Friends. Acquaintances. Family. Anyone who is a UFT retiree. Former colleagues.
As we got closer to the balloting, we sent out more specific messages. Rather than describe them, I will share some:
Write emails to anyone you know who is UFT. Friends. Neighbors. Bridge partners. Book club members (please – this is one of the most important things we can do). Bring up election at lunch/social events with other retirees. (Please do)
Who can you reach who you have not reached? That’s the Get Out the Vote piece for us – since 80% of new voters will be RA votes. We don’t need to target – any retiree helps. Who have we not thought of? How can we get to them? A phone call is only one person – but much more effective than a mass-mailing. Are there phone calls – or personal emails – that we can still make? Please share ideas / success stories.
And keep calling and emailing retirees you know… every vote matters.
Can you email How your calls and emails are going? (positive responses?) when your ballot arrives and you vote? How many people you have on your list to call/email?
Did you reach out to every UFT retiree you know?
- Friends √
- Relatives √
- Neighbors – did you miss anyone?
- Former Colleagues? Worth trying everyone
- Members of social groups, book clubs, classes, etc? There are lots of people here
- Friends of relatives. Relatives of friends. Keep thinking!
Happy to organize some brainstorming – almost everyone can find a few people they had not thought of.
Call people who said they are voting for RA, and make sure they voted. There are people who promised to vote for us. Let’s make sure they follow through. This is a genuine “Get out the Vote” activity (the rest is campaigning) – and GOTV is what makes or breaks modern campaigns. If they say yes, they voted, ask for a detail. I usually ask which post office they brought it to. Most people will tell you – but some will say “oh, actually, I’m about to mail it in” – and you might have just saved a vote! These are OUR votes – and we need to make sure that none of them are left on top of the refrigerator
(optional) – Do you want to call other Retiree Advocate supporters, and help explain to them how to “Get out the Vote”? If you do, respond, and we can set you up with some calls.
Calls
Interestingly enough, we got a strong response for volunteers to make phone calls. We should have started earlier, and made more of them. The calls generally had three questions. Here’s an email I sent to a volunteer:
thank you for offering to make calls. The schmoozier the better – helps morale, keeps people pushing (the campaign runs until mid-June, but most of the voting will be done in a couple of days). The routine is, 1. Make sure they voted. 2. Make sure they did some outreach to others. and then the big one. 3. Ask them to get back in touch with everyone who said they planned to vote for us. Did THOSE people mail in their ballots? This has been saving a good number of votes.
I think distinguishing between phone banking voters (which is good) and phone banking campaigners (which is worth so much more) was very important.
And I made a bunch of calls. And the results were amazing. The responses were positive. And I had all the information I needed to realize that we were winning. And I felt great about the responses, but somehow I stopped myself from reevaluating how well we were doing based on this entirely accurate information. Disbelief got in my way?
Positive Responses I Got (and discounted, wrongly)
Phone call to a supporter/candidate. He’d been out making calls. Good. He had recruited key people who had worked at other schools, and got them to work the retiree lists from their schools as well. I asked about any pushback – what percentage were saying they weren’t sure, or voting for Unity. None. He said there were no Unity voters. I thought that was fantastic. But did not factor it into my predictions. And I also missed that he had reached groups retired from multiple schools, and turned some of them into captains. Each one, reach one? Or each one, reach scores?
Phone call to a supporter/candidate. Prominent in her community, gave her some extra clout campaigning. Also well connected with her retirees from her previous school, and with connections from some other schools. She had been diligent about reaching all of them. Any pushback? None. Not a single Unity voter. Fantastic! But I didn’t factor that in.
Phone call to a supporter/candidate who I knew from years ago, from my first school. Let’s call him Dave, because that’s his name. He’s been a supporter, but not super-active, I don’t think. I have not been in touch. But he was always a fun guy, nice to talk, and he liked talking to me. He was a little surprised, pleasantly, I hope, by my call, and happy to talk – and some people are just nice to talk to. You know people like that. He had done a little outreach, didn’t know that many people who were UFT Retirees, but those that he did, he had lined up their votes. And we were talking and schmoozing, and having a nice time, and some reminiscences from the old days, I remember I was on the phone, walking up Broadway, near NYU, and he remembered that he had numbers for a bunch of people from our school, and hung up – interrupted a nice conversation – to go make calls. How many points for enthusiasm is that? Fantastic! But I didn’t factor that in.
I reached out to people who are members of Unity, or used to be members of Unity. In some cases I appealed for a vote for Retiree Advocate, with some success. Several actually agreed to campaign. Some would not vote RA, but agreed to vote for me. So first, as a sign of respect, I was touched. And second, this included people who would not have done that in former elections. And it wasn’t just me.
Many of us were not afraid to campaign directly with members of the Unity Caucus. We got some votes. We learned that their support was already crumbling. Frankly, we could have done much more. Among this group, yes, there was anger over privatizing Medicare, but for some there was accumulated resentment, in some cases distrust. Unity had not done a great job among their own supporters.
Phone call to a former Unity member, who I knew would campaign for us. Told me back in January that they were unwilling to be a candidate, but would work their contacts. I didn’t need to make this call. The person has a significant network of contacts, from multiple schools, from a few adjoining neighborhoods, and even without my calls texted me periodically on the progress they were making harvesting votes. And nope, no pushback that people were voting the other way. Absolutely fantastic! But I didn’t factor this in.
There were a lot more calls. And I reached out to voters (not campaigners) as well – but once we had their vote, still tried to get them to find someone else. All good stories. But what I shared above are some of the best.
It is true, my friends and contacts were already willing to talk to an opposition person (me) which skews my sample. And most (not all) of these reports are Bronx and most (not all) of these reports are high school… But there was good evidence that the election was going far better than I thought, and I ignored that evidence.
Retiree Advocate – When I knew we had won
August 2023 – May 2024
We had a chance, but we were underdogs. I started saying that August 2023, and I stuck with that line until the results started coming in Friday, June 14, 2024. The Retired Teachers Chapter of the United Federation of Teachers – this election would be, at least, a little interesting.
And I meant it. I really thought we had a chance. I was one of the Retiree Advocate organizers who insisted, from Day One, that we fill all 300 slots. Why? Because we were running to win. No sense in winning, but running 200 delegates and handing the last hundred to Unity.
And, by the way, we got our 300 candidates. More than that. About 330. Someone passed away (Sheila Rashal – I didn’t know her – but she would have been a delegate). After we asked candidates to accept our platform, a few said no (three said it was too radical, one said it was not radical enough – there may have been some who didn’t answer because they didn’t like it). A few more just didn’t respond – we know that not everyone looks at emails. But we were ready, over a month in advance, with a few in reserve. And then when we submitted the names, a few were not eligible. And we were still ok.
May 2024
We have a chance, but we are still underdogs. I stuck to this. Ballots were mailed out mid-May (should have been May 10, but I think they went later. Story for another time). I worked on getting people to get other people to vote, and to mail in ballots. And I heard the stories. Our response was stronger than I expected. More Unity people were hesitant. Some had switched sides. People had agreed to run with them, reluctantly. Or had said no.
I began to look at the old numbers. I considered how the numbers would change. This was interesting. The last RTC election came as the news of the Medicare Advantage fiasco broke – and Unity had lost votes. But in the general the next year the votes had not gotten worse for them. So there was no guarantee that there was an ongoing down-trend.
Sources of change:
- Older voters leaned more towards Unity. Younger, more recent retirees were more likely not Unity.
- Unity voters who just couldn’t vote Unity this time
- Unity voters who were flipping to vote for Retiree Advocate
- New voters from Retiree Advocate outreach (it helped that some of our 300 were brand new to union politics – they had friends that no one had ever nudged to vote)
- New voters from the NYCOPSR appeals.
I did some back of the napkin math, and anyone I spoke to in May, into early June, if I gave them a guess (and usually I did not) but if I gave them a guess, I was saying 42% or 43% for Retiree Advocate. We have a chance, but we are still underdogs.
June 2024
We have a chance, but we are still underdogs. I still stuck to this. There was some interesting evidence to the contrary. Marianne Pizzitola put us on her youtube, several times, with seemingly strong response. I couldn’t tell what that meant. But I orchestrated a phone calling campaign, and asked some of the callers about the responses they got. Pretty positive. I called a few of my contacts – candidates who were out campaigning – asking their friends and former colleagues to vote, and then calling again to make sure they’d mailed in their ballot. I asked them about their experiences. All of them reported getting some Unity votes. And none of them reported getting any pushback, except from longterm Unity supporters. No one said “the devil I know,” no one said “but you are single issue,” no one said “we don’t want outside influence.” – No one.
June 13, 2024
I sat down to write my “Numbers” post. And something was off. We weren’t winning 75% or 80% of the new votes. We were much closer to 100%. But when I adjusted the numbers, our percent was going unreasonably high. My proportion of Unity people switching to us was too low. But when I pushed it where my guess took me, the percents seemed off. I was getting Retiree Advocate numbers that were too high, or so I thought. I tweaked the numbers downwards. I ignored my own evidence. I got it down to a low of 37% and a high of 56%. Even then, the average was 46%, up from my 43% guesses. But I really saw 40% as a low and 60% as a high. But how was 50/50 possible? I fudged my numbers against us. I ignored my own data.
One thing I noticed – last RTC election there were 23,000 votes. If the number went high, like to 35,000, Unity had no chance. At 30,000, RA probably won. But what I didn’t write, even at 26,000 I was seeing an RA win more than 50/50. Again, I had baked in the idea we were underdogs, and was instinctively rejecting evidence otherwise.
June 14, 8:30 AM
Ok, now I knew what I had seen with the numbers. Over 26k and we were better than 50/50. This was 27k. I reran numbers in my head. It felt like we really might be winning.
Norm was comparing the numbers to the totals from the general election in 2022. (if he was right, we weren’t doing so well). He called. I explained why I thought that was wrong. The valuable comparison was to the RTC election of 2021, and 27k votes was a very good number for us.
June 14, 10:15 AM
It’s not just 28k vs 27k, but up 5000 ballots instead of up 4000 ballots. That’s much bigger. Now I thought we were winning, and probably clearly. I wasn’t ready to make a public predication yet. Plus, doctor appointment at 11:20… wanted to get poked and prodded first. Plus some additional data would help.
June 14, 11:48 AM
That didn’t look close to me. The percents: 58%, 63%, 68%, 59%, 61%. Five random snapshots, and Unity wasn’t even close to tied in any of them. I knew what that looked like.
June 14, 12:37 PM
That clinched it. Percents were 64%, 68%, 60%, 67%, 60%, 67%, 60%. These were independent samples. Seven more, or twelve altogether. And they were tightly clustered between 58% and 68%. It was highly unlikely that the final result would be outside of that range.
At 12:36 Bennett sent that second batch of data. I was on the 4 train. I did the percents. “It’s over,” I told Bennett, “And not close.”
Ten minutes later, off the train, I ran into Rashad and Brad walking the other way. Coming from the count? Yes. We won? They are just counting.
Five minutes after that I was at 120 Broadway, looking for the counting room. I saw Norm. We won, I told him, 60%. But I wasn’t explaining the stats. Bennett’s samples, 12 independent samples, all between 58% and 68% for us, combined with the turnout, there was no way that the result was anything except a big RA victory. But even if I couldn’t explain it clearly yet, he would see.
June 14, 2PM
For the next hour I Facebooked and tweeted a few numbers, hinted strongly that this was done, and let the consistency of the samples sink in with the people in the room. They were getting it. What was true at 12:30 was still true at 2:00 – we had won. I made my prediction public at 2PM:
It was all over but the counting.
Retiree Advocate Wins!
Results are not yet official. But….
There are over 28,000 votes, up from 23,000 three years ago. Since the extra votes are mostly ours, and the margin was 9500 last time, and there were clearly more sources of votes for us – a win – which had seemed a long shot, now seemed really possible.
Here’s some discussion from yesterday about sources of votes and analysis of where the numbers might fall.
Higher turnout was a good sign. But counting votes in batches of 20 or 30 or 40 gave the proof. Retiree Advocate are winning almost every batch. A few are even. Unity is winning none.
I am 100% confident that Retiree Advocate has won.
UFT Retiree Election – Some numbers
The voting is mostly done in this UFT Retiree election. The vote count is scheduled for Friday, tomorrow. This will be the closest race ever for leadership of the Retired Teachers Chapter. One party “Unity” has won every RTC election, up until now. But the challengers this time, Retiree Advocate, are running a strong race.
(I am a retired United Federation of Teachers member, and I am running in this election with Retiree Advocate.)
Retiree votes in the United Federation of Teachers were stable for years and years. But the leaked news that Unity leadership was trading away Medicare for privatized ‘Medicare Advantage’ created a new reality. There has been one union-wide and one RTC election since, with surprising results. Instead of Unity’s traditional 85-90% of the retiree vote, they took about 70% in both those elections. And this one should be closer.
The Numbers
I wrote about the retiree vote before, here. Please note, for 2004 and 2007 I have the vote totals after the cap was applied. That means that the percentages are correct, but the raw numbers were proportionately a bit higher.
Here’s the percents:
Here’s the numbers (remember 2004 and 2007 I have scaled, no actual)
And here are the RTC 2018 and 2021 numbers and percents:
Crucial to understanding, there are 80,000 or so eligible voters. So the 2018 results are something like 19% Unity, 4% Retiree Advocate, 77% not voting. In 2021 we see 20% Unity, 8% Retiree Advocate, 72% not voting. Non-voters became voters, and they did not support the leadership.
What is different?
In the 2021 RTC election and the 2022 UFT-wide election the news about Mulgrew and Unity messing around with our health care was already known. So it is possible that the shift from 15% Retiree Advocate to 30% Retiree Advocate represents all of the change that we will see related to healthcare. The theory might go: “People who were angry enough to switch, switched, and 70% – 30% is the new and permanent reality.” I do not think that theory is correct.
We have two more years of the Unity leadership working with New York City Government, including the Office of Labor Relations – trying to force retirees off of traditional Medicare. We have a series of court cases – all decided against the City government, and indirectly against Mulgrew and Unity. The look – sore losers who won’t stop fighting even though their members are against them and they keep losing – it’s an unattractive look.
We have two more years of Unity losing – which changes the picture. Before news of their backroom deal leaked, they looked invincible. There was a 10-15% protest vote. But they lost 30%. They lost 30% again. They lost a court case. Another. They got blocked in the City Council. Another court loss (and now they are trying to claim it’s not their appeal, it’s the city, but their lawyer is there, Unity is acting like a party, even if they deny it). And another court loss. People who wouldn’t bother opposing them before, figuring “it doesn’t matter, Unity always wins” – now they figure different.
The retiree group that’s been beating the City government is the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees. The NYCOPSR is independent (of any union, and of city government, and of the bankers and insurance companies and their agents). They have quite a following among UFT Retirees. They look like winners while Mulgrew looks like a loser. The NYCOPSR has urged UFT retirees to support Retiree Advocate.
And both sides campaigned differently than in the past. I’ll save that discussion for another post.
How could the votes change?
In 2021, Unity won 16,269 to 6,755. That’s 71% to 29%. But more importantly, that’s a 9514 margin. I’m looking at 2021 because that is an RTC election (the “general” election in 2022 has higher turnout. Apples to apples. But keep an eye on that 9514 margin.
Big thing to consider – before the Medicare Advantage leak in 2021, retirees who voted for Unity in one election probably voted for Unity in every election. Those who voted for an opposition group in one election probably voted for an opposition group in every election. And those who didn’t vote once? They mostly didn’t vote the next time, or the time after that, or the time after that. Voting habits used to be fixed.
Turnout
There are about 85,000 eligible retirees. Less than 30% vote. Or, at least, less than 30% voted up until now. One of the big questions will be turnout.
Notice, from 77% non-voters in 2018, we were down to 72% non-voters in 2021. That was a big jump in turnout, and most of that went for Retiree Advocate.
A huge surge in turnout would be excellent news for Retiree Advocate. Most new voters will vote against Medicare Advantage, against Mulgrew, against Murphy, against Unity. In the last RTC election 23,000 voted. There were 27,000 votes in the last general election. If this time there are 40,000 votes, you don’t need to see the count – Retiree Advocate has won. If there are 35,000, Retiree Advocate has probably won. Look for a total more in the 26,000 – 30,000 range, enough to worry Unity, enough to make it interesting.
Just a note (and I’ll come back to this tomorrow) – when your leadership is counting on low turnout to preserve their power, that’s a good sign you need to get a new leadership.
Demographics
Who is a retiree changes election to election. Some retirees are no longer able to vote, or pass on. But there are new retirees every year.
Those who are older used to vote in higher numbers, and skewed heavily towards Unity (of those who voted). There were fewer opposition voters.
The newer retirees – many fewer of them are retiring with strong Unity loyalty. Some are retiring with strong opposition loyalty.
On demographics alone (losing older loyal voters, replaced by many fewer new retirees who are Unity loyalist), Unity will lose votes. How many? 500? 1000? 1500? That seems high. Let’s say 500 – 1000, knowing that’s just a guess.
Retiree Advocate will lose many fewer older loyal voters (we have fewer), but will replace those with a greater number of recent retirees who are loyalists. How much of a gain? 250? 500? 750? Call it 250 – 750.
Unity minus 750? Retiree Advocate plus 500? But we will have no way to confirm or disprove these numbers. Just guesses.
Shift: Unity voters ➔ non-voters
When the news of the Unity/MLC/Mulgrew/NYC Government backroom Medicare Advantage deal leaked… At that moment, Unity lost voters. That’s a big part of how their traditional 90% fell to 70%. Unity voters, tried and true, election after election – they stopped voting. Those weren’t votes for Retiree Advocate. But 1 vote for Unity becomes 0 votes. That’s a minus one.
But that already happened. Or did it? Notice that from 2018 to 2021 Retiree Advocate gained over 3000 votes. But Unity did not lose votes – in fact they were slightly up. This loss of actual Unity votes has not yet been felt. And we might see it at the vote count.
Are there more Unity voters, between 2021 and today who will stop voting for Unity? I think the answer is “yes” – but it is hard to measure how many. Remember, when the initial shock of the Medicare Advantage deal came out, Mulgrew pushed back hard, and explained to retirees how he knew more than they did. Independents and Retiree Advocate supporters were horrified. But Unity people have been trained to defer to the leadership, and some of them repeated his weak arguments (silver sneakers anyone?)
But after three years of Unity fighting to impose copays, to force retirees into Medicare Advantage, people, even Unity people, see. Claims about the system being broke – when it’s not. Folks notice, even Unity folks. Their solid support may be less solid than it once was.
One bit of evidence? A letter from a retired DR – exclusively to Unity members –
As this RTC election is upon us I am certainly aware of the deep concerns that people have concerning the health care issue. This note is not intended to discuss that issue….
There have been two comments from people that I want to address.
1) I can’t vote for the opposition but I won’t vote for Unity, so I won’t vote at all….
The message? “Please don’t sit out the election.” He only wrote that because Unity people were choosing to sit this one out.
The other part of the message? “Please don’t think about healthcare.” We know why Unity is asking people not to think about Unity’s record…
But there’s more. There have been Unity members for years, silently critical of Unity. There are rivalries, cliques, grievances. People don’t get the promotion they deserve. Incompetence is rewarded. Personal issues are ignored. There is casual indifference to members’ needs, or lack of concern. There are policy issues beyond healthcare – Bad political endorsements. Mistakes in the contract. Situations not addressed. All of this, in a situation where Mulgrew no longer seems invincible, is leading to quiet quitting.
But how many Unity votes are in danger? They have a base of 16,000 (last retiree election) and an expanded group of 19,000 (last general). Forget the extra 3000 – with Medicare Advantage, I don’t think Unity has any hope of regaining those votes. Could they lose 4000 more? Seems like a lot. Could they hold their losses to 500? Seems like way too little. Somewhere between 1000 and 3000? Maybe.
Call that minus 2000 from Unity.
Unity voters switching sides
This is definitely happening – I hear too many reports to ignore. But a ton? Probably not. All of the reasons from the section above – but to switch they would need to have more trust (or contact with) Retiree Advocate – or have definite alignment – could be on health care – could be on the record of some of our leaders (think about Michael Shulman and the work on the UFT Organizing Committee which Unity terminated eight years ago). How many “switchers” could there be? At least a few hundred. 2000 seems like too many. 200? 1000?
I’m saying 500, but that’s just making up a number. Minus 500 from Unity. Plus 500 Retiree Advocate.
NYCOPSR outreach
The New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees has many UFT retirees among its members. Some of them were Unity voters, before the leak. Some were Retiree Advocate voters. Most seem to have been non-voters.
Marianne Pizzitola appealed to NYCOPSR’s UFT members to vote, and to vote for Retiree Advocate. She gave over several segments on her podcast/youtube show to Retiree Advocate leaders. And they, and she, have some serious reach. Worth considering is the high number of previous non-voters they reach.
How successful will her appeal to previous non-voters be? That’s a huge question. NYCOPSR could add 1000 votes – but that seems way too conservative. Could it be 5000? I don’t know.
Call this one plus 3000 for Retiree Advocate. Again, just a guess.
New voters
Retiree Advocate also did outreach! And an important aspect of that was the “Each one, Reach one” campaign. I got my friend to vote. That’s fine. I got another friend to go out and speak to their former colleagues, and spread the word. That’s more votes.
In the process of building this campaign, Retiree Advocate decided to run a full 300 delegates. In the past, we might have run 100, or 150. That’s symbolic. But if we were really contesting the election, which is what we are doing, it would be foolish to do so without a full slate. And as we filled those slots, we used people we already knew. But we also reached out more broadly, and found activists we did not know before. And that broader reach got us to new people whose “each one, reach one” brought in voters (previous non-voters) we had never before encountered.
We definitely activated new voters. 500? Probably more. 1000? more? 2000. Seems high.
And on the Unity side? I’ll write about this in a follow-up post – but they did not campaign for new votes. New voters for Unity will not be a factor in this election. Their numbers will be negligible.
New voters – plus 1000 Retiree Advocate.
The sum of my guesses
| Retiree Advocate | Unity | |
| Demographics | +250, +750 | -500, -1000 |
| Shift: Unity voters ➔ non-voters | -1000, -3000 | |
| Unity voters switching sides | +200, +1000 | -200, -1000 |
| NYCOPSR outreach | +1000, +5000 | |
| New voters | +500, +1000 | |
| Totals | +1950, +7750 | -1700, -5000 |
Worst case (based on my guesses) for Retiree Advocate: 6755 + 1950 = 8705 for us, 16269 – 1700 = 14,569 for Unity. 37% to 63%. That would be disappointing.
Best case (based on my guesses) for Retiree Advocate: 6755 + 7750 = 14505 for us, 16,269 – 5000 = 11,269 for Unity. 56% – 44%. That would be amazing.
But honestly? I don’t know. I just know that this will be the closest RTC election ever. Stay tuned.
Retiree Advocate Platform 2024
The Retired Teachers Chapter election is winding down. The count is scheduled for this Friday. What I’m doing here is, with a few comments, sharing the Retiree Advocate Election platform. It was first published on the Retiree Advocate website, here. We wrote it over the fall, finalized it at the start of February. All of our 300 candidates accepted it (doesn’t mean they agree with every line, but they accepted it overall) and we published it April 10.
- We do not have a one-issue platform. That hasn’t stoped Unity from repeating that Retiree Issue has a one issue campaign – healthcare (and then Unity proceeds to avoid talking about healthcare – taking away retirees’ Medicare is a bad look). Read for yourself. Healthcare is in there. It is prominent. It is not the entire campaign.
- Unity itself never publishes a platform. They run on “trust us” – after demonstrating pretty clearly that trusting them is an iffy proposition, at best. They do some things well. And then make backroom deals that force us into new copays. I wouldn’t trust them, would you?
- I really like the point about involving retirees in chapter organizing. We have decades of experience as activists and chapter leaders. It would be smart to put that to work.
- I like the last section, the social justice section. Jobs programs. Fight racism. Shifting money from the military to local communities and to veterans benefits. Some people thought that “social justice” would sink us. But I am proud of what we stand for. Read it. In fact, Unity attacked us for being leftists – but they made stuff up. There is nothing in our platform to attack us on – unless you are opposed to raising the minimum wage.
- Last point – we decided to publish the platform, but to push individual campaign leaflets. We ended up not pushing the platform out widely. Which was too bad. Looking at this platform today, I wish we had really blasted it all over social media. It’s a good platform. Oh well.
2024 Retiree Advocate/UFT Election Platform
ORGANIZE TO PROTECT AND IMPROVE RETIREE BENEFITS
- Protect our Healthcare from being privatized – No Medicare Advantage
- Protect our Pensions
- Improve the COLA formula on our pension to match full Cost of Living
- Expand Social Security benefits and ensure that they are not diminished
- Support and organize for a NY Health Act that protects and expands health benefits for all
- Work towards a national single payer health plan
EXPAND UNION DEMOCRACY IN THE RETIRED TEACHERS CHAPTER (RTC)
- End winner-take-all chapter elections (70% of the vote should not win 100% of the 300 delegates)
- Make RTC meetings more meaningful. Give voice to a greater variety of views. Allow real debate. Allow members to raise issues
- Let the full chapter vote on major RTC issues such as changes to our healthcare
SOLIDARITY WITH WORKING EDUCATORS / STRENGTHEN WORKING EDUCATOR-RETIREE ALLIANCE
- Everyone’s Health Care Matters! Work to protect in-service health care, as we fight to preserve retiree healthcare
- Lobby the state legislature for Pension Equity – Move Tier 6 to Tier 4
- Take steps to support educators working under abusive administrators
- Involve retirees in assisting chapter leaders and organizing school chapters. Use retiree knowledge and experience to empower our working colleagues and unionize charter schools
- Keep public schools public. No charters, no vouchers, no co-locations, and no funding schemes that undermine public education.
- End Mayoral Control
- Fully fund our schools. Slash the Tweed bureaucracy. Stop wasteful spending on no-bid contracts for consultants and vendors.
SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC JUSTICE FOR ALL
- We support:
- raising the minimum wage
- alleviating student loans
- universal parental leave
- subsidized childcare
- a massive jobs program to address racial and economic disparities
- a progressive tax system including a stock transfer tax
- Oppose and fight racism
- Prioritize local communities, social services, and veterans’ benefits over military spending
If Mulgrew wins… what happens to healthcare?
You have to ask this question.
For three years Mulgrew and Unity and the Municipal Labor Committee and Mayor Adams and the New York City Office of Labor Relations, and the insurance companies, and the City’s financiers have been trying to force retirees out of Medicare (Senior Care) and into Medicare Advantage. There’s a big pile money they can make by this change – which some people (including me) argue would be a reduction of benefits.
Today the City (OLR, Adams, NYC government) is in court, appealing a decision that has blocked this scheme. And today Mulgrew accurately states that the UFT is not a party to this appeal. However, accuracy and honesty are not always the same thing. Unity has supported the City in each of the court cases, each of the City Council hearings up to now, except one. And in that one Mulgrew’s lawyer, Alan Klinger, was consulting with the City attorneys during the hearing. Mulgrew has continued to claim, against retiree concerns and retiree research and all evidence, that his plan is better than what retirees currently have and are struggling to preserve.
But when you ask them…
They say that the election is not about health care. Or they say that the opposition only has one issue – health care. Can’t have it both ways – but Unity tries.
A retired Unity DR wrote “As this RTC election is upon us I am certainly aware of the deep concerns that people have concerning the health care issue. This note is not intended to discuss that issue.” – As if voting for Unity and voting to continue Mulgrew’s quest for Medicare Advantage could be separated.
Unity literature in the Retired Teachers Chapter election continues to boast about their support for Medicare Advantage:
The new health coverage plan negotiated by the Municipal Labor Committee is currently in litigation, and we await its outcome.
Notice how they don’t say where they stand on the litigation? And then:
Such a plan [Unity’s Medicare Advantage] would have features far superior to any current existing coverage.
They are still in favor of Medicare Advantage. They are still claiming it is better than what we have now.
And after the election?
It is true that the Chapter Leader of the Retired Teachers Chapter is not able to make decisions about who the MLC or the City is going to sue, and what backroom deals Mulgrew tries to make with Emblem or Aetna.
Retiree Advocate wins? We would use our voice to preserve Medicare
But a Retiree Advocate victory? Bennett Fischer will give public voice to retiree objections to the Mulgrew/Adams Medicare Advantage scheme. That will make it harder for the double dealing duo to pursue their plan. Kind of like denying them prior authorization.
Unity wins? Will they claim that retirees voted for Aetna?
And a Unity victory? You know, Unity could sit on the sidelines and watch what happens with the court case… except, that’s already not what’s happening. Mulgrew’s lawyer is already working with the City against us. I would not be at all surprised if Mulgrew attempts to intervene in the appeal, in favor of Medicare Advantage. He might even make the (false) claim that the RTC election was a referendum on health care, and that a majority of retirees are good with Mulgrew/Adams taking away Medicare. Untrue. Uncool.
Can we let that happen?
The election is almost over. There’s not too much you can do today. But if you didn’t vote… Please, you can still get that ballot in. Dig up the ballot. Vote today. The count is June 14. If you mail your ballot today, it should get there in time. If you can’t find your ballot, it’s pretty tight. Call AAA at 800-529-5218 and ask for a replacement. If you are in NY, I’d advise you to hand-deliver the ballot.
And when you get your ballot, check off the box for “Retiree Advocate” on the first page – and mail it in.
Anything else?
Even if Mulgrew and Murphy win, the City appeal does not look that good. The New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees is still fighting, and has won every fight so far. But victory would make things so much clearer!
UFT Retiree Election – What’s at Stake?
Did you vote? If not, dig up that ballot. Vote today. The count is in one week. June 14. If you mail your ballot today, it should get there in time. If you can’t find your ballot, it’s pretty tight. Call AAA at 800-529-5218 and ask for a replacement. If you are in NY, I’d advise you to hand-deliver the ballot.
And when you get your ballot, check off the box for “Retiree Advocate” on the first page – and mail it in.
So – United Federation of Teachers Retired Teachers Chapter. UFT RTC. Run by Unity Caucus for its entire history. And up to three years ago, Unity crushed the elections, 85% – 90% of the vote. But not any more. Retiree Advocate will win at least 30% of the vote. 40% is more likely. And over 50% is possible. I’ll run the numbers in an upcoming post.
Big issue? Medicare. Unity decided to move retirees out of Medicare, into a privatized Medicare Advantage. They didn’t tell retirees – who learned about this from another union (the Professional Staff Congress – the CUNY professors’ union). Retirees were pissed. They didn’t want privatized health care. And they didn’t appreciate being played for fools.
Over the last three years the UFT leadership, the Municipal Labor Committee (MLC), Mayor Adams and the Office of Labor Relations have been fighting to make the move. An ad hoc organization of retirees (the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees) has been dueling them in court – and winning. For now, Medicare is safe. Each battle has shown Unity to be vulnerable – they lose. And retirees who might have once not bothered voting against them (because they were invincible? right? wrong!) might think otherwise. And each battle, each round of fights, has opened up more division between retirees and the UFT leadership and RTC leadership. And that division, plus the knowledge that Unity can be beaten, that will add up to Unity getting its smallest retiree vote ever; they might even lose.
But what would that mean? If Retiree Advocate won the leadership of the Retired Teachers Chapter, what difference would that make? Those are important questions, and deserve clear answers.
Officers and Delegates
Retiree Advocate would win all 10 officer slots. You probably know some of the names. Bennett Fischer would be Chapter Leader. Long-time New Action chair Michael Shulman would be a Vice Chair. Fiddler/Blogger/ESL Teacher Arthur Goldstein would be as well. Activist Gloria Brandman would be Secretary. I’d be Assistant Secretary. Other officers would be: Bobby Greenberg, Michele Rayvid, Sheila Zukowsky, Greg Di Stefano, and Ellen Fox.
The 15 Executive Board members would be: Fred Arcoleo • Joel Berger • Novelette Foote • Daniel Harkavy • Doug Haynes • Prudence Hill • Bruce Markens • Dacio Quintana • Denise Rickles • Roque Ristorucci • Norm Scott • Alan Stein • Marian Swerdlow • Doris Wallace • Mary Therese Whelan. (all Retiree Advocate, because of the winner-take-all format)
And there would be 300 new Delegates to the Delegate Assembly – all Retiree Advocate.
Meetings
One thing that would change right away – the format of RTC meetings. I am tired, I think we all are, of the chair frustrating people by not calling on them, by cutting short discussion, by berating fellow retirees. I remember him poorly controlling meetings, but I also remember meetings where he raised his voice at our members. Not ok. There needs to be adequate time for discussion. And there needs to be greater fairness in calling on people. And we will absolutely put items of importance to people on the agenda. It is outrageous that the Medicare Advantage plan was not shared with members until another union broke the story. Retiree Advocate will not hide important information from retirees, the way that Unity did. There’s a lot of “fluff” at RTC meetings. Soft topics. Fun topics. I always believe that they have a place – but they will no longer be used to “run out the clock” and prevent real discussion. We can talk about trips and classes AND political and financial issues.
The UFT Delegate Assembly would not change – but it would change. The RTC gets 300 delegates. Currently they are 100% Unity, and mostly vote as they are told. “Lock step” is how LeRoy Barr once described Unity voting to me. But with a Retiree Advocate victory, there would now be 300 independent-minded delegates. They would listen before they voted. No lock-step. Nothing automatic. 300 delegates is enough to swing some issues – the level of debate would improve – as each side would actually need to convince delegates. What a novel idea! I don’t know the way each vote would go. But you want an example? The resolution on improving dental care, which Unity killed. I don’t think that happens with 300 independent retirees at the DA…
Communication
This is tricky. Retiree Advocate would seek to improve communication. But we know that Unity, which still controls the apparatus, may try to prevent us. Let’s see.
Putting Retirees to Work
Some of this is easy. The political action we already do? We would want to do, and do it better. We would want to involve more retirees in it. We think there are many retirees who would like to be more involved.
The UFT used to have a program that put retirees into schools, to assist chapters and chapter leaders. We would want to restart something like that. We think there are many retirees who have knowledge and time to devote to helping in-service members
Medicare Advantage
Ironic, right? This is our biggest issue. Unity lies, and says it is our only issue (read our platform, here). But right now New York City is appealing the latest ruling against Medicare Advantage. The UFT is not even a party to that appeal. So what difference would the leadership of the Retired Teachers Chapter make?
- It would be significant if the leadership of the RTC opposed the CIty’s appeal (opposed Medicare Advantage, supported maintaining our current coverage). Perhaps we could formally intercede against the City? And if not, we could still speak out publicly
- It would be harder for Mulgrew and the UFT leadership to join the City’s appeal. Now, they might not try anyhow. But they might. And also, Mulgrew might not formally support the appeal – but his lawyer Alan Klinger was working with the City at the appeal – maybe we could stop that.
But could we put the brakes on? Nope. Would our victory change the landscape. Yup. And that would be a very good thing.
JD2718 