Can UFT Welfare Fund Afford to Eliminate Retiree Prescription Premiums?
It sure looks like it.
There was a songwriter named Doc Pomus who wrote many great songs, like Save the Last Dance for Me. He used to hang around the old Lone Star Cafe in Manhattan, and one of his favorite aphorisms was, “People cease to amaze me.” I can see how someone who thought like that would have the ear to create those great songs.
People cease to amaze me as well. Retirees have shown we can stand up to the Unity Patronage Cult, but our work is far from over. At RTC meetings, Unity stands up and advocates for more expenses and fewer benefits. (I sometimes wonder whether they even hear what they sound like when they make these arguments.)
For some time now, I’ve been writing about how UFT bosses, who love to talk about how much they adore retirees, have been forcing us to buy our own prescription insurance. Never mind that they also run around boasting about how our insurance is premium free. It bothers them not at all that UFT members begin paying premiums at the very worst juncture in their careers—when they retire and can no longer expect increases in income.
I’ve been sent a message that purports to come from Geof Sorkin, head of the UFT Welfare Fund. Evidently it showed up on the Facebook group that used to be the official UFT retiree page—the one Retiree Advocate decided not to fight for. Sorkin says UFT doesn’t charge members for insurance. Technically, that’s true. That, however, doesn’t alter the fact that we pay it. Nor does it alter the fact that this insurance has gone up by 50% in only two years.
The other point Sorkin makes is that other unions have pharmacy plans that are not the same as ours. That’s probably true as well. Is ours better? Perhaps it is. Perhaps it isn’t. The message I saw gave no details whatsoever. If they aren’t good enough, perhaps they should negotiate to improve them. That said, I’m in pretty close touch with Marianne and her group. I don’t know any police, firefighter, sanitation, or DC37 retirees complaining about their prescription insurance, nor has she pointed any out.
I’m part of a chat group that discusses various union goings-on, and was pretty shocked to see the following, from DC37 Delegate Assembly notes:
Look at the last full sentence—If DC37, a larger union than UFT, can provide prescription insurance for retirees at a cost of 35 million per annum, how much would it cost the UFT Welfare Fund to do the same? Even if our system is better, which no one has conclusively established, how much more could it cost?
UFT Welfare Fund is sitting on a billion dollars right now. I’m sure they have many things to use the money for. However, if UFT really values retirees, as Unity claims, why don’t we enjoy the benefits other city unions do? I’d like Geof Sorkin and Michael Mulgrew to address that.
I’d also like them to explain why they think retirement is a good time to start charging us premiums. To me, it seems counter-intuitive, bordering on insane. I’m friends with a teacher who tells me this premium is a big reason she can’t afford to retire. Meanwhile, Unity has its patronage recipients out in force, complaining we’re “kvetching” when they raise costs on our fixed incomes.
If you haven’t done so already, please sign our petition demanding that we get the same benefits our brother and sister retirees do. If cops, firefighters, sanitation workers and DC37 employees don’t pay, we shouldn’t either. It’s amazing that Unity hacks who’ve made double what we did throughout their careers muster the audacity to lecture us on sacrifices.
FYI, I posted our petition on the current UFT Retiree Facebook page back on January 12th. It’s sat in moderation since then. I know that Retiree Advocate’s Jonathan Halabi moderates the page. I know Halabi opposes 1096, because he announced it at a meeting I attended. Does he also oppose the Welfare Fund supporting retirees?
It’s hard to say. I understand I’m not allowed to post what I write there. Perish forbid we should express ourselves in a union forum. Is it also unacceptable to mobilize members for better working conditions? You’d have to ask Halabi.
A big Unity talking point is that we no longer need 1096. They say Mayor Mamdani opposes privatization, and I’m sure he does. The thing is, though, that Mayor Mamdani accepted the endorsement of UFT and DC37, both of which oppose 1096. I don’t anticipate him supporting it. I’m not Blanche DuBois, and I therefore do not trust the kindness of strangers.
Furthermore it’s not actually Mamdani, or even Bloomberg, who managed to dump us into an inferior Medicare Advantage plan. That would be union boss Michael Mulgrew. Mulgrew is all about cutting costs for the city, and Daniel Alicea at The Wire has been all over that lately.
Who’s to say Mulgrew won’t approach Mamdani and say some new Advantage plan is so much better than the last one? Who’s to say he won’t do it when the mayor’s up for re-election?
As for convictions, Mayor Mamdani just did a 180 on a campaign promise to expand rental assistance. This, of course, comes after last month’s reversal on mayoral control. The reversal on rental assistance, though, is troubling for those of us focused on retaining Medicare. Mamdani’s looking to cut costs, and is clearly willing to renege on campaign promises to do so.
We can’t count on Mamdani, and we most certainly cannot count on our self-serving union bosses to support us. We’ve got to stand up for ourselves. I’d like to work with our friends from Retiree Advocate as well. That, though, would entail our taking aggressive stances, even if they were to anger King Mulgrew and his patronage army.
One way or another, we can and must stand up to them.