Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Susan Herzog's avatar

What struck me about the RTC meeting was how it resembled DA meetings. You had the “Leader” and committee “reports,” and what I thought was the unnecessarily long and boosterish IRMAA presentation – and precluded any real opportunity for members to raise issues of importance and debate them.

When Michael Broucum raised an important question of why the chapter is agreeing to the DA endorsement of Carl Wilson to replace Erik Bottcher in the City Council – a candidate who has not signed on to support 1096 -- he was shut up by Bennett. What struck me about Bennett’s angry response to Michael reminding us that it was Michael Mulgrew who had tried to force us into Medicare Advantage – was that it was the only time Bennett showed any anger or even distress during the whole meeting. He never seemed angry when talking about copays or the “only2%” of members who had problems with the new drug plan or the proposed changes to pension contributions by the city.

How did we – who fought so hard to take back the chapter from Unity’s disrespect of its retirees – end up with a meeting in which the chapter leadership talked about how great the union was doing for us, and how we should join a telephone campaign for a city council candidate who does not support a city council law that the chapter voted overwhelmingly to support - but only got angry when a member reminded us of why we had to fight to win the chapter in the first place.

Norm Scott's avatar

Watching Bennett over the past year and a half, he bends over backwards to defend Unity and criticizes their critics - in public, while privately he will be critical.

12 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?