A New Voice...

...and why we are building it

Retiree Advocate (RA) has failed us. They seem to like being in charge. They like hanging out in their Broadway office. They like making rules. But they miss the big picture.

That big picture, frankly, has Marianne Pizzitola and NYC Retirees painted all over it. They enabled our victory, and they’re the reason we were able, at long last, to oust Unity. They brought us the votes that finally allowed us to successfully push back.

NYC Retirees are the ones who did battle in the courts and on the streets. They’re the reason Mulgrew at least pretends to oppose Medicare Advantage (while lobbying against regulations that would legally preclude it).

We need a movement that will push our priorities. We need a movement that will work hand in hand with NYC Retirees to do so. That movement is Fix Retiree Benefits.

We are going to run in the 27 RTC election, and we aren’t going to forget our voters when we win.

On March 24th, NYC Retirees will hold a Lobby Day in Albany. Some friends and I will be going there to push the equivalent of 1096 as a state regulation—this would not only move Medicare from the mitts of meddling Michael Mulgrew, but also eliminate our co-pays. That, my friends, is where our focus should be.

At the February RTC Exec. Board meeting, I asked if we could reschedule our chapter meeting, also scheduled for the 24th. It was dismissed by RA’s Bennett Fischer with virtually no discussion. It can’t be done, he said, so let’s not even try.

Regardless, I’m going to Albany on March 24th. Join us if you like. At the RTC meeting, among other things, they’ll be discussing Iran. That was a big topic at the Exec. Board meeting on March 3rd. I left minutes after our scheduled ending time of 3 PM. I’m told they sat around debating over Iran and established a committee to further deliberate.

We had one other piece of business at that meeting. We were going to replace a member, the late Daniel Harkavy. I wanted to speak about him a little before the vote, but someone had decided that we were not allowed to comment. We’d all been able to do so at our last election meeting. Who made the decision to not allow comments, when did they do so, and why were we not consulted about it?

Thus far, no one’s filled me in.

I raised my hand and two RA members objected to allowing me to speak. Chapter Leader Bennett Fischer, another RA member, said I could speak, but only for 30 seconds, and only about the voting process. He asked me what I wanted to speak about. I told him forget it—I would simply write about it. I had my laptop, and began writing my piece about Daniel at that moment.

Bennett continued to talk for well over 30 seconds. Then several more members did the same. I figured the hell with it, and got up and said what I wanted to say. I added, though, that it would be a good idea to vote for my friend Gail, so as to change the conversation.

RA, evidently, didn’t see being inclusive as anything worthwhile. Instead, they selected someone who, upon being questioned, openly professed to have little background knowledge about our struggle.

It would be great if this could change. I’m afraid, though, it won’t happen until and unless RA faces up to the fact that ABC got three retiree votes for every one they did last year. I’ve been trying to build a bridge between RA and the ABC-aligned group we’ve been calling Fix Retiree Benefits since the day after the UFT officer election. I’d contacted several members of RA, those I deemed the most influential, and heard crickets back.

I also attended the very next Executive Board meeting and pointed out it was time to work together. This went unanswered and ignored for months. Last week, I reached out again, and the answer I got was yes, let’s meet, but not until the end of April. You need not be clairvoyant to see they’re reluctant to work with us.

I’m not crazy about working with some of them either, but so what? I was chapter leader of 400 people, and some were very tough to work with. I didn’t dwell on that. It wasn’t germane to the job. What’s important is helping people and moving our cause forward.

To do that, we need to reach members who voted for us two years ago. There’s no question that our mandate was to protect or improve our health care. There is also no question this has not been the priority of RA for the last few years—they’ve blocked my efforts to do so on multiple occasions.

While I happen to share RA’s position on Iran, I don’t believe the Retired Teacher Chapter of the UFT is going to effect any profound change there. I’d vote for the resolution if I weren’t in Albany trying to protect our health insurance. But fighting for our health insurance is something no one else will do.

Make no mistake, RA isn’t fighting for it either.

Perhaps if they choose to share a ticket with those of us who want to Fix Retiree Benefits, with a genuine partnership, we could lead the chapter in a new direction. Perhaps their much-vaunted labor committee could march with us when we demonstrate to protect our benefits.

Sure, it’s not Starbucks, but it’s what we were elected to do.

Everything I see says they’ll continue to promote RA as a caucus, charge 50 bucks for the vote they’ve deprived us of since we helped them get elected, and demand loyalty, like Unity. Everything they do suggests they learned nothing from the last election. They believe it was their brilliance alone that won the RTC, and that they’ll miraculously pull it off again.

That was what they thought when they ran with ARISE. They have boldly determined to learn absolutely nothing from the results.

We don’t need a lovefest. We need an understanding that we have common goals. For my money, RA aligned with Marianne and NYC Retirees, took the win, and left them (and us) in the lurch. At the first opportunity, they focused on their own pet causes, abandoning the work we were elected to do.

My daughter and I like watching Law and Order SVU together. We’ve been doing it for years. In a recent episode, NYPD Captain Olivia said something like this:

A good leader welcomes questions. A bad one demands loyalty.

I’ve thought about that a lot. It’s not easy being a leader. As chapter leader, I was always opposed by someone, and sometimes for odd reasons. A vindictive, problematic AP had chosen a member to be on our consultation committee, sent texts to members to choose that person, and some department members were angered when our committee voted to reject that person.

I understood their choice, though. An AP can dispense gigs to favorites, or withhold them. You know, like the Unity Caucus. And just like the Unity Caucus, people might support that AP, no matter how membership suffers. Unity Caucus ought to be supporting membership, but in fact values perpetuating its own power well more than helping us.

That’s why they’re so doggedly insistent on squelching criticism. That’s why they threaten those of us who fail to comply with frivolous lawsuits. That’s also why they’ve got to go, and that’s why we need to push them out as quickly as possible.

Excepting legal threats, RA seems to be following in Unity’s footsteps. They also persist in believing they pushed Unity out all by themselves, ignoring at least 9,000 retirees who changed their minds and voted for ABC last year. That’s nothing short of delusional.

Leadership is not easy. Conflict comes with the job. Criticisms can hurt. Some of our friends in RA have a hard time taking criticism, let alone acting on it.

They’d better learn, and fast. If they don’t, they certainly won’t be sitting around that treasured office much longer.