It certainly benefits his patronage cult, who get jobs there. Were the city to consolidate Welfare Funds, they could save a whole lot of money without taking retirees off of Medicare.
May I suggest doing a little comparison of the UFT welfare fund, SHIP and the CSA welfare fund benefits? What UFT retirees have to pay for, (catastrophic and SHIP) CSA offers far better at no cost to both actives and retirees. (Catastrophic no cost $1000 deductible, acupuncture coverage up to $100 per visit 80% covered etc. ) Why is the UFT sitting on $1B welfare fund pot?
I'm 8 years away from reaching my retirement age, so I thought it would be a good idea to finally sit in on a Health Benefits at Retirement clinic that my chapter hosts every few months or so. I was shocked to hear that prescription coverage is not provided after retirement. Naturally, the facilitator put a positive spin about our option to add a rider from a health insurance plan for coverage, but it's at an additional cost and nowhere near as comprehensive as our current in-service welfare benefit plan.
I've read this blog over the past several months, and while I understood the advocacy on healthcare intellectually, re-reading the commitment from the UFT 10 years ago on finding healthcare savings of over a $1 billion per year - in perpetuity - and hearing the lack of benefits post retirement put everything into stark focus.
The cost-benefit analysis of UFT/Managerial or CSA positions continues to close, and not in a good way. There is a lot of work to do to right this ship.
We absolutely need new leadership. Cost of living should be a given in contract negotiations, not something for which you sacrifice a veritable pound of flesh. Beyond that, getting a three year contract and giving away something forever is insane.
Arthur, I think that actives may be concerned after they hear his remarks. At one point he sent a communication that if Medicare Advantage did not go through the actives would have to contribute $1,500.00.
As a matter of fact, he wrote us last year to say if we did not repeal 12-126 that would happen. He was blatantly pitting one faction of the union against another in a straight anti-union act. However, when 12-126 was not changed, there was no premium imposed. So among his other qualities, he's a liar.
True. I may or may not have placed that in my notes. It really appears to me that active members are not overly concerned. Perhaps that will change when Mulgrew makes yet another awful deal.
largest welfare fund
Yes the largest welfare fund and Mulgrew is sitting on it. Sure as hell isn’t using it to provide the benefits it’s intended to provide.
It certainly benefits his patronage cult, who get jobs there. Were the city to consolidate Welfare Funds, they could save a whole lot of money without taking retirees off of Medicare.
May I suggest doing a little comparison of the UFT welfare fund, SHIP and the CSA welfare fund benefits? What UFT retirees have to pay for, (catastrophic and SHIP) CSA offers far better at no cost to both actives and retirees. (Catastrophic no cost $1000 deductible, acupuncture coverage up to $100 per visit 80% covered etc. ) Why is the UFT sitting on $1B welfare fund pot?
I'm 8 years away from reaching my retirement age, so I thought it would be a good idea to finally sit in on a Health Benefits at Retirement clinic that my chapter hosts every few months or so. I was shocked to hear that prescription coverage is not provided after retirement. Naturally, the facilitator put a positive spin about our option to add a rider from a health insurance plan for coverage, but it's at an additional cost and nowhere near as comprehensive as our current in-service welfare benefit plan.
I've read this blog over the past several months, and while I understood the advocacy on healthcare intellectually, re-reading the commitment from the UFT 10 years ago on finding healthcare savings of over a $1 billion per year - in perpetuity - and hearing the lack of benefits post retirement put everything into stark focus.
The cost-benefit analysis of UFT/Managerial or CSA positions continues to close, and not in a good way. There is a lot of work to do to right this ship.
2014 UFT MOA on Heatlhcare Savings (Section 9)
https://www.nyc.gov/assets/olr/downloads/pdf/collectivebargaining/cbu-uft-moa-042914.pdf
We absolutely need new leadership. Cost of living should be a given in contract negotiations, not something for which you sacrifice a veritable pound of flesh. Beyond that, getting a three year contract and giving away something forever is insane.
Arthur, I think that actives may be concerned after they hear his remarks. At one point he sent a communication that if Medicare Advantage did not go through the actives would have to contribute $1,500.00.
If the actives are not concerned they should be.
As a matter of fact, he wrote us last year to say if we did not repeal 12-126 that would happen. He was blatantly pitting one faction of the union against another in a straight anti-union act. However, when 12-126 was not changed, there was no premium imposed. So among his other qualities, he's a liar.
Mulgrew also made a comment about the in-service health plan that he is negotiating which is at risk.
Hopefully there is a recording because the actives should know.
True. I may or may not have placed that in my notes. It really appears to me that active members are not overly concerned. Perhaps that will change when Mulgrew makes yet another awful deal.