one extra point I'd like to add to your, as usual, wonderful piece....in court in front of judge frank, the aetna lawyer did not just admit that some procedures or treatments might not be approved or covered by aetna's medicare advantage plan, he actually admitted to the judge that people could actually die because of this....it was pointed out by the retiree organization's lawyer that a person with cancer actually had died because of aetna denying a treatment until appeals of that denial finally allowed her to go to the facility she had wanted and to have the treatment doctors told her she needed but but months had gone by because of the denials, so (short version) the doctors informed her that if she had gotten to them sooner, they could a bunch of things to help her, but it was now too late. her hip and leg were amputated and she ultimately died. the aetna lawyer's response was that that was just one person and yes some people could die with how aetna did their approvals....the judge's jaw actually dropped. at one point, while the aetna lawyer kept justifying, the judge suggested it would be better if the lawyer just stopped talking...I'm sure the aetna lawyer got in trouble with aetna for admitting in court the truth about how aetna functions...and this is the amazing plan and company that mulgrew and his unity shills, like the unnamed complained below, wanted us to be thrilled about....I prefer not to die because of what my own union has been trying to do to me and my healthcare...
Peter is correct. Prior authorization killed Orrana Cunningham. Her family sold their house and all their belongings to try to pay for her care still in the end she died.
Some union leaders like your own, say prior authorization saves money and prevents over utilization. No, it’s been manipulated by union leaders to fill their coffers at the expense of healthcare needed by people ordered by their doctors.
There are programs well AI that can help you very easily draft legal complaints and briefs against unfair representation. If your interested I can share. You put in what you need substitute your grievances and bam they have to pay attention.
My next post will feature something that needs to be addressed. I'm thinking about it right now. The best remedy, IMHO, is voting them out, and we're working on that.
Because my wife has a unique type of Lymphoma in which a team of top Sinai doctors are now figuring out a course of treatment, I know in my heart Aetna would have never approved—especially the need for a second biopsy to get more information. That is why Marianne came to our first meeting, I had to go up and personally thank her. She is a hero while I view Unity sycophants cowards. Some were once my friends, but now my view of them are different because as members of a union, we are suppose to watch out and help each other. Instead, they only care for themselves by following the party line like members of the Soviet poliburo.
I agree. Very sorry for what you and your wife are going through. Diane Ravitch wrote that she'd had heart surgery for some non-standard reason, and might not be around today were she not on real Medicare.
This article sounds very Unity-ish. There was an opportunity to educate readers about NYHA, yet you lean into a vagueness that doesn't need to exist and adds to the confusion that Unity wants around NYHA. We know what happens to public sector retiree healthcare. If you are an out-of-state public sector retiree, you keep what you have now without diminishment and no additional cost. If you're a retiree in-state, you get NYH and the added benefit of long-term care.
I wrote, exactly, "For example, out of state retirees are not covered by NYHA. Supposedly, they are covered by whatever their employers have provided." Yes, doubtless Unity will be delighted with this piece. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
"supposedly" is not the wording in the bill and that words infers many misgivings.
Let's be precise and accurate.
For every retiree, while he or she is not a resident of New York
21 state, the appropriate public employee retiree health benefit program
22 shall maintain the retiree's public employee retiree health benefit as
23 if this article had not been enacted.
Reserve the "supposedly" for the private healthcare system. They will "supposedly" do a better job than a public one. However, every nation with a public healthcare system has better health outcomes than ours and it eliminates medical debt which is one of the leading reasons people become unhoused.
We should also reserve "supposedly" for our employer and provider of our public employee health benefit program. The mayor(s) and city continue to operate in bad faith. We need more specific language protecting municipal retirees.
NYHA removes employers from the equation. Medicare Advantage would be an impossibility under NYHA. It is also statewide, not only NYC. I am not sure what you mean.
What language would you like to see in the bill for retirees?I bet it is in the bill already.
We need language that speaks to the impossibility of MA and guarantee of traditional Medicare for all retirees living outside of NYS. We can expect the city and current MLC leaders to continue to work against us. If out of state retirees must stay with their existing employer’s plans while all the details of NYHA are being worked out, we need assurance the employer’s plan will not eventually lead to diminished benefits/coverage for out of state retirees.
There will be no private insurance companies operating in NY so there cannot be an MA plan. Out-of-state retiree insurance is not subject to change, once the bill is passed. It will be the law.
I need folks commenting on NYHA to take the time and research the bill first.
It's interesting that regardless of what happened in the last DA, with the acknowledgement that pursuing Medicare advantage was a mistake and an acceptance that listening to the retirees, not forcing any Healthcare plan on them that they have not agreed to, and pledging to help them in their fight for legislation to be passed to maintain premium free Healthcare, is not enough for you. Even further, the delegates agreed that those matters should be voted on and agreed to by the delegates for it to move forward, yet, you continue to cast blame on an entire caucus, which includes rank and file members. You will never be satisfied.
Another thing, Unity does not limit the number of words on Facebook, Facebook sets the limit!
Also, if the organization formed by Marianne Pizzitola can provide proof that it has received its determination letter and donations are tax deductible, I will donate. As someone who has members of her family who are retired City Employees, universal premium free Healthcare is an important fight for me. Not just any old Healthcare. I have checked, with the intention to donate to the organization, and the NYC Organization for Public Service Retirees does not have that approval from the IRS.
I ask that when you are claiming to give information, it not be misinformation, as that is harmful to all members both in service and retired. Your bitterness is showing. Focus!
In fact, no one has admitted any mistake. In fact, Mulgrew still defends the Aetna plan. In fact, we are still threatened with it, as you'd know if you bothered to read the piece upon which you comment. And your request, essentially that I sit down and shut up, serves to reinforce my point.
I've banned at least three Unity members who've concealed their positions from this site. My readers deserve to know what motivates you to defend the status quo. If you aren't using a real name the next time you come here, I'll ban you too.
the name hidden complainer complains that the retiree organization needs to prove it is tax deductible for him or her to donate....left out is that the organization had to race to form to stop retirees from being screwed. and becoming a tax deductible non-profit takes time...people are donating from their pensions to defend themselves against the unity machine's attempt to take away health care promised for entire careers, and for which teachers like me took 0% raises many years to ensure I would receive it. I'll bet you this person will gladly reap the benefits of the retiree organization if we win our law suits and that person had a serious injury or injury that wouldn't be covered properly by medicare advantage....finally, this person further says it's just not good enough for us that mulgrew "pledges" to help us, but of course does nothing. by that logic if mulgrew says he is the queen of england, and pledges to rule with compassion as that queen, we must actually believe he is the queen of england...
I don't care if they are tax deductible. I care that they do what they claim to do, as they've proven over and over in court. The NYC Retirees are doing the job we pay Unity to do. Unity is failing and many know it. Some members have had it with Mulgrew's nonsense and I can't blame them at all. Remove Amy Arundell, who tirelessly helps members? Was she making others look bad? Who knows? Dictators never explain.
So let's be clear. I never asked you to sit down and shut up. I asked you to not spead misinformation, which from your response proves that you have no intention to be truthful. You can ban me as a way of shutting me up, but remember that this rank and file member is one you and your cronies claim you want to represent.
If the only way to keep spreading your misinformation is to block those who challenge you, then you are as bad as the leadership you are trying to replace, if I am to believe your description of them. So carry on. Every dog has his day!
Thank you for keeping us informed.
Thank you for your kind comment.
one extra point I'd like to add to your, as usual, wonderful piece....in court in front of judge frank, the aetna lawyer did not just admit that some procedures or treatments might not be approved or covered by aetna's medicare advantage plan, he actually admitted to the judge that people could actually die because of this....it was pointed out by the retiree organization's lawyer that a person with cancer actually had died because of aetna denying a treatment until appeals of that denial finally allowed her to go to the facility she had wanted and to have the treatment doctors told her she needed but but months had gone by because of the denials, so (short version) the doctors informed her that if she had gotten to them sooner, they could a bunch of things to help her, but it was now too late. her hip and leg were amputated and she ultimately died. the aetna lawyer's response was that that was just one person and yes some people could die with how aetna did their approvals....the judge's jaw actually dropped. at one point, while the aetna lawyer kept justifying, the judge suggested it would be better if the lawyer just stopped talking...I'm sure the aetna lawyer got in trouble with aetna for admitting in court the truth about how aetna functions...and this is the amazing plan and company that mulgrew and his unity shills, like the unnamed complained below, wanted us to be thrilled about....I prefer not to die because of what my own union has been trying to do to me and my healthcare...
Wow! I did not know that. I too prefer not to die because Unity chooses to trade my health care for a mediocre contract.
Peter is correct. Prior authorization killed Orrana Cunningham. Her family sold their house and all their belongings to try to pay for her care still in the end she died.
Here is the case Peter was referring to. https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/10/health/aetna-verdict-oklahoma-orrana-cunningham/index.html?cid=ios_app
Some union leaders like your own, say prior authorization saves money and prevents over utilization. No, it’s been manipulated by union leaders to fill their coffers at the expense of healthcare needed by people ordered by their doctors.
it was an amazing experience that day in court
Is this something that could help?
https://www.legalbriefai.com/legal-terms/duty-of-fair-representation
It's very interesting. I've looked at it and will share it with some friends. Thank you.
There are programs well AI that can help you very easily draft legal complaints and briefs against unfair representation. If your interested I can share. You put in what you need substitute your grievances and bam they have to pay attention.
My next post will feature something that needs to be addressed. I'm thinking about it right now. The best remedy, IMHO, is voting them out, and we're working on that.
Because my wife has a unique type of Lymphoma in which a team of top Sinai doctors are now figuring out a course of treatment, I know in my heart Aetna would have never approved—especially the need for a second biopsy to get more information. That is why Marianne came to our first meeting, I had to go up and personally thank her. She is a hero while I view Unity sycophants cowards. Some were once my friends, but now my view of them are different because as members of a union, we are suppose to watch out and help each other. Instead, they only care for themselves by following the party line like members of the Soviet poliburo.
I agree. Very sorry for what you and your wife are going through. Diane Ravitch wrote that she'd had heart surgery for some non-standard reason, and might not be around today were she not on real Medicare.
Thank you Arthur
You're welcome Kathy.
This article sounds very Unity-ish. There was an opportunity to educate readers about NYHA, yet you lean into a vagueness that doesn't need to exist and adds to the confusion that Unity wants around NYHA. We know what happens to public sector retiree healthcare. If you are an out-of-state public sector retiree, you keep what you have now without diminishment and no additional cost. If you're a retiree in-state, you get NYH and the added benefit of long-term care.
I wrote, exactly, "For example, out of state retirees are not covered by NYHA. Supposedly, they are covered by whatever their employers have provided." Yes, doubtless Unity will be delighted with this piece. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
"supposedly" is not the wording in the bill and that words infers many misgivings.
Let's be precise and accurate.
For every retiree, while he or she is not a resident of New York
21 state, the appropriate public employee retiree health benefit program
22 shall maintain the retiree's public employee retiree health benefit as
23 if this article had not been enacted.
Reserve the "supposedly" for the private healthcare system. They will "supposedly" do a better job than a public one. However, every nation with a public healthcare system has better health outcomes than ours and it eliminates medical debt which is one of the leading reasons people become unhoused.
Again, thanks for sharing your thoughts.
We should also reserve "supposedly" for our employer and provider of our public employee health benefit program. The mayor(s) and city continue to operate in bad faith. We need more specific language protecting municipal retirees.
NYHA removes employers from the equation. Medicare Advantage would be an impossibility under NYHA. It is also statewide, not only NYC. I am not sure what you mean.
What language would you like to see in the bill for retirees?I bet it is in the bill already.
We need language that speaks to the impossibility of MA and guarantee of traditional Medicare for all retirees living outside of NYS. We can expect the city and current MLC leaders to continue to work against us. If out of state retirees must stay with their existing employer’s plans while all the details of NYHA are being worked out, we need assurance the employer’s plan will not eventually lead to diminished benefits/coverage for out of state retirees.
There is no more MLC under NYHA, it isn't needed.
There will be no private insurance companies operating in NY so there cannot be an MA plan. Out-of-state retiree insurance is not subject to change, once the bill is passed. It will be the law.
I need folks commenting on NYHA to take the time and research the bill first.
https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2023/S7590
https://www.nyhcampaign.org/
It's interesting that regardless of what happened in the last DA, with the acknowledgement that pursuing Medicare advantage was a mistake and an acceptance that listening to the retirees, not forcing any Healthcare plan on them that they have not agreed to, and pledging to help them in their fight for legislation to be passed to maintain premium free Healthcare, is not enough for you. Even further, the delegates agreed that those matters should be voted on and agreed to by the delegates for it to move forward, yet, you continue to cast blame on an entire caucus, which includes rank and file members. You will never be satisfied.
Another thing, Unity does not limit the number of words on Facebook, Facebook sets the limit!
Also, if the organization formed by Marianne Pizzitola can provide proof that it has received its determination letter and donations are tax deductible, I will donate. As someone who has members of her family who are retired City Employees, universal premium free Healthcare is an important fight for me. Not just any old Healthcare. I have checked, with the intention to donate to the organization, and the NYC Organization for Public Service Retirees does not have that approval from the IRS.
I ask that when you are claiming to give information, it not be misinformation, as that is harmful to all members both in service and retired. Your bitterness is showing. Focus!
In fact, no one has admitted any mistake. In fact, Mulgrew still defends the Aetna plan. In fact, we are still threatened with it, as you'd know if you bothered to read the piece upon which you comment. And your request, essentially that I sit down and shut up, serves to reinforce my point.
I've banned at least three Unity members who've concealed their positions from this site. My readers deserve to know what motivates you to defend the status quo. If you aren't using a real name the next time you come here, I'll ban you too.
Have a nice day.
the name hidden complainer complains that the retiree organization needs to prove it is tax deductible for him or her to donate....left out is that the organization had to race to form to stop retirees from being screwed. and becoming a tax deductible non-profit takes time...people are donating from their pensions to defend themselves against the unity machine's attempt to take away health care promised for entire careers, and for which teachers like me took 0% raises many years to ensure I would receive it. I'll bet you this person will gladly reap the benefits of the retiree organization if we win our law suits and that person had a serious injury or injury that wouldn't be covered properly by medicare advantage....finally, this person further says it's just not good enough for us that mulgrew "pledges" to help us, but of course does nothing. by that logic if mulgrew says he is the queen of england, and pledges to rule with compassion as that queen, we must actually believe he is the queen of england...
I don't care if they are tax deductible. I care that they do what they claim to do, as they've proven over and over in court. The NYC Retirees are doing the job we pay Unity to do. Unity is failing and many know it. Some members have had it with Mulgrew's nonsense and I can't blame them at all. Remove Amy Arundell, who tirelessly helps members? Was she making others look bad? Who knows? Dictators never explain.
exactly...
So let's be clear. I never asked you to sit down and shut up. I asked you to not spead misinformation, which from your response proves that you have no intention to be truthful. You can ban me as a way of shutting me up, but remember that this rank and file member is one you and your cronies claim you want to represent.
If the only way to keep spreading your misinformation is to block those who challenge you, then you are as bad as the leadership you are trying to replace, if I am to believe your description of them. So carry on. Every dog has his day!
Adios, masked Unity member!
Why cannot these people use their real names? They are cowards.
You realize that the DA reso just says UFT will never agree to forcing any retired member into a Medicare Advantage Plan?
When the MLC does, above reso is meaningless.
Ever wonder why the UFT doesn’t want another MLC vote on the issue?