This article makes a great case against Mulgrew in how he is dividing people which is the very opposite of the purpose of a union. It seems to me that the biggest division is between Mulgrew and everyone else, in how he must think he has the right to demand that other union members either be his sycophants or be punished. The great union leader, Eugene V. Debs, spoke about how it is not the management bosses who do in unions but people in their own ranks. Mulgrew is no better than the worst union-buster.
Mark my words.... If Retirees win their litigation ... The MLC/UFT/DC37 will BLAME retirees for their troubles. THEY caused this, but will blame retirees for defending what they RIGHTLY earned. Them vs Us is not a good look in unions when you are speaking about your OWN people. Those terms are usually left for union vs management. When unions start eating their own - that is a clear sign they have LOST THEIR WAY....
The MLC and their attorney have created a paradigm that the MLC was founded to prevent... pitting one union against the other and using the leverage of ALL labor in negotiations to get the best for the workers and retirees. Sadly, poor leaders, like Michael Mulgrew and Henry Garrido used it to benefit their own unions - like Mulgrew said, " I am not supporting a democratic vote of one union one vote in the MLC to give up our power!" He became a dictator to control the MLC to only benefit the UFT - AT THE EXPENSE of other unions... That IS NOT UNION!
Mostly, I couldn't agree more. I have to disagree, though, that Mulgrew is doing anything to benefit ANY union. Stripping members of benefits is not beneficial to UFT, or anyone. Mulgrew makes the worst deals I've ever seen, over and over.
I've argued in this space that you and the retiree group are doing the work of union. That's why I contribute to you instead of COPE. I contributed to the UFT political fund for years, but stopped when Mulgrew used my dues to hire lawyers to threaten me. Union stands together to help members, to improve the lot of members, and thus improve things for everyone. Mulgrew is doing the opposite. You're doing what he should be doing, and if he had any shame, he'd hang his head in it.
We have to call it like it is. Unity believes in a totalitarian union. They are no better than the communist party of the old Soviet Union. When a union as well as many people who are now running for political office no longer believes in democracy, democracy dies.
Shunning?! I grew up in a cult and in it until my early 30’s. It took a world of pain and deep searching to break free.
Hearing my union leaders speak to members with this type of toxic language and watching how a patronage elite faction is manipulated within my union has been triggering … and yet, still very familiar.
We must change the culture.
The preacher who preached this divisive sermon needs to be held accountable… as much as Mulgrew.
We need a union. Not a fraternity or sorority. Not a secret society. Not a monolith that buries dissent with group dynamics and group think.
This article makes a great case against Mulgrew in how he is dividing people which is the very opposite of the purpose of a union. It seems to me that the biggest division is between Mulgrew and everyone else, in how he must think he has the right to demand that other union members either be his sycophants or be punished. The great union leader, Eugene V. Debs, spoke about how it is not the management bosses who do in unions but people in their own ranks. Mulgrew is no better than the worst union-buster.
Vote them OUT!!!
Mark my words.... If Retirees win their litigation ... The MLC/UFT/DC37 will BLAME retirees for their troubles. THEY caused this, but will blame retirees for defending what they RIGHTLY earned. Them vs Us is not a good look in unions when you are speaking about your OWN people. Those terms are usually left for union vs management. When unions start eating their own - that is a clear sign they have LOST THEIR WAY....
The MLC and their attorney have created a paradigm that the MLC was founded to prevent... pitting one union against the other and using the leverage of ALL labor in negotiations to get the best for the workers and retirees. Sadly, poor leaders, like Michael Mulgrew and Henry Garrido used it to benefit their own unions - like Mulgrew said, " I am not supporting a democratic vote of one union one vote in the MLC to give up our power!" He became a dictator to control the MLC to only benefit the UFT - AT THE EXPENSE of other unions... That IS NOT UNION!
Mostly, I couldn't agree more. I have to disagree, though, that Mulgrew is doing anything to benefit ANY union. Stripping members of benefits is not beneficial to UFT, or anyone. Mulgrew makes the worst deals I've ever seen, over and over.
I've argued in this space that you and the retiree group are doing the work of union. That's why I contribute to you instead of COPE. I contributed to the UFT political fund for years, but stopped when Mulgrew used my dues to hire lawyers to threaten me. Union stands together to help members, to improve the lot of members, and thus improve things for everyone. Mulgrew is doing the opposite. You're doing what he should be doing, and if he had any shame, he'd hang his head in it.
We should NEVER have had to exist. Ever.
Absolutely. Mulgrew should be doing what YOU do, instead of trying to serve Eric Adams.
We have to call it like it is. Unity believes in a totalitarian union. They are no better than the communist party of the old Soviet Union. When a union as well as many people who are now running for political office no longer believes in democracy, democracy dies.
It certainly appears that way. You'd think they'd at least pretend, but they can't seem to be bothered anymore.
Shunning?! I grew up in a cult and in it until my early 30’s. It took a world of pain and deep searching to break free.
Hearing my union leaders speak to members with this type of toxic language and watching how a patronage elite faction is manipulated within my union has been triggering … and yet, still very familiar.
We must change the culture.
The preacher who preached this divisive sermon needs to be held accountable… as much as Mulgrew.
We need a union. Not a fraternity or sorority. Not a secret society. Not a monolith that buries dissent with group dynamics and group think.
Absolutely.