The Rigging of the Votes

How Unity Views Us

I get email. Sometimes people tell me what I did wrong. Sometimes they tell me what Unity did wrong. Sometimes I agree, and sometimes I don’t.

For example, despite suggestions otherwise, I don’t think that GES rigged the votes. I believe the count was fair and we lost. We had people watching, and I trust them. There were other things, though, that went down during what Mulgrew calls, “silly season.” As he likes to say, there were “shenanigans.”

ABC lost. But we did surprisingly well, on our first time out, and we’re just getting started. RTC chapter leader Bennett Fischer pointed out, to me at least, that Unity didn’t win enough votes to pass an SBO. He also quoted someone, and I don’t recall who, who said we should have an election every year.

That’s a good idea, especially with a cult like Unity in power. Unity values that power, and will use it in any possible way, within their limited imagination, to sustain it. As far as I can determine, it’s the thing that matters most to them. And when they find themselves threatened, they reach into their bag of tricks.

The incumbency is a powerful thing. Mulgrew can send emails to the whole union or any portion thereof. For example, after the outrage that took place at the June DA, he saw fit only to email those who attended, as though this sort of behavior affects only those who happened to be there. Unfortunately for him. other parties are free to tell the entire sordid tale, and we’ll never let them forget it.

As for the election, UFT set up an insane system where non-Unity groups would have to pay thousands of dollars to use email, and in which a UFT email could delay non-Unity email for, essentially, as long as they wish. They maintain this is to avoid confusion. I maintain it’s their way of maintaining total control.

It is beyond absurd, in 2025, that the only way non-Unity parties reach members is via an ad in a paper many or most of us don’t deem worth our time. I don’t recall whether or not my face made it into our ad, but I’m certain if it did, that it was used to line many a bird cage, and to fill even more trash bags.

Then, of course, they allowed in-person voting, but only in locales they themselves could control. This was nothing if not transparent.

This year, of course, Unity found itself suddenly able to make improvements for members. You get glasses annually instead of semi-annually. There are more dentists, even if they’re located in Cleveland. Though Unity imposed co-pays on retirees who already pay hefty premiums for insurance, they’ll refund 105 bucks back if you use SHIP.

And, of course, after having overwhelmingly lost the Retired Teacher Chapter, Unity paid valuable lip service to opposing Medicare Advantage. Yet, they oppose our efforts to legislate it. And there are reasons for that too. Mulgrew speaks as though he wants to guarantee it only for those of us who are already retired. That means, perhaps, he’s not betraying all of us, but merely, the overwhelming majority of us.

As usual, Unity is proud of themselves, and seems to feel they deserve credit for the simple act of breathing. They don’t. But here are some improvements they could make if they wanted to. There’s a big one they could have made. They could have given paraprofessionals a pensionable raise in the last contract.

Unity only changed its tune when paras voted against them 3-1. So hey, if we have elections every year, maybe Unity will take time out from gala luncheons and try to help us, which is, you know, their frigging job. And yet, despite the promises they made, the ones that bought literally paraprofessional votes this year, paras have absolutely nothing to show for it.

It’s only elections that caused Unity to even pretend to act in our interest. Yet it’s their job to do so all the time. 105 bucks back for retirees means you get 7 free doctor visits—but not necessarily. Recently retirees have been charged multiple co-pays for single visits. It’s happened to me and many others.

This is another manipulation from Unity—not only do they do things that look good right before the election, but they withhold things that look bad until directly after. Am I the only one unsurprised that, on the very first business day after the election results, Unity announced a new upcoming health plan for in-service and non-Medicare retiree members? Am I the only one unsurprised they say it’s the bestest thing ever and offer no details whatsoever?

Unity’s MO is pretty clear. Before the election, it’s good, good and good. After, it’s back to business as usual. Make no mistake—the mayoral endorsement was part of that as well.

Before the election, there were member surveys. Mulgrew said they were all over the place, inconclusive, and we couldn’t endorse any candidate. After the election, he revealed that little over 1% of membership even bothered to fill out the surveys. And he still didn’t tell us exactly what they said.

Personally, I see this as the socialist vs. the sociopaths, and I’d opt for the former if I resided in NYC. But I’m sorely disappointed Mamdani will not commit to 1096, and I’m certain that has to do with his wanting or needing union endorsements. In fact, the thing that most concerns me about him is that he’ll find himself indebted to our union leaders.

I don’t see Unity as having our interests at heart. They spout demonstrable, outrageous falsehoods to rationalize their opposition to legislation that would protect our health care. And they continue to muster the audacity to oppose premiums even as we, retirees, pay them for pharmacy coverage. They had no qualms about trying to impose even higher ones for those of us who wished to continue with real Medicare.

And yes, we are reimbursed, partially, for the drug plan we’re offered. However, our spouses are not. This is unusual because our spouses are part of our health care in general, both when we’re in-service and retired. Why are they excluded from this benefit when they’re included in virtually every other?

They could, of course, go even farther if they wished, given they’re sitting on almost a billion dollars. We pay 150 bucks a month for pharmacy insurance. That’s 1800 a year. If you’re married, double it to 3600. Then, you get back 900, but only for the member. So you’re out of pocket 2700. Why not extend it to the spouse, and cut retiree expenses to 1800?

If they really wanted to help us, of course, they’d place us in the same pharmacy program our in-service brothers and sisters have, where you get any prescription for 30 or 40 bucks, instead of thousands.

And hey, maybe they’ll do that right before the next RTC election. Then perhaps, they could win the chapter back. Then they could get rid of all those motions, and all that voting that takes place at our meetings. They could place some long-winded stooge up there to give long speeches that amount to, “Sit down and shut up,” their most-cherished theme.

Make no mistake—It’s on us to stop that from happening.