Archive Page 32

Mulgrew spooks members with a 6:00 AM non-update about taking our GHI

This Monday morning, as we rush into our schools and get our first lessons set up for the week, we also have the pleasure of pondering what the heck Mulgrew is talking about in a bizarre non-update on in-service healthcare, sent out when I assume he and the rest of UFT leadership were still sleeping soundly. (It reached me at 6:12 AM).

Titled “An in-service healthcare update,” he begins by reminding us that “All of our members have and will continue to have access to premium-free health care,” failing to mention that this is actually already guaranteed by City Administrative Code 12-126, which he used UFT resources to try and get scrapped – and without a membership vote.

He then reminds us how good we have it, noting that “UFT is one of the few teachers’ unions in the country that still offers premium-free health care coverage for members…” However, he fails to note that other unionized cities that have it, such as LA, are not working to weaken it or trade it away for minor wage increases, but are instead effectively organizing to keep their healthcare and increase their wages above the inflation rate.

Next, Mulgrew hints that we might not be renewing GHI-CBP – an insurance plan that most of our workers have been using for decades, and then vaguely mentions that four providers responded to an RFP, but didn’t say who. In fact, when we asked at executive board last week, Joe Usatch, the Assistant Director of the UFT Welfare Fund, told us that he didn’t even know who responded. Mulgrew also fails to tell us that the RFP to replace GHI sought 10% in cost savings – an amount that would be impossible to save without somehow increasing member costs or reducing member care. There are only so many savings, after all, that Mulgrew can make by weakening GHI itself, such as by inserting massive copays for urgent care visits.

Then, he mentions switching retired members off of traditional Medicare and onto an Aetna Medicare Advantage plan as a win, and not as the failed plan to reach cost-savings at our expense that it actually is. To read this paragraph and not squirm, you have to be massively in the dark about what is going on, as the retiree healthcare battle has been front page news now for years. If he’s using what he’s done to retirees as an example of what he plans to do to in-service workers, however, we should definitely listen.

There are no new updates in this email. In fact, there is less information here than we’ve gotten at executive board meetings, DAs, and even other email updates. No, this isn’t an update. It’s a limp response to a petition organized by opposition to give us a say on healthcare changes before they happen. Sign that petition today.  

Striking is not Antiquated: L.A. education workers prove UFT leadership wrong with 30% Salary Increases

Last week, we had the displeasure of hearing the party of our union leadership argue against members having the right to strike. In the land of pattern bargaining, striking is antiquated, said one. It’s white privilege, said another. We don’t need the right, because we’d strike anyways if things were ever actually bad said their caucus president. A few members additionally pointed to cities like LA and Chicago and said—they’re just striking for what we already have here in New York.

The timing couldn’t have been more ironic. For, but a few days later, highly diverse education workers in Los Angeles went on strike. And they didn’t go on strike to get what we already have in New York City. The City of Los Angeles offered them a better deal than the sub-inflation DC37 pattern that UFT leadership wants us to be stuck with. But, more importantly, the striking workers won. They’ll be getting 30% salary increases, among other perks.

 Let’s look at some facts/analysis.

  • The workers who went on strike in Los Angeles are not ‘people of privilege.’ They are amongst the lowest paid public sector workers in the city, filling approximately the same positions as the lowest paid workers in DC37.
  • Times are rough in Los Angeles, but they’re rougher in New York. Over the last 12 months, when compared with Los Angeles, general inflation is higher by a full percentage point in New York. Nevertheless, L.A. workers agree, that times are bad enough to strike.
  • Cities like L.A. don’t just strike to get what we have in New York; they strike even when they’re given a better deal than us. Indeed, LA’s latest offer was about a 23% increase over 5 years with a 3% cash-in-hand bonus, a $20 minimum wage, and full healthcare benefits for part-time workers (4 hours a day or more). That’s about 7 percentage points higher than what DC37 was given (16.21%) and two dollars more in terms of a minimum wage ($18). But, Education Workers United was seeking 30% and an additional $2 an hour over the next few years, as well as more hours for their workers. They weren’t ‘settling for less in solidarity,’ as our unions are. Moreover, health insurance is already 100% premium free for L.A.’s striking workers. To my knowledge, union leadership there is not trying to organize for members to pay more for coverage or be switched to inferior plans, as our own union leadership is doing here.
  • Striking is clearly not antiquated. The strike in L.A. has ended after just a few days of workers organizing together on the picket line. And they won. Per CBS, “the agreement includes a 30% wage increase and a retroactive pay increase of between $4,000 and $8,000. The increase will raise the average annual salary of its workers from about $25,000 to $33,000.”

In conclusion, Los Angeles proves New York’s union leadership wrong. When we organize together, we can do better. But in the bizarro land of New York, where the union organizes only to get us thrown off our healthcare, while threatening lawsuits to real progressive organizers, we’re told that the only way to truly be ‘union proud’ is to ‘don’t worry, be happy.’ Under the leadership of Unity Caucus, the UFT has become ‘post-union.’ Let’s take a page from L.A. and start acting like a union again. That starts with at least working to win back the right to strike.

Why is Mulgrew Exaggerating the cost of going to CityMD?

Last week at the DA, Mulgrew claimed that CityMD costs were so high that he was glad to hike our copays up to $100. In fact, he’d prefer if our copays were $400. That implies a pretty substantial amount of cost. He threw some numbers out there — like $680 for a COVID test — to try to make his point.

So, I’m a little lost. A few weeks ago, I injured myself. In my neck of the woods, CityMD is pretty much the only urgent care option around unless you want to wait in line for hours at the free clinic. Long story short, I shelled out the $50 and went. Had to get X-rays and everything, so the cost was clearly more than just ‘getting in the door.’ What did GHI pay? $172. Once copays go up to $100 (up from $15 in 2016), that share would be $122 – just barely over half the cost. If copays were $400 – about double the cost of the visit, period–I’m not sure who would be profiting. The hedge funds? The stabilization fund?

Bottom line? We’re being misled on the cost of urgent cares as an excuse to raise our share of healthcare costs. And, don’t get me wrong – let’s be careful not to adopt Mulgrew’s frame. We’ve caught UFT leadership misleading us on just how bad the skyrocketing costs are. That’s important. But even if costs are going up, we should be fighting for our compensation packages to match or exceed those increases. Instead, UFT leadership is accepting sub-inflation wage adjustments (read: paycuts) below the mostly non-unionized average. They’re telling us we’re better off without a right to strike. And they’re obliterating our healthcare before our eyes.

It’s time to tell leadership: no more cuts. UFT members deserve fair pay and benefits so that we can afford to live in the city we serve. Sign your name on the petition today for a referendum to vote before major changes–like copay hikes or insurance switches–are made to our healthcare.


Learn more about

our UFT Caucus

Content Policy

Content of signed articles and comments represents the opinions of their authors. The views expressed in signed articles are not necessarily the views of New Action/UFT.
Follow New Action – UFT on WordPress.com
May 2026
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Blog Stats

  • 409,365 hits