11 Comments
User's avatar
Karen S's avatar

Marianne is a union member,just not from our union. We are all fighting to keep our healthcare as is. Why is it great for UFT members to go show support to other unions (railroad workers,amazon etc.) but not ok to join together as NYC retirees to fight for our mutual rights?? Afraid of the impact the joint retirees are having??

Expand full comment
Arthur Goldstein's avatar

Of course they're afraid. They're terrified because all they care about is holding onto power. Our health absolutely pales in significance to them.

Expand full comment
Keith Firestone's avatar

Mulgrew said that if the retirees lose the Bentkowski case, he will take action to preserve Medicare and Medigap at no cost to retirees: how?

The Bentkowski case was heard by the Court of Appeals, it can be watched on YouTube.

I suggest that the RTC members watch it. Based on the questions and comments of the judges it appears to me that the retirees will lose. Watch it and form your own opinion.

Whether you think that the court will rule in favor of the retirees or not, the UFT (Mulgrew) should have an action plan ready if the court rules against the retirees.

I am the dependent of a UFT retiree who relied on the City’s promise to provide Medicare and Medigap at no cost to retirees and dependents. We made life decisions based on that promise.

Is it inappropriate for the RTC to ask Mr. Mulgrew what his action plans are should the retirees lose?

I don’t think so.

Expand full comment
Arthur Goldstein's avatar

You lost me at, "Mulgrew said." I'm reminded of Nixon's secret plan to end the Vietnam War.

Expand full comment
Keith Firestone's avatar

And that is why people should insist that Mulgrew present his plan if the retirees lose Bentkowski. Nixon said he could not because he did not want to " undermine the Peace Talks".

Fool me once shame on me, fool me twice shame on me.

Expand full comment
Arthur Goldstein's avatar

You're assuming a lot about Mulgrew--first and foremost that he responds to member demands. Years of experience tell me he does not. And that's why he must go.

Expand full comment
Keith Firestone's avatar

Should be :fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

Expand full comment
Keith Firestone's avatar

He should be on the record as a candidate

Expand full comment
Arthur Goldstein's avatar

I'd be happy to ask if I thought it would do any good. What I'd like to ask is this--win or lose, will you accept the results of the UFT election?

Expand full comment
Ronald Fields's avatar

As a RTC delegate, I witnessed a man unknown to me remove a stack of info sheets explaining why we should vote NO on the outside interference motion. The Delegate rally seemed like a MAGA rally, from a Unity person like Trump telling us how she is a very intelligent person who should be listened to and Mulgrew himself telling us to ignore our own UFT by-laws as they were outdated (in answer to a point of order asking how the agenda was set!)

Expand full comment
Arthur Goldstein's avatar

Wow. How totally creepy. They don't want union interference because it's their divine right to do all the interference themselves.

Actually there are no by-laws, just the constitution, and Mulgrew made a joke about how it was eligible for Medicare, the perfect touch for the caucus that celebrates and applauds ageism.

Expand full comment