NYC Retirees Win Co-Pay Suit - NYC and EmblemHealth Settle Senior Care Co-Pay Class Action for $53Million

Boy there's a lot on the plate to report and every day when I don't post, the list gets longer. This morning, NYC Retirees led by Marianne Pizzitola made a historic announcement. Another monumental win for NYC Retirees led by their president, Marianne. 

There is some irony in that one of the sticking points in the (rare) negotiations between Fix Retiree Benefits and Retiree Advocate over the upcoming Retiree Chapter Election next spring is over an alliance with Marianne who has come under criticism from some ideologues over what may or may not be her personal politics, which frankly I don't give a rat's ass about since she is focused on one issue: protecting retiree benefits of all municipal workers.

Marianne appeared in NY1 last week and when asked what would be her number 1 wish, it was to end the co-pays. While she did win backpay, she also won a freeze on raising co-pays for this year. I know full well about co-pays as I have a few every week.

 

https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/the-rush-hour/2026/07/29/public-service-retirees-call-for-better-healthcare-protections  

 

Read more about what amounts to one of the largest class action settlements in NYC history.

NYC and EmblemHealth Settle Senior Care Co-Pay Class Action for $53Million One of the Largest Class Action Settlements in City History Marianne Pizzitola Aug 03, 2026

New York, NY, August 3, 2026 – In a major development, the City of New York and EmblemHealth agreed to pay $53 million to settle a class action lawsuit on behalf of more than 250,000 elderly and disabled retired City workers enrolled in EmblemHealth’s GHI Senior Care Plan. The suit was brought by the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees and a handful of retirees. The signed settlement papers were sent to New York County Supreme Court Justice Lyle E. Frank for the Court’s approval.

The settlement refunds co-pays that retirees were unlawfully charged for medical visits between January 1, 2022 through January 31, 2023. The $53 million represents 100 percent of the co-pays retirees had been charged. In addition to the monetary settlement, the City and EmblemHealth also agreed not to increase the existing $15 Senior Care co-pays through at least December 31, 2027.

The $53 million settlement amount is one of the largest class action settlements in New York City history. In addition, the lawsuit saved retirees an estimated $106 million through a temporary injunction, which halted the co-pays for two years.

This settlement is just the latest healthcare victory by the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, which has, to date, collectively saved retirees approximately $3.16 billion since 2022. The Organization stopped the City from forcing retirees to pay for Senior Care, which the City itself has valued at $600 million per year; prevented the City and EmblemHealth from charging retirees co-pays in 2023 and 2024, which (according to EmblemHealth’s records) was worth approximately $106 million; and pioneered this class action settlement that is returning $53 million to the pockets of retirees.

“This is a wonderful victory for retirees,” said Marianne Pizzitola, president of the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, one of the named plaintiffs. “The older people get, the more likely they are to need medical care, and co-pays are one of the worst, most regressive burdens making healthcare unaffordable. We hope Mayor Mamdani and City Council Speaker Menin recognize this and roll back co-pays.”

“Retired City workers have proven once again that they will fight relentlessly, and successfully, to protect their healthcare rights, which have been under constant attack for the past five years,” said Jacob Gardener of Walden Haran Williams LLP, one of the lead attorneys for the retirees.

“It is another step forward in ensuring affordable healthcare for our seniors,” said Steve Cohen of Pollock Cohen LLP, the other lead attorney for the retirees. “Now we have to get the City Council and the Mayor to eliminate co-pays for seniors entirely. They were promised and deserve free healthcare in retirement.”

The settlement papers can be found here.

 

UFT/Unity Abandons Disabled Paras Over TRS Mistake

The NYC Teachers Retirement System (TRS) contacted over 180 retired paras and advised them they “made a mistake” when their pension was calculated some more that 15 years ago.  Not only are they reducing their pension by half, they are clawing back the alleged overpayment for the last three years. ...the UFT argue that active paraprofessionals are making an unlivable wage and even declare war on the Mayor if he doesn’t sign into law the bill in the City Council to give them a $10,000 ‘respect check’ of Non-Pensionable income. Well a pension that is 2/3 of that salary is unlivable and now take more than half of that away from them when they came to rely on that money is criminal.  The UFT told these paras when they called, that there was nothing they can do.  The UFT has been silent on this issue.  TRS already cut these retirees pensions in half beginning with the July pension check.

Well, look at this one. The UFT, with its 3 TRS pension reps sits silently by and not standing up for the affected disabled paras who are undergoing pension reductions due to a mistake made by TRS in overpaying them. A group of UFT paras and retirees have joined with the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees to stand up for them.

July 31, 2026 

Good Morning,

Attached is a press statement from our three organizations.   Fix Para Pay is a slate of active and retired UFT Paraprofessionals advocating for better wages to be negotiated by their union.   Fix Retiree Benefits is a slate of active and retired UFT members advocating to protect an improve the conditions for UFT retirees.  NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees is an organization of over 200,000 municipal NYC retirees founded to protect retirees healthcare and other benefits from diminishment in retirement. 

Together, we stand with our retired paraprofessionals today.  The NYC Teachers Retirement System (TRS) contacted over 180 retired paras and advised them they “made a mistake” when their pension was calculated some more that 15 years ago.  Not only are they reducing their pension by half, they are clawing back the alleged overpayment for the last three years. 

You have watched the UFT argue that active paraprofessionals are making an unlivable wage and even declare war on the Mayor if he doesn’t sign into law the bill in the City Council to give them a $10,000 ‘respect check’ of Non-Pensionable income. Well a pension that is 2/3 of that salary is unlivable and now take more than half of that away from them when they came to rely on that money is criminal.  The UFT told these paras when they called, that there was nothing they can do.  The UFT has been silent on this issue that needs to end today.  TRS already cut these retirees pensions in half beginning with the July pension check.

We are collectively demanding that they amend the Retirement and Social Security Law they amended in 2002 under then President Randi Weingarten and correct this injustice and TRS must pass a resolution not to claw back any alleged overpayment. 

 

MEDIA CONTACTS:

Arthur Goldstein: 516-661-3221

Marianne Pizzitola: 631-793-9715

 

Public Control or ‘20th-Century Socialism’? The Bruhaha over a few publicly supported super markets p o in NYC by Mamdani

One of the (many) controversial policies of DSA is public ownership of the means of production, which causes outrage. Oh the outrage over the Mamdani plan which the right wing and even some Dems are calling "free food" when in fact it is reduced price food. I find it funny how the anti-Mamdani cabal will hang onto anything they can grab, led by the NY Post.

DSA - NY has called for a takeover of Con Ed and other public utilities. Our water and sewage systems are publicly owned and managed. How would you feel if we sold them off to private equity?

The major public entity in this country over the past 200 years has been the public school system, which of course there has been a major move to privatize, with charter schools being the spearhead, but even that is not good enough - thus vouchers. I'm surprised they haven''t moved to make all learning remote and sell off all the school buildings to turn them into condos. Boy, my old school in Williamsburg built in 1904 has high ceilings and big windows. 

In fact, we have found over the past 50 years that the reduction of public regulation, if not outright ownership, has been a disaster in this country. Think of Chicago selling off its parking meter system.

Chicago's parking meter deal still haunts the city's finances 

Chicago parking meter deal: City's meters sold to another ...

Margaret Thatcher destroyed the public ownership of so many areas of England in the 80s, even weakening the vaunted public health system - yes, in England healthcare was publicly controlled. So here is an article in the July 29 NYT business section, that has not been receiving the outrage from the Wall St Journal - yet. 

Public Control or ‘20th-Century Socialism’? U.K. Debates a Different Way.

The new prime minister, Andy Burnham, faulted Margaret Thatcher’s privatization in the 1980s. He wants an alternative economic model, especially to run utilities.

By Eshe Nelson

Reporting from London

July 28, 2026

Andy Burnham, Britain’s new prime minister, began his leadership with a full-throttled rebuke of the past 40 years of British policymaking. Rejecting the sweep of privatization introduced by Margaret Thatcher, Mr. Burnham said he would bring in a new political and economic model.

A central pillar of that approach will be more government control over utilities and services that were handed over to private companies starting in the late 1980s, like water and energy.

Mr. Burnham was ushered into office extraordinarily quickly. A little over a month ago, he was the mayor of Greater Manchester in the northwest of England, without a seat in Parliament. Now he is vowing to remake Britain, and little is known about the details of his economic agenda.

One result has been the start of a vivid debate about privatization — whether it went too far and how best to fix its failings. Mr. Burnham calls for more “public control” of services, not necessarily government ownership. But the vagueness of the term has left a lot open to interpretation and speculation. It has come to encompass everything from a socialist turn into widespread nationalization to tighter regulation of utilities.

Mr. Burnham said that later this year he would release a 10-year plan to increase public control and reduce the cost of essential services like water, housing, energy and transportation.

Mr. Burnham should create the “feeling that the state is back and it’s on our side,” said Danny Sriskandarajah, the chief executive of the New Economics Foundation, a progressive British research group. “That’s what’s been missing.”

Arguments about ownership frame the debate.

As prime minister in the 1980s, Ms. Thatcher fundamentally reshaped the British economy. Her 11-year tenure increased private homeownership, greatly enhanced the financial services industry and diminished manufacturing. Her government also privatized huge segments of the economy, including energy, telecommunications, airports and water.

The resulting companies were floated on the stock market. The idea was to bring about mass public ownership through these shares, but many companies ended up in private hands and most were delisted from stock exchanges.

The forceful opening of the British economy led to wealth creation and prosperity. It also wrought regional inequality through deindustrialization in the north and accelerated the shift to an economy more dependent on financial and business services, which were clustered in London and the southeast.

“In the 1980s, Britain took some wrong turns,” Mr. Burnham said on July 20, standing in front of No. 10 Downing Street, just moments after he became prime minister. “Political power was centralized, economic power privatized, large parts of the country deindustrialized, and they still haven’t recovered.”

But is ownership really what makes the difference in how well a utility or service, like trains, is run? Economists and policy strategists aren’t decided either way.

Mathew Lawrence, the founder of Common Wealth, a British think tank, who has presented his ideas to Mr. Burnham’s team, is in favor of some public ownership.

“Public ownership and public provision are not panaceas, they are tools,” he said, and shouldn’t been seen as “magic wands that fix everything.”

But previous periods of nationalization, such as after World War II, had notable successes, including the building of more public housing and the transformation of the energy system from an inefficient patchwork of thousands of companies into a few centralized and regional systems.

Ownership is important because it enables profits to be returned to the government, Mr. Lawrence added, and then a choice can be made about how to spend them in the public interest.

Others are less convinced. Diane Coyle, a professor of public policy at the University of Cambridge, said that how services were regulated and the sectors were organized to create competition mattered more than if they were run by private firms or public agencies.

There’s a strong argument, she said, for a system where state-owned companies compete with private enterprises. That way, public ownership can lead to diversity in business models, more competition and more informed oversight.

“People obsess too much about ownership,” said Ms. Coyle, who has influenced policymaking in Manchester and at the national level. “It isn’t the ownership, it’s the structure of the market that makes a difference in the kind of outcomes for consumers and citizens.”

Some government takeover is already happening.

More nationalization is already underway in Britain. On several occasions it has been an act of last resort.

Under the previous prime minister, Keir Starmer, the government had started to bring the railway system under full public ownership and was pulling more than a dozen train operators into one public company, Great British Railways. Several operators were already nationalized by the previous Conservative government for financial or operational failings.

One of Mr. Starmer’s last acts as prime minister was to complete the nationalization of British Steel, which operates the country’s last blast furnaces for making steel. It seized control of the company last year after its Chinese owner, Jingye, appeared to be trying to shut down operations.

Water companies could be next. In the late 1980s, Britain went further than almost anywhere else in the world when it privatized the water authorities of England and Wales, selling off assets such as pipes, land and reservoirs. After decades of private ownership, much of the county is fed up with rising bills, pollution and chronic underinvestment that followed a period when billions of pounds were paid out in dividends. A few years ago, every major water and wastewater company was under investigation for dispensing sewage in rivers and other waterways.

The poster child of the failure is Thames Water, the country’s largest water company. Weighed down by enormous debts, it has been on the brink of financial collapse for years and faces the possibility it will be temporarily nationalized. It currently has only enough cash to last until the end of the year. Last month, the government rejected a rescue plan by Thames Water creditors, which include the large American funds Apollo Global Management and Elliott Management. Mr. Burnham will need to decide what to do about Thames Water.

For some, it could be a test case for the rest of the industry. GMB Union, one of Britain’s largest labor organizations, has called on Mr. Burnham to “take decisive action and nationalize Thames Water.”

Public ownership is about politics, not just economics.

It’s one thing for the government to prop up operators of essential utilities offering substandard services or in financial distress. It’s another entirely to bring companies and services into public ownership on the argument that it’s a superior model.

For some services, the public has taken a side. More than 80 percent of Britons believe water companies should be run in the public sector, and 70 percent say the same for energy, according to recent polling.

Still, widespread nationalization of services is unlikely.

Mr. Burnham said he wanted to be a “business-friendly” leader. His method of public control is likely to be influenced by changes he made to the bus system in Manchester, where a franchise model allows a local authority to set the routes, fares and other conditions, while private companies bid on contracts to operate the service. And so, in his 10-year plan, private companies are expected to play an important role.

“The state has withdrawn too far on the basic essentials,” said Mr. Sriskandarajah of the New Economics Foundation. “But its re-entry doesn’t need to be 20th-century socialism.”

 

Marc Kagan, Mamdani's Favorite HS Teacher Sends a Message Re: Para Bill

Important analysis from Marc Kagan and a message to Mamdani who was one of Marc's HS students. His substack is: The Labor Movement is a Mess... and What We Can Do About It

• What the Politics of “Paras” Tells Us About Mamdani, Menin, and Mulgrew

In fact, Mamdani identifies Marc as his favorite teacher and they still have a good relationship. I was concerned that Marc would treat his former student with kid gloves. This piece belies that, in a very honest assessment as he gives Mamdani performance grades, the most significant being: 

On public sector workforce, a D.

Now, let’s be fair to Mamdani. He has to live within his budget. If he chose to shower public workers with money, then that’s money that can’t be spent on reducing class sizes, or building playgrounds, or subsidizing affordable housing. Even after we have real socialism, those tensions will continue to exist.

But what I hoped Mamdani would do is to quickly fix outstanding inequities. The gross underpay of Paras. The gross underpay of Emergency Medical Techs. I want him to put his thumb on the scale for job security for CUNY Adjuncts.

I wanted – and want – him to tell the Office of Labor Relations (OLR) – where he reappointed the same commissioner who’s been in that office since Bloomberg (ugh) – that her job is to fix problems, not stonewall. I want him to tell agency commissioners that part of “efficiency” is mandatory discussions with workplace-level union reps. That they will be graded and assessed on their ability to reach mutually agreeable solutions to problems – worker problems as well as agency ones.

Instead, the City’s labor relations seem like business as usual. I was not wholly dismayed when he answered my question in April about collaborative bargaining by saying ‘I need to talk to my people about that.’ That’s was not an illegitimate answer, although a socialist should have labor questions at the top of their list of issues to address. But who did he talk to - the same OLR that is the problem? 

 I think contract negotiations, given the budget issues, will be a downfall for Mamdani. A socialist whose main agenda is affordability, money for labor should be a priority but the pressures for him, facing the enormous enmity of so many groups, that will be a hard pull. Mamdani has made a few errors and as time goes back a mayor's popularity fades. 

For Mamdani lovers, beware.

 

And Yes, for Mamdani haters, Julie Menin is running for mayor. And her alliance with Mulgrew has already born fruit for the millionaire.

 

NY Post: 

Will Mamdani have the courage to stare down the teachers union boss?

United Federation of Teachers boss Mike Mulgrew threatens “all-out war” if the mayor vetoes the bill to award the cash, but the mayor owes the UFT nothing — and it’s his duty to the general public to say no.

No city union should ever get a raise outside the collective-bargaining process: Since City Hall can’t cut union pay in other ways, it’s robbing the taxpayers if it doesn’t make labor negotiate for any hike.

Menin, in fact, should feel ashamed of letting the giveaway go ahead — this simply shows that the council’s incapable of being more fiscally responsible than even a declared socialist.

Ha. Just watch the NY Post pump Menin over the next few years. Imagine the Post supporting the collective bargaining agreement. And if Mamdani, as he should, gives the paras a permanent,  pensionable large raise so they can afford to live in the city, the Post will slam him. 

 

The 10K was designed to counter the Fix Para Pay election win and it did in the election last year where we had hoped there would be a big turnout against Unity, as an ABCer one of my expectations that we had a chance to win that election. As the ABC crew has been pointing out, the one time only 10k will fade. What's needed is contract guarantees.

Mayor Mamdani has argued that it is illegal for the Council to allocate money to improve public workers’ wages (or benefits) – that all money issues must be collectively bargained. “The Council’s passage of this legislation is in direct violation of the Taylor Law,” he says. There is some discussion that the City’s lawyers will challenge this legislation in court. 

Now there is some irony in Mamdani reversing himself on the 10k and claiming it violates the Taylor Law, the same excuse Mulgrew has been using to oppose the retiree protection 1096 City Council bill. When the RTC delegates finally got the floor in 1096 at the last DA, Mulgrew ruled it out of order on those ground.

 

While Mulgrew is wrong, Mamdani may prove to be right. In essence he issued a challenge to Mulgrew to solidify the gains for paras in the upcoming contract negotiations. 

As Marc points out,  

Mulgrew is a center/right Democrat, as is Weingarten and the entire UFT/AFT apparatus, despite some progressive rhetoric and Randi's resignation from the DNC - a purely "finger in the air" move. A leader of the DNC lives in my building and rolled his eyes when Randi's move came up and called her a political opportunist - she should wear a sign.

Marc cites Daniel Alicea's EONYC: 

As explained and itemized in this article by Educators of New York City, in the most recent contract round, Mulgrew made various concessions that gave him $450 million to allocate as he saw fit, above and beyond the “pattern” raise that all city workers received. Mulgrew could have allocated it to increase Para salaries. Instead, he used most of that money to give an additional $1000 to each member. I think this EoNYC image really sums up the UFT’s “Teacher’s first” decision: 

 

Daniel has been doing yeoman work on the para issue: 

 July 11, 2026

The Newly Revised UFT Para Bill: The Promise That Kept Shrinking: How the UFT sold a permanent para pay index that would seek to offset pattern bargaining—and ended up with a temporary one-year payment. And only if it passes or survives legal challenges at all.

Educators of NYC

 

Followed on July 19 with:

The Respect Check Passes: A Temporary Victory Built By Pressure - And the Unfinished Fight: How rank-and-file pressure pushed paraprofessional pay from a union fight to a City Hall vote—and why the legislation remains temporary, non-pensionable and legally unsettled.

Educators of NYC

And he followed up with Part 2

For roughly sixteen years under Michael Mulgrew’s leadership, there was no fundamental effort to restructure paraprofessional salaries. Aside from modest improvements to longevity raises in the 2018 contract, paraprofessional pay remained largely governed by the same pattern bargaining that had left many struggling to survive.

Then came the last contract.

The UFT had roughly $450 million in recurring, non-pensionable retention money available.

The Good, Bad and Ugly - The NYC Para Bill: A deep dive into the UFT and City Council's $10k pay plan for paraprofessionals.

Educators of NYC

Jul 21, 2026

 

BTY - listen to Daniel's interview with para Alyson Monzon in his Talk Out of School WBAI program: https://wbai.org/archive/program/episode/?id=66311

Alyson's substack: 

Why I’m speaking up for us!

Unity Spends over $1.5 million to send over 700 Delegates to Control the AFT Convention -AFT Needs Direct Elections

In 2024, UFT sent an incredible 734 delegates to the national convention in Houston, even though its voting strength is not dependent on how many delegates it sends. UFT delegates to the convention had a voting strength of 16% of all delegates, but sent 27% of all convention delegates. This was an overwhelming show of force. No other AFT local even sent 70 delegates. Meanwhile, the bottom 90% of union locals and state federations represented at the 2024 convention sent less than 10 delegates each.

How much did UFT spend to send 734 delegates from New York City to Houston for 5 days and 5 nights in 2024? A probably too modest $2,000 per delegate would come out to at least $1.5 million. And the bill was likely much higher than that.

Needless to say, most union locals don’t have that kind of money. And even if they did, their leaders would have to justify to their members why they would spend their dues for this kind of expense. If the national AFT election is already locked up, why bother? And so the de-mobilizing, demoralizing cycle of rule by political machine repeats itself every two years.^[i]...  The Future of Our Schools Collective

Late BREAKING - Randi Re-elected 

 

Those who think the UFT/Unity leadership is corrupt, don't know the half of it. Trevor Griffey just published a piece on Jul 15, 2026 on the current AFT convention that reveals a lot of truths.

This is Not What Democracy Looks Like: The AFT Convention and the Future of the US Labor Movement:  Trevor Griffey, a lecturer in Labor Studies at UCLA and US History at UC Irvine who serves as Vice President of Legislation for UC AFT, comments in our newest post about the upcoming AFT convention.

I commented the other day at Ed Notes on the convention:

• 750 Unity Loyalists Junket in Washington for AFT convention

I pointed out that Unity received 54% of the vote in last year's election but gets 100% of the 750 delegates, thus shutting out the points of view of a significant proportion of UFT members from national and state educational policy debates (those 750 are also NYSUT reps).

 

So not only are the almost 20,000 teachers who voted against Unity denied representation, the entire union is snookered over the massive expense. AFT delegates will debate as many as 108 resolutions and constitutional amendments including voting on whether to increase the dues paid by AFT’s 1.8 million members. I can guarantee this dues increase will pass because Randi wants it passed and that means our dues here in NYC will also go up as a major portion of our dues goes to the AFT.

 

You will see headlines today or tomorrow announcing Randi's re-election

I pointed out that Randi Weingarten would be elected with 95% of the vote - if she has any opposition at all - Randi loves it when she has no opposition - see her deal with New Action for the 2004 election:  New Action/Unity in Corrupt Bargain - Why I Left New Action!!! by James Eterno, UFT Executive Board.

 

85% of AFT Locals Do Not Send Delegates to Convention while our dues fuel the UFT spending a million and a half on covering expenses for Unity members.

  

A way toward democracy is to have the entire AFT membership vote instead of the Unity dominated delegates. This major change occurred in the UAW which led to Shawn Fein's election. Chris Bohner recently wrote in Labor Notes, “Direct Elections for Labor Leaders Make for More Militant Unions.”

 

You can see why the threat of losing the NYC local election is such threat to Randi and the AFT/NYSUT/UFT union hierarchy, one reason why ABC's insurgency has made them nervous. Don't think the recent 10k para bonus designed to weaken para anger at their situation is not connected to the threat. ABC had over 100 paras run with them and the para functional chapter is the second largest with 27k members to the 70k retiree chapter, which Unity lost. If the insurgency in these two groups aligned with the growing dissatisfaction among working members, there would be a massive shift in educational unions, especially with both Chicago and LA being progressive unions. Why haven't the revolted after a decade or more in power? Randi has the power of the purse to support them - or not - in their local struggles.

 

Trevor:

......leaders of AFT locals, including mine, would be more open to subsidizing convention delegate travel if they thought convention business was directly tied their union members’ needs, and if they thought their delegates’ participation would make any difference whatsoever on decisions made at the convention.

The fact is, once delegates elected by their locals arrive at an AFT convention, they find themselves operating within a one-party state run by the Progressive Caucus, which in turn is run by the Unity Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT)— the largest AFT local in the US.

UFT delegates have dominated AFT conventions through slate elections at the local and national level for over half a century. Every AFT President for the last 62 years emerged out of UFT leadership, except for four years from 2004-8 when Edward McElroy served two terms as a “transitional president” following Sandra Feldman’s diagnosis with breast cancer..

The AFT has been controlled for over 50 years by one caucus - a national version of Unity called The Progressive Caucus. Of course our beloved 750 local Unityites are the main instrument of control. They also control the NY State Unity.

 

Lois explains:

The Unbeatable Slate: Progressive Caucus Dominates AFT for More than 50 Years

The issue that shapes union leaders’ decisions to effectively boycott the convention is the perception of a lack of democracy within AFT.

Financial barriers to sending delegates thousands of miles away for five days of convention deliberations are significant, and union leaders who express concerns about the costs of convention attendance shouldn’t be dismissed as simply lacking solidarity.

But leaders of AFT locals, including mine, would be more open to subsidizing convention delegate travel if they thought convention business was directly tied their union members’ needs, and if they thought their delegates’ participation would make any difference whatsoever on decisions made at the convention.

The fact is, once delegates elected by their locals arrive at an AFT convention, they find themselves operating within a one-party state run by the Progressive Caucus, which in turn is run by the Unity Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT)— the largest AFT local in the US.

UFT delegates have dominated AFT conventions through slate elections at the local and national level for over half a century. Every AFT President for the last 62 years emerged out of UFT leadership, except for four years from 2004-8 when Edward McElroy served two terms as a “transitional president” following Sandra Feldman’s diagnosis with breast cancer.

Today, the three top officers of AFT and every one of the 43 national Vice Presidents are all members of the Progressive Caucus. They run as a single slate that depends upon bloc voting. The leader of the caucus is the President of the union, who is also at the top of the slate. A recent google form to join the Progressive Caucus even called its slate “Randi Weingarten’s slate.”

One can’t simply declare one’s intention to join the caucus as a candidate for elected office, as candidates for elected office do in the US. You have to be invited. And most of the people invited are representatives of the largest labor unions in the federation. Inclusion on the slate provides direct personal access to the President, who can provide favors in the form of spending and staff support for causes that officers care about. But inclusion also requires supporting every candidate on the slate. Failure to do so will get you kicked off the slate and effectively lock your union local out of national power.

Once most of the leaders of large unions pledge to turn out their delegates to support the union President, the election is all-but-over. Support has been traded for access before the votes have even been cast. Slate voting— which allows a delegate to simply check one box for an entire slate instead of voting separately for 46 different officers— tilts the scales even more by creating a disincentive for even thinking about the merits of individual officers.

Anyone in AFT who dares even exercise their right to participate in union elections outside the Progressive Caucus has to position themselves against the entire power structure of the union— including the President— whether they want to or not. Unless the Caucus splits, which so far it never has, such challenges (recently by small groups like By Any Means Necessary, or BAMN) are dead on arrival. 

 Since so many locals can't afford to send delegates to the AFT conventions, not only 46% of NYC teachers are left out, but the small locals all over the country too.

 

 Read the entire article on the substack: https://futureschools.substack.com/p/this-is-not-what-democracy-looks and note the disparity in delegates attending - ie Chicago only 68.

Top 20 largest union locals that sent delegates to AFT 2024 Convention.

 

For Immediate Release July 19, 2026

Contact: Alexis Lopez 305-878-9836 alopez@aft.org

AFT Re-elects Officers, Hears from Union and Political Leaders, Passes Suite of Resolutions at 2026 Convention   National Teachers Union, at Highest-Ever Membership, Caps Four-Day Confab that Drew 3,000 Delegates to DC

WASHINGTON—The 1.88 million-member AFT wrapped its 89th biennial convention today, with union delegates voting overwhelmingly to re-elect President Randi Weingarten, Secretary-Treasurer Fedrick Ingram and Executive Vice President Evelyn DeJesus to new two-year terms.   In six packed sessions over four days, more than 3,000 delegates debated and passed resolutions on a range of pressing issues—from reclaiming the promise of public education, to protecting immigrant communities, to rebuilding public health, to preparing for the age of artificial intelligence, to tackling the affordability and student debt crises. Dozens of breakout meetings and receptions covered rural issues, faith and religion, international solidarity and more.   AFT President Randi Weingarten said: “Our convention theme was ‘fighting for a better life for all.’ That’s not a mere slogan—it’s the promise and potential to be together, to work together, to bargain together, to protest together, to vote together, to act together to bring about change—real, lasting, life-improving change for every person in America.”   The union heard from a bevy of high-profile guests and speakers, including Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, U.S. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, former Georgia state Rep. Stacey Abrams, Democratic nominee for D.C. mayor Janeese Lewis George, Pennsylvania state Rep. Jen Mazzocco, former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola, IAM Union International President Brian Bryant, and IAM Texas State Council President and Texas state Sen. Taylor Rehmet.   Outgoing American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees President Lee Saunders, the first African American to lead the union, received the AFT’s Bayard Rustin Human Rights Award, and labor leader Dolores Huerta was honored with the AFT’s Lifetime Achievement Award for her decades of work with the United Farm Workers. And after a rousing Saturday address from Association of Flight Attendants-CWA President Sara Nelson, delegates unanimously passed a motion from the floor pledging support for the campaign to unionize Delta flight attendants.   At the onsite Activist Hub, delegates signed more than 1,000 “Free D.C.” postcards addressed to state governors to demand they recall their states’ National Guard from their deployment in the District of Columbia.   Weingarten, who taught social studies and civics at Clara Barton High School in Brooklyn, N.Y., was re-elected to a 10th term Saturday night, while Ingram, a high school band director in Miami, and DeJesus, an early childhood educator and reading specialist in New York City, were elected to sixth terms. The union also elected 43 vice presidents from around the country.   AFT Secretary-Treasurer Fedrick Ingram said: “There is only one way we all win and that is working together to push back against the forces that are so eager to tear us apart. That is why I have made union work my life’s work and why I remain committed and ready to serve this union as an officer. It is a distinct honor to work with the best this country has to offer, in order to ensure everyone has a real shot at success, happiness and security.”   AFT Executive Vice President Evelyn DeJesus said: “As the onslaught of ICE attacks against Latino communities continues, today I stand prouder than ever to be the first Latina officer elected and re-elected six times to serve the 1.88 million members of this powerful union. We must look out for, show up and protect one another, because only together can we make a better life for all. Sigamos luchando por la democracia, la libertad y una vida mejor para todos.”   “Our delegates and committees tackled the issues keeping families up at night, from the affordability crisis, to defending immigrant communities, to the reassurance that AI won’t take our members’ jobs, to the protection of democracy as a whole,” Weingarten added. “To create an America where everyone has the education, economy and opportunity to build a good life; an America where everyone’s dignity and rights are respected; an America whose democracy not only endures but finally lives up to its noble ideals, will take all of us—standing together.”   Click HERE for more convention highlights. All passed resolutions can be found HERE.

Para Pay on Agenda, 750 Unity Loyalists Junket in Washington for AFT convention, American History - Always Oligarchy

I have a few brief items for you today. Celebrate my rare briefness. 

Monday, July 13, 2026

Council Sets Vote on $10K Perk for Paraprofessionals

Para Pay Raise bill at City Council, Mamdani switcheroo - really, if he wants to talk affordability, para pay should be a prime factor. But there is also the factor of bonus vs pensionable salary and we are in contract negotiation territory with a cast of thousands negotiating committee. 

Leah Linn infographic on history of para bill:

https://www.instagram.com/reels/DawC3M3Ry_g/ 

One comment:  

 

Nothing like an ad for your caucus:

A UFT Leaflet for labor day

 

 This City Reporter article mentions Fix Para Pay.

Some paraprofessionals, though, feel the payment isn’t enough and doesn’t address longstanding issues that they say have been ignored by the union.

Marie Wausnock is a paraprofessional on Staten Island who also co-founded Fix Para Pay, a union caucus slate that opposes Mulgrew.  Some paras leave for other city jobs that require less training and have better pay, she said.

“How do you give respectable pensions and dignity to paras when you want to give them non-pensionable money?” she said. “Paras are so underpaid. We get crumbs every time.”

 750 Unity Loyalists Junket in Washington for AFT convention: They got 54% but get 100% of delegates - ABC and ARISE should have 46%

In last year's UFT election we voted for 750 AFT/NYSUT convention delegates. And I bet a batch of non-delegate Unity staffers added - call it over 800 and maybe 900. 

Unity received 54% of the vote but in a winner take all system they get 100% of the delegates as 46% of UFT voters are shut out of both the AFT and NYSUT. And of course, all 750 will vote as told on every reso - all dictated by what Randi wants.

This perversion of democracy will enforce the alliance between the UFT leadership and the Dem Party corporate center. Note the speaker list below. I see one progressive - the next Mayor of Washington who is a social-democrat. You won't see many SDs at this convention. 

Watching Hakim Jeffries and Chuck Schumer and the awful Neera Tanden disparage the SD movement is getting to be LOL - how close are they to Trump reactions. They are threatened and rather then lose control of the bailiwick they'd rather see Republicans - and billionaires - win.  

The rise of SD as a challenger to the Dem Party - see the drama being played out in Maine  is also a threat to Unity hegemony. Too bad the SDs in the UFT have had a decade long failure to show any similar organizing chops that SD has had. Ironically, the closest I've seen to an SD organizing model has been ABC and hopefully the Fixed Retiree Benefits group can also show some organizing chops. Both are a work in progress. 

 From AFT PR:

Thousands of Educators, Elected Leaders and Advocates to Gather in D.C. for AFT National Convention   Delegates Will Hear from Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, US House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Labor Leader Dolores Huerta, Former US Attorney General Eric Holder, Former Georgia State Rep. Stacey Abrams, Democratic Nominee for D.C. Mayor Janeese Lewis George and more to be announced

WASHINGTON—The 1.8 million-member AFT—representing teachers, school staff, higher education workers, nurses and healthcare professionals, and public employees—will host its 89th national convention July 16-19, bringing together over 3,500 delegates from across the country. Note that almost one third of the 1.8 million are from NY State delegation controlled by Unity Caucus, which at the national level is called the (once in a blue moon) Progressive Caucus. Oh, and let me announce that Randi will win re-election either unopposed or by 95% if there is an opposing candidate.

Nepotism and Cronyism: Mulgrew Undermined UFT Pension Dept., Broken Promises Over TRS Election

 My most recent blog exposing the Mulgrew machine has been getting some notice.

---

The Blind Spot: How Oligarchs Dominate Our Democracy

What exactly has changed all that much in 250 years?

I'm a big fan and paid subscriber to Sam Seder's The Majority Report where I get great interviews and commentary and a lot of fun every weekday at noon-2:30. 

For history buffs, this interview, especially for a history major like me who took courses in the American Revolution, this interview with Jeffrey Winters was fascinating. The theme is that the founding fathers were fundamentally oligarchs who believe in small d democracy - very small d. That the constitution was designed to protect their wealth. And in this interview he goes into detail. They had a problem in their new system which had a level of democracy never seen before. How to control that democracy so their wealth would never be threatened. 

We are taught about checks and balances as one branch of government checking the other branches. In this interpretation, C&B were designed by the oligarchs leading the revolution to check the rabble who might get too much democracy and take away some of their wealth -- in case they want to tax the rich. So what else is new? 

https://www.youtube.com/live/3j7Y-w-XhVk?si=GzVwfqgVfXjlakkE&t=1863 

Here's an article about Jeffrey Winters (Author)

An urgent and shocking examination of how the ultra-rich dominate democracies, hoard political power, and maintain inequality—and how we might chart another path.

The wealthy and powerful few have dominated the many throughout most of human history. This is now more starkly visible than ever—a time when, with politicians bought and paid for across the political spectrum, the gulf between oligarchs and average citizens is larger than any gap that existed during European feudalism or the slave society of Imperial Rome. One thing is clear: the world is heading into an even deeper state of inequality, one that oligarchs of past eras could only have dreamed of. The strange thing is, for the first time in history, this domination is accomplished through democracy. Yet we aren’t in open revolt against the system. In fact, we seemingly keep voting to prop it up. Why?

In The Blind Spot, political scientist Jeffrey Winters delivers a timely, incisive account of how we reached this era of in-your-face oligarchy. Tracing the evolution of wealth power through the modern democratic era, he demonstrates how domination by oligarchs isn’t just a flaw in our democracy, but a foundational feature—allowing the wealthy to limit the agenda, control the marketplace of ideas, and rewire the law to defend, hide, and increase their money and power. Now, in an extraordinary paradox, we exist in a state of “participatory inequality,” a world in which the 99.99 percent of us participate openly, freely, and democratically in our own ongoing exclusion and exploitation.

But The Blind Spot ultimately sounds a clarion call for change, arming us not only with a vital lens through which we can understand just how bad our political reality has become, but also with bold ideas for how we might shift the balance of power. While powerful oligarchs do not cede power willingly, this period of shocking inequality is nevertheless an opportunity for change.

The Winters interview on you tube: