Watch what they (Unity) do, not what they say... Norm homily
...he (Mulgrew) favors a system where pieces of our benefits are controlled by industrialists who want to make money off of healthcare. That system most definitely will never be in our interest, and he shouldn’t be spending our dues money trying to shore those plutocrats up.... Under Assault
How will Retiree Advocate and or the RTC officers and exec bd respond to the Mulgrew letter to members? ... Anon.
CVS/Aetna reported $8.34 billion in profit last year, and spent $12,476,000 lobbying against policies like universal healthcare and lower prescription costs.This is the company@UFT Mulgrew and his caucus want to dump NYC Retirees in. This is why we voted them out. Arthur Goldsteinby funding the opposition to universal healthcare and lower prescription costs, they’re bankrupting patients and families at best, denying them care and leaving them to die at worst.Michael Mulgrew got up and said he now opposed the city Medicare Advantage Plan. However, as I wrote him, he’s done absolutely nothing to support our court cases or legislation---- I think Mulgrew is too set in his ways to change course. I think Mulgrew figures well, I said I opposed the Aetna plan, and that should be good enough for anyone. I think the “very smart” Unity hacks who advise him told him that would be enough, and that we would fold.--- Arthur Goldstein
Marianne mocks Mulgrew and responds (see below) or click: https://youtu.be/hrBGUqLkMlM?si=lHeo3GqobDTQ2PzZ
Seeking fed leg is a joke and distraction |
|
Michael Mulgrew Bogus, PR Reso on national healthcare is a beard to cover his opposition to a real way to get national healthcare by supporting state and regional initiatives.
Earlier today, on the floor of the American Federation of Teachers convention in Houston, Texas, I motivated a resolution to seek federal legislation to protect Medicare and expand Social Security benefits for seniors — and to ensure that these benefits will never be diminished. Forget the fact that I worked diligently in the MLC in NYC in concert with Mayor Adams to weaken Medicare and reduce benefits for seniors while promoting a privatized MedAdv plan that itself would definitely NOT protect Medicare but in fact would weaken it.
We’ve said for years we need federal intervention to protect all our health care benefits for both retirees and in-service members as a way to deflect from our actions to take away Medicare on the MLC.We can no longer wait for the federal government to do the right thing. We need to push for it, and the push starts with our retirees while we stab those NYC retirees in the back. We will fight like hell oppose any state-wide moves.
This fight needs to be national even though we full well know there is zero chance of making any changes. Protecting health care at the local and state levels isn't enough while we use specious arguments to oppose any moves to implement local and regional solutions that would expand medicare and would benefit not only retirees but everyone.We need to wage a war against an industry that cares more about quarterly profits and bonuses than its patients’ care while we promote that very industry like Aetna as solutions in NYC while the Dem party rakes in contributions from these industry lobbyists.Let’s not forget: Our members pay into Medicare and Social Security throughout their careers (while we let anyone who makes over 168k off the hook), and we cannot let opponents chip away at these programs while I and my fellows on the MLC chip away all the way. Our retirement security depends on them, except for those teacher retirees we supposedly represent.No one works harder than public school educators, nurses and other public employees. The push for this federal legislation is just the first step in a campaign to protect the health care of all UFT members, both working and retired. Of course we have no plan when we ignore a strategy of gaining national health care through a local strategy. With so much at stake in the elections in November, Congress needs to lock in Medicare and Social Security benefits, and it needs to act now while we make sure to oppose any state level moves to do the same. But we always want Dem party funders and lobbyists from the health care industry on board so like ObamaCare and will always keep a warm spot open for them to make their profits on the backs of our members.Sincerely,Someone named Michael (just in case the UFT sends lawyers after me like they did to Arthur.)
Under Assault also comments on Mulgrew’s new resolutions: an exercise in futility .... Fighting for Traditional Medicare has never been on the UFT agenda as far as I know. It’s hardly within its purview... The Second resolution is practically meaningless. No candidate at
the federal or state level is currently trying to find a real solution
to preserve “high-quality and affordable benefits.” The only way to do
that would be to change the tax structure and cut the ravenous middlemen
corporations out altogether – those giant entities that have taken over
the healthcare industries from top to bottom, eating up Medicare
dollars. That solution would be Single Payer, and I don’t hear anyone
talking much about it these days.... As for the Third resolution: there are no “simple solutions” to
healthcare. (I don’t even understand what Mulgrew means by “simple
solutions to necessary changes” – and I don’t think he knows either.)... for the Fourth, where Mulgrew says they’ll seek federal
legislation to ensure that Medicare and SS won’t be diminished. Exactly
what form will that “seeking” take? The AFT won’t find big solutions
with the lobbyists.
Here is a letter to The Chief from Harry Weiner
No advantages
Posted Wednesday, July 24, 2024 2:40 pm
https://thechiefleader.com/sto
ries/no-advantages,52791 To the editor:
UFT President Michael Mulgrew has withdrawn support for the Medicare Advantage and the current health care negotiations for in-service and pre-Medicare retirees. In a letter to the Municipal Labor Committee outlining his about-face, he complained that “this administration has proven to be more interested in cutting its costs than honestly working with us to provide high-quality healthcare to city workers.”
In an NY1 interview, Mulgrew added that the City “should stop all of these appeals” and expressed concern that a court labeled City attorneys “incompetent.” He also told The Chief that the relationship with administration officials has become “adversarial.”
These are crocodile tears, as MLC attorneys, with his blessing, have sided with the city in litigation brought by retirees. MLC legal filings have failed, and their lawyers are losing all the way to the bank.
According to the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, MLC attorney Alan Klinger was paid $882,000 in 2022 and $763,000 in 2023 to fight the retirees in court. (The MLC’s house attorney, Harry Greenberg, has a $60,000 annual income.) With cash reserves drained, an attempt was made to pass an MLC dues increase to cover the $700,000 debt owed to a consulting firm for health plan guidance.
MLC Chair Harry Nespoli sent a letter to Mayor Adams echoing Mulgrew’s concerns about protracted ”legal hurdles.” Sadly, there was no call to drop any appeal. Nor did the MLC (or Mulgrew) endorse city and state legislation to protect retiree health benefits.
Nespoli writes that the mayor has rebuffed requests to meet, collaborate and resolve delays. Hizzoner won’t return calls. Nespoli now knows how snubbed the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees has felt these past three years.
Harry Weiner
Marianne video
1 comment:
Bravo for talking about the wage base limit ($168,600 in 2024) above which the gov’t doesn't’ seem interested in taxing you to shore up the funds. OF COURSE THAT SHOULD BE CHANGED! Millionaires and Billionaires could easily pay more into the system before it makes a dent in their pocketbooks — less than the cost of eating at an upscale restaurant once a month, and it’s a no-brainer to push for that. Mulgrew Inc. doesn’t. But don’t forget about the surcharges for higher incomes on the Medicare Parts B and D premiums — these are capped as well. The Millionaires and Billionaires don’t pay anywhere near a fair share there either. IRMAA surcharges mean singles with salaries between $103,001 and $500K pay higher than the base rate for B and D premiums (couples between $206,001 and $750K). Government doesn’t care to collect more from people who make more than that, they let them slide. If Mulgrew Inc. is really interested in a fix, let them start with a Resolution to raise those income caps in Medicare premiums. But he doesn’t know what he’s talking about, probably never heard of IRMAA, and is two-faced to boot.
Post a Comment