1096 is now 1008 - Retirees Rally (Again) on Healthcare - Who was there, UFT/Unity MIA

I posted about this event just as I was leaving to attend Thursday morning: 

NYC Retirees Press Release - Legislation Introduction with Council Member Christopher Marte to Protect Retiree Healthcare

No one from the UFT/Unity was there (of course) but we had 4 members of the RTC Exec Bd at the event and a nice crew from Fix Retiree Benefits, which has been working closely with NYC Retirees.

Fix Retiree Benefits in the house

 

 

Saturday, August 15, 2026 

DSA had a bunch of social events going on today and I intend to go to a beach party in Rockaway where I will stand around and try to find someone over 30 to talk to. There is also a local Rockaway DSA group meeting elsewhere which actually includes older people. Oh, the choices.

I attended the Thursday morning NYC Retiree rally and presser near City Hall along a nice sized crowd where the new bill replacing 1096 was announced by Democrat Chris Marti, one of the most liberal city council members from the lower East Side who was joined by Staten Island Republican Frank Morano, one of the most conservative members.

Only Marianne Pizzitola could accomplish such a feat of unity. I find it more than ironic that certain forces inside the current leadership of the Retired Teachers Chapter of the UFT have been critical of her efforts to unite all sides of the political world in the the support of the healthcare of retired NYC workers because they would rather people whose politics they abhor not to support us and castigate Marianne for getting them to work in our interests. The level of support for working with Marianne is one sticking point in the disagreement between the 30 year old Retiree Advocate, which won the 2024 election with Marianne's massive support, and the new kids on the block, Fix Retiree Benefits (FRB), which has been working with her organization to battle on issues like co-pay and para pensions.

After it was over and we took photos, I was one of the few people left when Rockaway lifeguard legend Janet Fash showed up. 

 

She came by subway, so no surprise that the A-train would get here there late. She was disappointed in not getting to meet Marianne and Arthur Goldstein. I had just bought her book the day before and she signed it. (CBS Saturday morning just did a major feature on her and she has been appearing on NPR and other media). Her book goes beyond her life story and explores the corrupt lifeguard union. I remember reading about her battles with the union leader, who was also her boss. (Yes she was retaliated against). She was also active in the UFT as a chapter leader in a Queens middle school and had gone to UFT DAs and borough meetings and was aware the UFT is not democratic.

She is very up to date on the doings in the retiree chapter. I ran into her at the June RTC meeting and she attended the FRB zoom in late June and signed up to be more involved. She decided to take the ferry back to Rockaway and I considered going with her. I was trying to decide whether to go back to Rockaway or go back uptown to Bryant Park for a 12:30 Broadway in the park. I also had tickets for an Art Cart drawing class at 2:30. Having had chemo the day before, I had to make sure I had the energy to keep going. I decided to stay in the city and take a late afternoon ferry home. 

I stopped for breakfast at a Dunkn on Chambers St. and took the subway uptown to Bryant Park (one of the great wonders of NYC and only a few blocks from my pied... er apartment (don't tell Mamdani - lucky I have a cheaper one). The night before I missed the 6PM yoga class but this Monday I'm going to the City of God movie. 

Anyway, I'm so glad a went because I met two ladies with health issues, one with Type 1 diabetes (she was wearing a dexcom patch) and later at the Art Cart a cancer survivor who had a lot of knowledge and was very encouraging. We talked so much, my drawing of the buildings surrounding the park look like a Jackson Pollock. 

Back to the rally and presser, this is an updated version of Intro 1096 that was proposed during the 2024-25 Council session.

The bill summary states: This bill would maintain the health insurance coverage of eligible retired employees of the city of New York and their dependents by prohibiting the City from increasing the total costs for healthcare above the rate paid by each retiree as of December 31, 2021, or by decreasing the level of coverage that was provided to each such retiree as of December 31, 2021.

The full text of the bill reads as follows:

Int. No. 1008

 

 

A Local Law to amend the administrative code of the city of New York, in relation to protecting the health insurance coverage and contribution for Medicare-eligible retired employees of the city of New York and their Medicare-eligible dependents

 

Be it enacted by the Council as follows:

 

Section 1. Subdivision a of section 12-126 of the administrative code of the city of New York, as amended by local law number 9 for the year 2010, is amended to read as follows:

a. Definitions. As used in this section, the following terms shall have the following meanings [hereinafter stated]:

[i. “]City employee.[“] The term “city employee” means [A] a person: (1) who is employed by a department or agency of the city; and (2) is paid out of the city treasury; and (3) is employed under terms prescribing a work week regularly consisting of twenty or more hours during the fiscal year; and (4) is not employed by the board of education. 

[ii. “]City retiree.[“] The term “city retiree” means [A] a person who: (1) is receiving a  retirement allowance, pension or other retirement benefit from a retirement or pension system either maintained by the city or to which the city has made contributions on behalf of such person pursuant to subdivision (g) of section 80-a of the retirement and social security law; and (2) immediately prior to such person's retirement as a member of such system, was a city employee, or was an employee of the board of education employed under terms prescribing a work week regularly consisting of twenty or more hours during the fiscal year; and (3) had at the time of retirement, at least five years of credited service as a member of such retirement or pension system, except that (A) such requirement of credited service shall not apply in cases of retirement for accident disability, (B) the requirement of credited service for vested retirement and service retirement shall be at least ten years for a person who was not an employee of the city or the board of education on or before the effective date of the local law that added this clause, and (C) notwithstanding the provisions of clause (B) of this subparagraph, the requirement of credited service for vested retirement and service retirement shall be at least fifteen years for a person who was not an employee of the city or the board of education on or before the effective date of the local law that added this clause, is receiving a retirement allowance from the New York city teachers' retirement system or the New York city board of education retirement system, and held a position represented by the recognized teacher organization for collective bargaining purposes on such person's last day of paid service. 

[iii. “]Dependent.[“] The term “dependent” means [T]the spouse of a city employee or city retiree or any child of a city employee or city retiree during the period of eligibility of such child for coverage under the insurance contract applicable to such employee or retiree; provided, however, that no spouse or child of any such employee or retiree shall be deemed a dependent after the death of such employee or retiree. 

Diminish. The term “diminish” means to cause any change in health care offered that could potentially make it harder for city retirees residing anywhere in the United States, including its territories and possessions, to access their health care than before such change was made. These changes include increasing the total costs for healthcare paid by each city retiree, including with respect to premiums, deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments.

[iv. “]Health insurance coverage.[“] The term “health insurance coverage” means [A] a program of hospital-surgical-medical benefits to be provided by health and hospitalization insurance contracts entered into between the city and companies providing such health and hospitalization insurance. 

§ 2. Section 12-126 of the administrative code of the city of New York is amended by adding a new subdivision e to read as follows:

e. The city shall not diminish the health insurance coverage provided to city retirees and their dependents or the contributions the city makes for such health insurance coverage below the level of such benefits or contributions made on behalf of such city retirees and their dependents by the city as of December 31, 2021. Nothing in this subdivision shall be construed to impair the ability of employee organizations to negotiate the terms and conditions of employment, including those concerning future retirement benefits, for their employee members.

§ 3. This local law takes effect immediately and is retroactive to and deemed to have been in full force and effect on and after December 31, 2021.

NYC Retirees Battle Back with New Bill to Protect Healthcare

Top Story

Aug 13

 

By Joe Maniscalco

New York City Council Member Chris Marte [D-1st District] reintroduced legislation on Thursday aimed at blocking ongoing efforts to chip away at the healthcare coverage municipal retirees earned after decades on the job—and this time, he said, the bill will pass. 

“I think there’s a lot of momentum on our side,” Marte told Work-Bites outside the gates of City Hall Aug. 13. “Whether it’s the recent [court] decisions, the [$53M] settlement, it really shows that this is a force to be reckoned with and we’re on the right side of history.”

In 2024, then Mayoral-candidate Zohran Mamdani told Work-Bites that Marte’s bill—then known as Intro. 1096— would not be needed if he was elected. But municipal retirees who have continued to press for legislation further codifying the healthcare package they had enjoyed up until the end of 2021, insist a new bill is needed. 

Last year, they successfully pushed Mayor Eric Adams to abandon a campaign—originally hatched between Mayor Bill de Blasio and the heads of the largest public sector unions in the city—to strip municipal retirees their tradition Medicare and Medigap benefits and herd them into a profit-driven Medicare Advantage plan.

The scheme was supposedly going to save the City of New York $600 million annually and cover long overdue raises for active city workers. 

Adams also imposed $15 copays on municipal retirees that many living on severely limited incomes could hardly afford.  Retirees fought them, too, ultimately convincing Manhattan Supreme Court Judge Lyle Frank to block the charges in 2023. 

Venerable New York City municipal retiree Evelyn Jones-Rich helps to rally supporters outside the gates of City Hall this week.

The Adams administration later responded and successfully managed to reinstate the copays. 

Just this month, however, municipal retirees won a $53 million settlement with the City of New York and EmblemHelath reimbursing them for the $15 copays they were forced to part with back in 2022. 

This week, Marte said his reintroduced bill will put a stop to any further efforts to diminish retiree healthcare. 

“Whether that’s limiting your network, whether that’s changing your provider to give you a worse system or increase your copays—that will not happen when we pass this bill,” he said on Thursday. 

Previous versions of the retiree bill, according to Marte, had to “side step” the legislative process and be introduced from the City Council floor because then-City Council Speaker Adrienne Adams opposed it. 

This time, he added, his team has been able to introduce the bill though the legislative process with the bill-drafting unit, “so [opponents] can no longer say that we did not look at this bill before it was introduced.”

Council Member Frank Morano [r] joins fellow Council Member Chris Marte [l] in calling for passage of newly-reintroduce legislation protecting the traditional Medicare benefits City retirees earned on the job.

“They can no longer say that our lawyers didn’t have an opportunity to look at every single word to make sure it was right or not. All those false narratives they’ve used in the past two years against us—they can no longer be used today,” he said.

Intro. 1096 largely failed to pass because District 37 Executive Director Henry Garrido, head of the largest public sector union in the city, also opposed it and actively worked to intimidate other City Council members against supporting it. 

“We are in the fight of our lives,” nonagenarian Evelyn Jones-Rich told Work-Bites on Thursday. “There are millions of us who believe in ourselves and the city we built—and we will prevail. We will fight to keep our traditional Medicare, we’re going to fight to keep our supplements, we’re going to fight to not have copays. We believe that we make this city and this nation—little people like us, ordinary people, ladies who have struggled behind the scenes. We have stood in the shadows for too long. Now we are standing up—we are speaking out.”

Marte’s reintroduced retiree bill also comes out of the gate with strong bipartisan support. In co-sponsoring the new legislation, City Council Member Frank Morano [R-51st District] has easily out-lefted the most progressive members in the legislative body and democratic socialist Mayor Zohran Mamdani himself. 

“The government talks constantly about rebuilding trust,” Morano said on Thursday. “Here’s a good place to start: Keep your word. The $53M victory that we’re [also] talking about today proves something else: You can fight City Hall—and sometimes City Hall loses. Retirees should’t have to hire lawyers and spend years in court every time somebody in government comes up with another clever way to reinterpret a promise. That’s why we need legislation.”

Mariann Pizzitola, retired FDNY EMS first-responder and head of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees, said the City of New York should never seek to achieve savings or balance the budget on the backs of active workers or retirees. 

“Here’s the deal,” she said, “these people worked for decades. They’ve been retired for decades. A promise was made to them. They kept their end of the deal and the city has to keep its promise. We’re going to hold them accountable to that.”

Mayor Mamdani, a close ally of Garrido, has so far ignored Pizzitola’s requests to meet and discuss retiree legislation.

Garrido, along with the other of the heads of the Municipal Labor Committee—UFT President Michael Mulgrew and Uniformed Sanitation Men’s Association President Harry Nespoli [retired]—have long insisted that legislation protecting retiree healthcare violates collective bargaining rights.

Marte, however, maintains that the newly-reintroduced retiree bill explicitly protects collective bargaining and that nothing in it limits the ability of employee organizations to “negotiate terms and conditions of employment, including future retirement benefits, on behalf of the active employees they represent.”

“We have heard the stories of retirees being frustrated, being scared, having anxiety every time they wake up, or every time they have to go to their doctor or provider—that is killing our people who have given so much for our city,” Marte said on Thursday.