A Meeting Unattended - Fix Retiree Benefits Replies to Retiree Advocate Formation of Election Committee

Nine for them, three for us. Echoes of UFT/Unity election committee meetings where they always get three for one. But then again, Retiree Advocate channeling Unity behavior has been striking.

 

Here is the response to a meeting from Fix Retiree Benefits that I and two others were invited to that we will not be attending. It's self-explainable. I'm scheduling this post for 6 PM, the precise time the meeting they called without consulting us is due to begin.

 

Also posted at: 

https://normscott.substack.com/p/a-meeting-unattended-fix-retiree

 

 

Monday, September 28, 2026

 

6:00 PM 

Fix Retiree Benefits Replies to Retiree Advocate’s Sudden Formation of a 13-member Election Committee

The three invited Fix Retiree Benefits members will not attend.

In June 2024, UFT retirees overturned 40 years of control of the UFT Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC) by Unity Caucus, and won elections for 10 RTC Officers, 15 Executive Board members and 300 representatives to the UFT Delegate Assembly. Retirees revolted over the old Unity RTC leadership’s support for the attempt to move us out of traditional Medicare and into a for-profit Medicare Advantage plan. Receiving 63% and over 17,000 retiree votes, the Retiree Advocate (RA) slate prevailed in the 2024 election, with the strong support of the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees (NYCOPSR) led by Marianne Pizzitola, who spoke to a standing ovation at the very first RTC Meeting not under Unity control in October, 2024.

As a result of that massive victory, UFT leader Michael Mulgrew backed off the Medicare Advantage demand, but has refused to support retirees on City Council Bill 1008 — which would grant retirees permanent protection under the law; nor has the UFT Unity leadership supported the elimination of co-pays for UFT retirees.

Over the past two years, differences have arisen within the RTC chapter between Retiree Advocate and a newly formed group, Fix Retiree Benefits— which has focused on protecting and expanding healthcare benefits and continuing the strong alliance with Marianne Pizzitola and NYCOPSR as major factors in the attempt to keep Unity from re-taking control of the RTC.

Representatives of Fix Retiree Benefits had two meetings with RA in April and May 2026, with a proposal for the two groups to work together in the RTC elections. Fix Retiree Benefits proposed a 50-50 split of the 25 RTC Officers and Executive Board, as well as the 300 Delegate Assembly representatives. A proposed June follow-up meeting was cancelled by RA with no further response.

On Sunday, Sept. 27, three core members of Fix Retiree Benefits were informed via email by RTC Chapter Leader and RA Organizer Bennett Fischer that they had been placed on a 13-member RTC election committee, without being consulted in advance. This 13-member RTC election committee was formed unilaterally by RA. The committee also included six RA Organizing Committee members and three others with known affiliations to the RA Organizers, with no input from Fix Retiree Benefits or independents organizing for the RTC election. In the email sent to the three individuals affiliated with Fix Retiree Benefits, the election committee meeting was called for Monday, September 28 at 6 P.M. 

An email to one of the three members from Fix Retiree Benefits was sent to the wrong email address. You can read his response here: 

 
RA Calls a Last Minute Meeting, Grants Fix Retiree Benefits No Input Whatsoever (Arthur Goldstein)

This formation of a 13-member “election committee” is in essence the response by RA to our original proposal from April and May, which was for an even split of Officers, Executive Board, and Delegate Assembly Representatives, and to for a united slate in the next RTC election.

Aside from the fact that Fix Retiree Benefits was not even given the courtesy of being asked what representatives we would choose, plus the fact that Fix Retiree Benefits, a group with a strong presence of women (two of whom had already met with RA during negotiations in April and May), did not have any of them considered for the committee by RA; the very nature of a proposal to set up a “pre-election” committee in which RA members would more than double the representation of Fix Retiree Benefits is objectionable. Presumably, this 13-member committee would then determine the candidates running on the slate.

This proposal by RA is clearly one-sided and is not acceptable to those who have been critical of the manner in which the RA leadership has been running the RTC, and would amount to a continuance of the same policies that have caused a large number of retirees to reconsider voting for RA again.

Only a slate decided on and reflective of the RTC membership will have a chance to defeat Unity once again. A serious proposal would respond directly to the issue of how each group (as well as independents) would be represented on a unified slate.

While representation among the Officers, Executive Board and Delegates is important and must be resolved, there are other concerns that must be addressed. For one, what should be contained in the platform of a united slate? What issues should be emphasized? Another issue is how do we organize to get Inro 1008 passed, and how do we work with other groups to lobby for its passage?

Given these conditions, none of the three Fix Retiree Benefits members intend to attend RA’s election committee meeting. However, we remain open to working not only with RA but with the vast number of non-affiliated RTC members who wish to actively participate in the RTC election.

---

The joint-slate proposal presented by Fix Retiree Benefits to Retiree Advocate in April and May is below:

1. Protect our promised retiree healthcare. We must unite with other municipal union retirees, and work in solidarity with the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees and its leader Marianne Pizzitola in the fight to pass City Council Intro 1008.

2. Fight to eliminate the onerous and coercive copays. Improve retiree UFT Welfare Fund benefits. Provide drug coverage for retirees and their dependents, as in all other municipal unions, and improve dental coverage.

3. Protect our pension benefits. Do not let the city balance its budget on the backs of retirees. Fight in the State to increase COLAs. Enable retirees to vote for TRS teacher trustees.

4. Oppose Unity Caucus leadership, when they pit active members against retirees or engage in undemocratic or other actions that cause harm to the membership.

We wish to run a democratic RTC, accountable to all its constituents, Medicare and pre-Medicare, inclusive of paraprofessionals and all other titles.

Fix Retiree Benefits proposed the following governing structure for the joint slate:

1. Each group (RA and FRB) would each nominate 150 of the chapter’s 300 delegates.

2. Each group (RA and FRB) would equally share the 10 officer positions (5 each).

3. Each group (RA and FRB) would share the 15 Executive Board positions, with the group nominating the chapter leader candidate choosing 7 of the 15 members of the Exec Board, and the other group choosing 8 members.

Thanks for reading FIX RETIREE BENEFITS - UFT! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support our work. 

 

It is deeply disappointing but not at all surprising to see RA leadership behaving in this way. It seems their only takeaway from the 2025 officers election, in which they lost the retiree vote by a 3-to-1 margin, was to become even more embittered and entrenched.

Despite TRIPLING the retiree vote received by RA in the 2025 election, the union activists involved in Fix Retiree Benefits have offered to split the RTC slate evenly (50/50) and to work together with RA to develop a platform. That offer from Fix Retiree Benefits was presented in good faith and in the spirit of union solidarity, and it still stands. RA should take the offer, and we should all get to work in defeating Unity, whose nearly 70-year obsessive control of the UFT has resulted in 20+ years of diminishing returns for all UFT members.

Mulgrew's Para Pay Gambit in Conflict with Mamdani Who Gets Praise from the Right: Is This War?

EONYC, The WIRE:

don’t confuse a temporary check with a raise.

don’t confuse a political campaign with collective bargaining.

 Arthur Goldstein, The Ever-Shifting Rationales of Michael Mulgrew

You CAN’T circumvent collective bargaining.

That’s what he [Mulgrew] told us as we tried to pass 1096. No doubt he’ll trot this out again as we support the newly named 1008. The problem, he claims, with a bill that would make our health care city policy and eliminate his beloved co-pays is it violates collective bargaining.  

Paras Need a Living Wage Now, Not To Be Used as Political Props - Educators of NYC, Daniel Alicea

Monday, Sept. 7, 2026 - Happy Labor Day

 

There were howls of laughter in UFT-land when the unpopular union leader Michael Mulgrew declared war on the super popular Mayor Mamdani over the para bonus issue. 

 

Did Mamdani invite Mulgrew to break the much-maligned pattern bargaining that sets a standard of pay raise for all unions based on the first union to settle? It would make sense for a DSA pro-labor mayor to give special attention to the lowest paid workers and paras certainly fit that mold, as do EMS workers. But that would break the pattern and might lead to squawking from higher salaried who might get less %wise even if the actual money they get would be more - much more.  

 

Due to pattern-bargaining, the same % goes to the highest and lowest paid. Thus a 100k at 3% worker gets a 3k raise a year and a para at 35K gets a $350 raise in the same contract. The only way for paras to get a permanent, pensionable salary is to selectively break the pattern.  

 

Yes, Mulgrew is using the same collective bargaining argument as Mamdani when it comes to protecting retiree healthcare, except Mamdani is closer to the truth than Mulgrew. But using "truth" and "Mulgrew" in the same sentence is a sham.

 

Oh, the irony of the mainstream NYC press (Times, News, Post) engaging in a rare Mamdani praise-fest for standing up to the UFT, when in actuality he is taking a potential long-range pro-para pro-union position. But then again so much of what Mulgrew has done is actually anti-union, and the para bonus gambit may just fit that mold. 

 

I say potential because the crucial test will be in the next contract negotiations where if Mamdani doesn't deliver for paras his cred on the left on the affordability issue with some of the lowest paid city workers would be laid to waste. 

 

There are many facets to the para pay issue. When my wife, who pays little attention to some of this stuff, asked me why Mamdani opposes the para bonus, I realized the issue had gone mainstream. I told her the key to understanding the entire issue was the Fix Para Pay election win over Unity in the 2024 chapter election. Her eyes glazed over at the inside baseball. Go and explain this to the mainstream press which is framing the issue in lopsided ways.

 

Daniel Alicea addresses the Unity election loss issue:

The Daily News says UFT President Michael Mulgrew “failed” paraprofessionals at the bargaining table and “basically left the paras behind.”

That’s the sentence worth remembering.

Because before there was a RESPECT Check, before Mayor Zohran Mamdani sued to stop it, and before politicians started holding press conferences about paraprofessional poverty, paras themselves had already revolted.

In the last UFT paraprofessional chapter election, in 2024, Fix Para Pay — a rank-and-file movement demanding better wages — defeated Mulgrew’s Unity Caucus with roughly 75% of the vote.

That’s not a close election.

That’s a jaw-breaking message.

Only after that political earthquake inside his own union did Mulgrew become the public face of a $10,000 legislative campaign. A lobbying campaign and series of bills in which Mulgrew never once consulted with the UFT paraprofessional chapter over its design or messaging.

That history matters.

So does what happened to the $10,000.

Continue reading his post at The Wire

The mainstream mostly anti-Mamdani and anti-union press has been having a field day, gleeful at seeing a split and mocking a DSA member mayor, and so happy that a pro-labor socialist will stand up to the union.  

 

Here are a few points to explore:

 

Mulgrew's para gambit was a response to the Para chapter election loss in 2024. Check.

 
If we delve deeper, we can see that Mamdani is actually more pro-labor than Mulgrew and his corrupt UFT leadership by defending the collective bargaining agreement as the way to enact permanent economic health for paras as opposed to a one-time non-pensionable gimmick. 

 

Mulgrew and City Council chair Menin tag team Mamdani as she preps a 2029 campaign against him, a campaign the UFT will back (maybe the kiss of death for her?). The para issue is the first of others to come where Menin looks for opportunities to differentiate herself. (Keep an eye on the 9/11 ceremonies).

 

The mainstream press has superficially been siding with Mamdani for standing up to the union and attacking Menin, but that is temporary. The second he gives paras a raise in the contract, the dogs will be out. 

 

The left, especially the loyal opposition in the UFT, which is reluctant to criticize Mamdani and seems confused, just stays silent - see if you can find a Jacobin article delving into the issue. So the only place with a left-leaning perspective where you will get some analysis is by reading Arthur, Daniel, ABC, Fix Retiree Benefits, FIx Para Pay and Ed Notes. Let me know when you see MORE, RA or NAC put something up.

 

Here are excerpts from the NYT authored by 3 reporters who always have their chops out to slam Mamdani. The Times has followed the scurvy NY Post lead on anti-Mamdani articles.                                                                  

By Fighting Union Pay Bonus, Mamdani Wins Rare Praise From Conservatives

A lawsuit filed by the Mamdani administration to block $10,000 bonuses for teachers’ aides has put the mayor at odds with their union.

Aug. 31, 2026 - By Eliza Shapiro, Sally Goldenberg and Dana Rubinstein

When Mayor Zohran Mamdani sued the City Council over its end-run move to give $10,000 bonuses to teachers’ aides outside the normal collective bargaining process, the mayor placed himself at the short end of a two-on-one battle.

Not only would the mayor square off against the City Council, a frequent sparring partner, but he would also embark on his first major fight with a public sector union, in this case the United Federation of Teachers.

In doing so, a mayor eager to burnish his pro-worker bona fides has scrambled conventional wisdom and left himself in the strange position of being praised by some of his most committed critics.

“Mamdani does right,” read a recent headline from The New York Post’s conservative editorial

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/31/nyregion/mamdani-uft-paraprofessionals-budget.html 

 

 A Daily News editorial goes after Menin:

Julie Menin’s power grab in pushing bonuses for NYC paraprofessionals would make Trump proud

Because Speaker Julie Menin knows better, her unabashed abuse of power in orchestrating a unanimous City Council vote for a $10,000 bonus payment for NYC’s deeply deserving school paraprofessionals would make Donald Trump proud.

Her usurping the mayor’s exclusive authority under the state Taylor Law to negotiate contracts was a naked giveaway to the powerful teachers union and United Federation of Teachers President Mike Mulgrew and sets a dangerous precedent at City Hall.

 

The Missing Link in all reporting on the para issue is the 10k is the Unity Loss to Fix Para Pay in the 2024 Para Chapter Election, along with the loss in the Retiree election. 

 

The losses were by big margins: 63% in the RTC and 75% in the para election. In the RTC, Unity dropped from their usual 17-19K to 10K.

With 26k paras and 70K retirees and his re-election coming up a year later, losing big in those chapters could very well have turned into a loss for Unity - and both results spurred Amy Arundell and other unhappy Unity people to join with some standard opposition folk to form a potent ABC and become a threat. Mulgrew pivoted by declaring he no longer backed MedAdvantage and for the paras came up with the one-time non-pensionable 10k bonus. 

And it seemed to work in time for the 2025 election . One of the reasons ABC actually thought it had a chance to win even in a 3 slate race was the hope that the para and retiree vote would be substantial. While the retiree vote dropped from 2024 it was still enough to continue to worry Unity with Unity regaining some ground but fundamentally in a 50-50 split with the ABC/ARISE combo retiree vote. (I will delve deeply into the upcoming RTC election.)

The para vote was not substantial, as the Unity blitz before the election gave paras the impression Mulgrew was really fighting for them. It will be interesting to see how things play out in the upcoming para chapter election if FPP runs a slate. Will there be some blowback if they still haven't gotten the check by the spring?

While supporting the 10k as an emergency bonus, ABC pointed out the one-time only gimmicky aspect and called for paras to get a permanent pensionable raise in contract negotiations, while also pointing out that Mulgrew had his chance to get them a big raise in the last contract and didn't even try. For taking that position, Unity attacked ABC as being against the 10K and that also cut down the vote. But 140 paras ran with ABC -- and none with ARISE. 

Now that Mamdani is taking the collective bargaining position in opposing the 10k bonus and in essence challenging Mulgrew to bargain effectively (two contradictory words for UFT negotiators) he also puts to shame the Mulgrew position that supporting City Council bills to protect retiree healthcare violates collective bargaining and the Taylor Law. Taking one side for an issue and taking the contradictory side for another issue is not out of bounds in the UFT.

Tell Our Councilmembers to Support 1008

Please do your part to help get 1008 passed!

Fix Retiree Benefits - UFT

I left a text linking the para election issue at the Brian Lehrer show regarding the election after a segment on the para issue last week. 

Daniel points out that if going around contract negotiations and using politics to bargain is good for the goose, it is also good for the gander as other unions will play the same game.

Daniel Alicea nailed the FPP election impact:

The ripple effects are already beginning.

Council Member Joann Ariola has announced legislation proposing $20,000 workforce stabilization payments for FDNY EMTs and $25,000 payments for FDNY paramedics, arguing they face the same recruitment and retention crisis.

She probably won’t be the last.

School aides.

School crossing guards.

School food service workers.

Childcare workers.

EMTs.

And countless other lower-paid municipal employees now have every reason to ask the same question.

Paras Need a Living Wage Now, Not To Be Used as Political Props

While UFT leadership, City Council Speaker Menin and Mayor Mamdani are cast as heroes and villains, we continue to forget paraprofessionals need a permanent living wage, now — not later.

Dan Alicea

Aug 30, 2026

 

https://thewire.educators.nyc/p/paras-need-a-living-wage-now-not?r=h8n1q&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

 

Last week, the Daily News editorial board got one big thing right about New York City’s paraprofessionals.

NYC paras were left behind.

Where I part company with the board is over what happens next — and who gets to play hero now that everybody has discovered that a school worker making barely $33,000 can’t afford New York City.

More from Dan 

The Good, Bad and Ugly - The NYC Para Bill

Educators of NYC

·

Jul 21

Read full story

FIX RETIREE BENEFITS - UF