Showing posts with label A Better Contract. Show all posts
Showing posts with label A Better Contract. Show all posts

Sunday, June 1, 2025

Election Reaction - Statement from A Better Contract

Hey folks. I just want to thank all of you that chose to support this slate. Although we didn’t win, we knocked Unity down from 66% in 2022 to 54% this time around. We're chipping away at Unity's choke hold on UFT... Comment from an ABC candidate

Sunday June 1

For a brand new group of people getting a third of the vote is a decent showing. If not for some unforced errors we might have gotten close. 

But we will try to examine where we missed. But also examine the strengths. Building the plane while flying it is tough but also fun. What does this say about the caucuses and their outreach after decades of existence? But do watch the spin. I know there are demands to come together. Can you mix a caucus based group with the free-style ABC? I don't think easily but ABC always has a welcome mat out for anyone interested.

I left the count Friday night at 7:30 to catch the last ferry to Rockaway under the assumption they would count until 1-2AM to get it done, but when I got home there was a new plan- to stop and continue Saturday morning.  

So I shlepped back on the 8AM ferry, stayed until 1PM - and still no results until our intrepid reporters sent out the results around 2PM. Our crew to the right. 

UFT Election Results - 46% say NO to Unity (Slate only): Unity 54%, ABC 32%, ARISE 14%

We Are Down But Not Out: Unity wins again, but by the lowest margin in their history ---- Arthur reported on his experience on Saturday



Now, there's a lot to mull over but I admit to being somewhat surprised to see the positive reactions from so many ABCers who expected to win this election. I thought they might be crushed and disappear but holy cow, they seem rearing to go back to the fray - well, maybe take a week or so off. In the past, the usual suspects from the oppo - usually an alliance of caucuses, went their separate ways and let two years go by before realigning for the next election. Since ABC is an alliance of individuals, this separation may not happen and there's a lot of excited back room chatter on next steps. Hard to say, given the loose structure of ABC.

I loved the comment from one of our retirees who said on Friday that she loved running with ABC and felt so welcome and heard, unlike being associated with RA where she felt left out. 

There is a lot of hand wringing from the same people who wanted one slate and felt we could have beaten Mulgrew. They refuse to understand that the only way there could have been one slate would have been under the ARISE caucus driven formula -- how did that work out? Don't forget --- ABC always offered everyone the opportunity to run with ABC and will do so in the future. Those who want one slate go talk to the 14%ers.

Sorry, after all the scurrilous attacks by some ARISE leading lights, some just a few days ago, I'm not in the mood to be magnanimous.  

I can only say how happy I was to be involved with the people from ABC. We were serious about trying to win rather than running to try to make a point about where we stand politically but also had a lot of fun with each other. We were attacked for not talking about Trump enough -- like talking about para pay or how teachers were under attack or retiree healthcare were attempts to appeal to Trump supporters. Give me a break. I call bullshit in advance at what will be some of the bitter people in ARISE who will try to blame ABC as a way to cover for their failures.

Now let me point out, the bitter people in ARISE are the few. More than a few may seek to work with ABC but their caucus structures will be an obstacle. I will get more into those structures and delve into why two 30 and one 13 year old caucuses with all their supposed outreach could only muster 14% after spending a lot of money and energy on this campaign, while an ad hoc group of individuals that spent maybe 2 grand managed to get a third of the vote. What do these outcomes auger for the future? I will delve into these issues very soon. 

 

Statement from A Better Contract: This Campaign Changed the UFT

May 31, 2025

The results are in. While our slate did not win this election, what we built together will outlast any ballot count.

From the beginning, we knew what we were up against: a well-funded machine with decades of institutional control. But we had something they couldn’t manufacture—member energy. Across chapters and titles, UFT members showed they were ready for change.

A Better Contract was never just a slate. It is a movement. And that movement has reshaped this union’s political landscape. Secretaries, paraprofessionals, school nurses, teachers, clinicians, retirees—thousands of members organized their schools, reignited chapters, and took ownership of our union’s future. For many, this was their first time participating. It won’t be their last.

We ran on the belief that this union belongs to its members. That leadership should be earned, not handed down. That our contracts should reflect the real value of our work—not serve as placeholders while our conditions erode. And that power grows through connection—not control. Our union isn’t a ladder with a few at the top—it’s a living network, strengthened by every relationship, every act of solidarity, every member who refuses to stand alone.

That belief is now shared by more members than ever before.

We are proud of what we’ve done. Proud to have shifted the narrative. Proud that demands for transparency, democratic reform, and member-led bargaining—once silenced or dismissed—were brought into the open, debated, and embraced by members hungry for a different kind of union.

So we’ll say this plainly: we’re watching. We all heard the promises Unity made during this campaign—for paras, for retirees, and for those working in Tier 6, to name just a few. Those promises were born of pressure from facing a viable challenge for the first time in UFT history, and they will be met with accountability. The membership demands that Unity now deliver.

This campaign has changed the UFT. It awakened members who had long been disengaged. It connected voices across boroughs, titles, and schools. It reminded all of us that organizing works and that no amount of money or messaging can stop a union whose members are ready to lead.

None of this would have been possible without our supporters, who have from the start been the heart of our efforts. “Member-driven” isn’t just a slogan for us, it’s an ethos. To everyone who voted for the change we offered, we offer you the sincerest and most heartfelt of thank yous.

We may not have won this round. But we’ve already won something bigger: a shift in what’s possible.

In Solidarity,
The A Better Contract Slate

Here is one other point of view:

I’m proud to have run with ABC. We stood for member driven democracy, transparency, honesty. We did change the narrative and hopefully more will be listening and waking up. Than you for all the hard work everyone put in! Let’s keep the message out there.

Win or lose,, you are the best. The fight persists.

This is not the result I wanted. Just know I promise to be here with you for the fight. I believe in ABC!

An abolitionist minister, Theodore Parker, stated that "[t]he arc of history is long, but it bends towards justice." Congratulations on taking the longer view, the unselfish road, the path toward justice for all members.

I'm very sad. Thank you for organizing. Thank you for running. When is the next election? In three years? There is time. There is hope. Always. Always. ABC!!!

We gave it our all. There’s always tomorrow. Never give up. Thank you

Live to fight another day. I find it hard to understand why we lost since Mulgrew clearly did not act in the best interest of the retirees and longterm he did not act in the best interest of the active members. This might have been the first but it will not be the last time Mulgrew makes a malevolent decision.

Well that means arise only got 14 percent. I don’t understand why Mulgrew got 54% of the votes. I wish people would come to their senses.

I hope the next election ABC and ARISE can unite against unity caucus.

I am very sad and thank you for your support.

 

Saturday, May 31, 2025

UFT Election Results - 46% say NO to Unity (Slate only): Unity 54%, ABC 32%, ARISE 14%

 Lots to analyze and break down. We could have swamped the HS if we had run some joint candidates. ARISE might actually win a seat of two if individual votes come through. But overall, the ARISE coalition did very poorly. ABC which as a new group matched and in some areas exceeded what UFC did 3 years ago, had decisions to make as to whether to continue working together. Overall, I'd say people really had a good experience.

I'm planning an ICE forensic analysis in person on Juneteenth. We will also do a zoom. 

More later.  

 

Unity won the election. Here are the unofficial results. Certified results will be available later.

Overall ballots sent - 201,791

58,318 registered

413 voided/empty envelopes
57,905 valid ballots

1,946 booklets of individual votes still being counted

55,959 slate votes


ABC - 17,874 32%
Unity - 30,219 54%
Arise - 7,866 14%

Elementary:
ABC - 2,897
Arise - 1,241
Unity - 5,967

MS:
ABC - 619
Arise - 520
Unity - 1,536

HS:
ABC - 1,472
Arise - 1,769
Unity - 1,985

Functional:
ABC - 3,889
Arise - 1,305
Unity - 7,158

Retirees:
ABC - 8,997
Arise - 3,031
Unity - 13,573

 

Friday, May 30, 2025

UFT Election 2025: ARISE - A Forensic Analysis - Will ARISE Demise? And What About ABC?

Prediction from John Q. Teacher: ARISE will get about 20% of the vote. Unity will get 40% and ABC will get 30% of the vote. Thus, Unity still wins. I have been saying this for a while. Having two groups such as ARISE and ABC will cause a Unity victory and I am not happy to see that happening. Hope I am wrong..... 
Unity will break 60% closer 65%. .... Anon

Friday, May 30, 2025

Yesterday, as predicted, was a dud in terms of election results - even worse than I predicted due to the expected complications of in-person, mail, dealing with the large number of booklets vs single slate voting. They did count the in-person with estimates that around 1200 voted, and from what I could see from the screens, Unity won that vote overwhelmingly - looked like 65-70% to me. But that was expected. I was in and out all day with a noon doc appt and then at 5 to the rally on immigration at Tweed where there was a big crowd.


 
But today they are ready to start the serious scanning of the mail ballots -- we have no number on returns - we were told north of 50K. But how far north is a key as 50K is still on a quarter of the 200k ballots.
 
I'm heading down soon for the day which may stretch into Saturday. We won't know official results until sometime next week. We can only detect trends.
 

Here are the scenarios and at this point I can't do much speculation other than to say ABC has a shot and ARISE will not win.
Unity wins with 60-65% along the lines of the 2022 UFC election.
Unity wins but with lower totals ever: low 50s%
Unity wins small: Under 49%
ABC wins - if so it will be small
ARISE wins - I see no path
 
If Unity hits over 60%, that is a tribute to the campaign they ran that was aimed at getting out their base. They were desperate, because, you know, going back to the classroom was possible of they lose. But if the win with under 50%, that is a major warning sign that the end is near - if the opposition can get their stuff together -- always problematical.

But before we know results, as ballots start flying through the scanners, we can't help but look to the future, which has many different possibilities depending on the outcome. I will address the future of ABC which could go from bye-bye to vibrancy after the results. One thing was proven - that an ad hoc group of individuals with a wide range of political views - with a "leave your personal politics at the door" attitude, showed they could put together a slate of 550 candidates and run a campaign, a campaign that annoyed the hell out of both Unity and the usual loyal opposition.

What about the future of ARISE? Let's look at the components of the ARISE coalition, which has some similarities to United for Change from 3 years ago, but also some differences. My premise is that each caucus has different interests and after the election will focus on pursuing those interests. And as long as there are multiple caucuses pursuing their interests, and only coming together every 3 years for elections, Unity will prevail. 

ARISE is smaller in size down from 7 voices to 3 and they have learned a few lessons from the mistakes of UFC. Three caucuses made for easier decision making than 7. Let's not forget - before ARISE arose, there was the bigger ABC in formation which I wrote about the other day: Proposal from MORE to ABC Coalition (Oct. 2024) - Why This Agreement Favors MORE Caucus and Hurts Broader Union Democracy

Before the split, the group that became ARISE pushed the idea of structure as a necessary precursor which to the ABC component, which was like a wild horse trying to break out of the barn, meant control. And limits on what type of campaign could be run. Even a modest proposal to allow committees to funtion somewhat autonomously led to a hysterical reaction with screams of "you are trying to gut the power of steering." That was the final straw when ABC found out that the major 4 page proposal from MORE was being given careful consideration by the very same people who attacked ABC for its modest offer.

Anyway, let's look at those components.

New Action was founded in 1995 in a merger of two long-time caucuses, Teachers Action Caucus (TAC) - late 60's and New Directions (1975) and through 2001 won the high school exec bd seats. C. 2002, NAC began to cooperate with Unity Caucus and worked in tandem for UFT elections through the 2013 elections before breaking with Unity in 2016. During that 12 year period, NAC lost the bulk of its support, especially from active members and became more and more of a retiree-laden group. They recouped some in-service support from the 2022 election but are still very retiree dependent.

New Action has the most to lose if ARISE finishes last as they have claimed that only the caucuses and with their history and experience, could run a campaign. Thus some of them have been the most vicious in attacking ABC, which presents an existential threat to them.

MORE: Due to the NAC deal with Unity, two new groups, ICE and TJC ran against them both from 2004-10 before coming together with other groups to form MORE in 2012. A faction in MORE pushed out the ICE people in 2018 and MORE slanted traditional left. MORE is the biggest opposition group and is very school based and can withstand any outcome in this election and still hold its own. A significant portion of MORE did not even want to run and if ARISE finishes a poor last, will become more ascendant in MORE. That will make MORE less likely to want to continue to work within the ARISE group after the election.

Retiree Advocate: A 30- year old group that was a spin-off of NAC but separated in order to attract new people -- I and some others from the ICE wing of MORE plus people picked up during the rallies against MedAdv. Currently around 12 people, of which I am one. We call ourselves the RA Organizing Committee. Last year's major victory over Unity in the RTC election gave people hope we could beat Unity this time, but for me has made some serious errors in how they decided to join the ARISE group without going outside the dozen. I was the lone dissenter, urging them to remain neutral and try to play the role of mediator to try to bring ABC and NAC/MORE together before ARISE even AROSE. 

RA is not really a caucus because it has no formal membership and we are talking about how to change that but bad feelings about this election will not go away very quickly. RTC CL Bennett Fischer, who I support, even when I disagree with him, has the potential to keep things together.

In the meantime, RA is very tied in with running the RTC --- 8 of the ten officers are RA and I am on the RTC Exec Bd.  

Well, time to go off to get the results and look for a follow-up to this post once we know more.

 

Thursday, May 29, 2025

UFT Election 2025: The Final Countdown - Come on Down - Plenty of Seating

Thursday, May 29, 2025
 
So it's the middle of the night and I have to be at UFT at 9 AM but I wanted to get this out  in advance. I want to get upstairs to the gym before I leave so this is a rush job. 
 
Expect all the groups running to have reps there along with any others who are interested in the process. Food will be served by GES, the vendor, which is catering from the UFT 3rd floor restaurant. For some a lot is at stake so expect some anxious looks. Let's hope there will be no food fights. Generally, I've found in the past that even people who have fought hard in an election don't bring animosity when observing. We all try to be nice. I will do my best, though I know a lot of people from some caucuses who seem pretty mad at me. (I will address the other caucuses in a follow-up post - maybe tonight.)
 
The ABC crew, on the other hand, seem to be happy campers, having had fun along the way. One of the officer candidates was given release from school today so I will have good company - I expect her to shield me from some of the very angry people who tend to blame me for the existence of ABC. (I have not played a major role other than in running the petition campaign through late March.)
 
I dropped by Shanker Hall yesterday to get the lay of the land for the count. I reported on my conversation with Kathryn Weisbeck, president of Global Election Services, the company running the election, when I voted in person last week. She was very helpful and yesterday she was at Shanker Hall along with the Chairman of GES, John S. Matthews, who gave me a guided tour of the entire process. Though I was initially skeptical, my hopes were raised that the process would run smoothly - but talk is cheap. Today we will see if the proof is in the pudding. John said they hired and trained 75 people in 3 shifts. Two security guards, moonlighting NYC police I believe, will be guarding the ballots from 8PM last night until 8 AM this morning.
 
Unlike AAA, GES did not touch the ballots until Wednesday morning when they picked ten boxes (about 3-4 feet high) up from the post office and delivered them to Shanker Hall. In addition, there are 34 locked in-person ballot boxes. Thus, unlike AAA which used to scan the envelopes as they came in - something none of us were able to see, GES is more open to us observing that process which will begin at 9 AM and last 8 hours. Thus no counting until that is done. But even before the count can begin, the envelops have to be slit open which will also take hours. So I imagine we might see some counting tonight.

Yasmin Colon, who handles elections for the UFT was there with me and I always rely on Yasmin and promised I would try to be nice - this time. There is plenty of seating for observers and there will be 3 TV screens for the scanners. Up to ten observers at a time will be allowed to watch up close if they like.
 
Yasmin has arranged plenty of seating for observers so no need to call in advance but you will need your UFT id to check in with her assistants. 

Security guards will also be on duty tonight from 8 PM to Friday morning at 7 when count sill resume. If necessary, the count will continue into Saturday. Expect full results to be tabulated by Monday or Tuesday. 

One other major change is that the ballots will not be separated by colors and counted division by division but all mixed in together -- there is a code on each color ballot that the software can pick up - but we won't be able to easily monitor the divisional vote until it's over. What we will do is take sample batches throughout the process over a period of hours and average those results. Bennet Fischer reported he did that in the RTC election last year and when he averaged about 15 samples he hit the exact number - 63% - that we won by. So if you come down join me in doing sampling. Expect the bulk of counting to be Friday.
 
As a member of the UFT Election Committee, I should be able to get some updates along the way. 

Below is the bulletin to the election committee from GES:

Tuesday, May 27, 2025

Proposal from MORE to ABC Coalition (Oct. 2024) - Why This Agreement Favors MORE Caucus and Hurts Broader Union Democracy

This is not coalition-building; it’s institutional dominance under the guise of “consensus.” -- response to MORE plan

If ARISE were to win, which of the 3 caucuses would have the major influence in running the UFT?

 


Tuesday, May 27, 2025 - 
 
Today is the last day to vote in person. There are lots of complaints from people who did not receive ballots and it it discriminatory to offer in person voting when there are so many out of town retirees or some who can't travel. But it sure gives an advantage to Unity Caucus members who work in or near borough offices. The other day only 21 people voted in the Bronx office. I could support in-person voting if there was an electronic voting alternative, which Unity views as not to its advantage. But apparently they do view in- person to their advantage. It will take a month after the election to find out how many late ballots came in, a number that may be in the thousands.
It is UFT election history time here at Ed Notes and with the end of the election and people looking ahead to what has become a somewhat toxic relationship between ABC and ARISE. In order to move forward we cannot bury the past. So I will post a series based on my view of the history since I've been there from day 1. I'm sure people will disagree and they are welcome to do so - no comments will be suppressed. 

Both sides have been accused of not coming together due to egos, past slights, and personalities. I push back on that. There were real differences on ideology, organizing principles, and the kind of audience a campaign was aiming to reach - irreconcilable differences at the time - and possibly going forward. Of course the election outcomes will determine the future. As I began pointing out almost a year ago, a key to defeating Unity would be, not retirees, but rousing enough of a segment of former non-voting in-service to go beyond 25%.
 
Assume all 3 components of ARISE will continue on their individual paths no matter the election outcome, though RA is under the major influence of NAC and not totally independent. For ABC, since it is not a caucus, the votes will determine its future. The attacks on ABC from both Unity and ARISE are aimed at diminishing the ABC votes to a point where ABC will just go away.

To set the groundwork, here is a  response to a proposal from MORE when ABC was one group to modify an original proposal from NAC to divide a future steering committee into four parts -- NAC, MORE, RA and everyone else (which became ABC). Behind the scenes the NAC group that designed their proposal to include MORE but limit their ability to take control of the UFT, which was a real concern, if we were to win the election. 
 
We began to meet in March 2024 - with independents and people from almost all caucuses and continued in August through early November. We were at first held up in moving ahead by MORE's internal system of deciding whether to join the coalition which lasted from August through mid-September. At all meetings until the vote was complete, MORE announced they were there only as observers, which led some to question whether they should be in the room given there was a chance they might not join and even run their own campaign. But most people, including many of the ex-Unity future leaders of ABC seemed to be catering to MORE. 

MORE had an internal split, with 35 out of about 170 voters who were opposed to joining the coalition - a position I can respect as fitting to MORE ideologists who claimed they shouldn't run with groups that didn't share their values, especially when it came to Palestine. (MORE's largest demo at a UFT DA had been a pro-Palestinian event where their CL and Delegates walked out to join). This group was very vocal with a lot of influence and there were internal concerns about them leaving the caucus unless some of their demands were met -- which created complications.
 
So there was push back from everyone when MORE came back with modifications of the NAC proposal and asked for more representation based on claims they were bigger, did more work and were harmed in the past in coalitions and wanted redress for these harms, even hinting that past criticisms on blogs like Ed Notes should be removed or censored. (They had made similar demands back in the 2022 UFC election with James Eterno being the fiercest opponent).
 
A vote was taken - 16-3 against MORE, with the 3 MORE reps voting yes and all the NAC, Unity defectors and independents voting NO. That led to all 9 MORE reps withdrawing from the coalition. 
 
Then NAC got cold feet over not being able to rely on MORE to do the bulk of the in-service election vote and secretly met with them and reversed themselves, agreeing to accept many of the MORE demands but not informing the others in ABC. At that point NAC members stopped attending the ABC meetings. A week later, what was left of ABC had clearly given up on working with the caucuses and declared they were going to run a slate in the UFT elections, inviting any individual, in a caucus or not, to run.
 
Before the final break occurred, there was an attempt to hold all the non-MORE elements together in ABC and approach them with a united front. One sidelight were hints from some leading MOREs behind the scenes that there were people in MORE willing to run as individuals with the ABC slate. This broke down with the NAC reversal and also the inordinate influence they had with Retiree Advocate. The secret meeting they held on Nov. 5 with MORE to renegotiate their demands was a final straw. Really, if you are looking for root caucus, check the actions of NAC then and through some of the insane attacks on ABC. NAC has the most to lose if ARISE does poorly since they were selling their decades of organizing experience. Assuming ARISE doesn't win - a good bet to make - can that coalition continue to function post-election? Another good bet to make.  As for ABC -- a collection of individuals, expect some relationships forged in the election to continue. Of course if ABC wins, that is another story.
 
But let me say --- things in the past will not always be that way in the future, but relationships between people on both sides will continue to be forged and out of that some sense of working together can come. 

Here is an analysis of the flaws in the MORE demands from October, 2024, followed by the MORE document.
Why This Agreement Favors MORE Caucus and Hurts Broader Union Democracy:  While framed as a compromise, this agreement disproportionately benefits MORE and imposes structural disadvantages on the rest of the coalition and membership:



1. “Chapter Leaders First” Locks In MORE’s Influence
    •    MORE has more active chapter leaders than many smaller caucuses.
    •    Prioritizing current chapter leaders ensures MORE dominates e-board seats before any proportional division, undermining equal representation.
    •    This rewards current power structures instead of reflecting membership-wide support or building broader coalition capacity.

2. Platform Pre-Vetting by MORE Imposes an Ideological Gate
    •    MORE demands the coalition agree to MORE’s platform priorities upfront, including controversial or highly specific planks (like strike-readiness and New York Health Act).
    •    This creates an ideological litmus test that other groups must pass before decisions are even shared—undermining a true consensus approach.

3. Maintains MORE’s Autonomy but Limits Others’ Influence
    •    MORE retains the right to speak independently on any issue—even contentious ones like Palestine—but other groups must accept that without reciprocal control or shared standards.
    •    This opens the door to confusion, factionalism, and public messaging conflicts, which can harm the coalition’s credibility and unity during the campaign.

4. MORE Locks In Officer Representation
    •    By demanding 3 of the top 12 officer spots, including a top position, MORE secures disproportionate visibility and power relative to other caucuses, even if the electoral base is not equally strong.

5. Imposes MORE’s Governance Style on the Whole Coalition
    •    Requiring the use of MORE’s meeting norms and a community care-based accountability model forces other caucuses to adopt their internal culture.
    •    This is not coalition-building; it’s institutional dominance under the guise of “consensus.”

6. Undermines Long-Term Coalition Stability
    •    The proposal makes the temporary leadership body explicitly short-term, requiring a total renegotiation after the election—this benefits the strongest player now (MORE) and leaves others insecure in the long run.



Conclusion:

This proposal allows MORE to:
    •    Consolidate more seats through chapter leader preference.
    •    Dictate platform content.
    •    Retain full ideological independence.
    •    Secure a top leadership position.
    •    Control internal processes.

Other caucuses get equal officer seats only after concessions, limited say on platform, and no autonomy protections of their own. Rather than a power-sharing agreement, this is a strategic entrenchment of MORE’s influence at the expense of true democratic coalition-building—and by extension, a less representative, less inclusive vision for the broader UFT membership.
 
And here is the MORE proposal coming in mid-late October - 4 pages - after months of meeting and itching to get a campaign started. While I don't know for sure, I'm betting NAC caved to many if not all the demands. Note only 72 out of 500 members voted. I and most of ABC can actually agree with many of the platform ideas and in fact has a similar platform other than a few points.

 
MORE/Coalition Proposal: Goal and Summary
The goal here is to present what MORE wants out of this coalition all at once in order to avoid endless back-and-forth horse-trading. To this end, MORE undertook a weeklong survey of its dues-paying members over the course of a week. 
 
72 members responded. 
 
Based on those responses MORE has crafted the following proposal. We believe this is a significant compromise from MORE and should be broadly acceptable to all our potential coalition partners and we hope this can end the back-and-forth negotiation and allow us to
begin campaigning in earnest.
 
As a topline summary: 
 
MORE is willing to trade away proportional representation among the officer seats and the election coalition leadership body in favor of a “Chapter Leaders First” system for allocating the e-board seats. We believe this will improve the coalition’s chance of winning (because Chapter Leaders have natural and proven constituencies within schools) and prioritize expertise and experience as workplace organizers and union activists. Once every chapter leader represented by all of the groups has an opportunity to say yes to being a part of an e-board slate, the remaining spots will go to the four groups/constituencies as proposed by NAC according to equal representation and the groups can choose members to fill the remaining spots allocated to them as they see fit.
 
MORE would also like to see a small number of things added to the platform before seating the coalition leadership body to avoid any individual or caucus vetoing some of MORE’s priorities. We believe these additions are in keeping with the general spirit of the coalition and are not major asks, though we recognize some of these are areas where there may be disagreement among coalition members. We hope that other groups will accept these proposals in the spirit of compromise. 
 
Those are detailed below.

In exchange, MORE will agree to equal representation on the coalition leadership body and only 3 seats among the officer slate, including one of the top spots. We feel that this is a significant concession given our caucus’s size and the resources we will be bringing to the coalition. The coalition leadership body will run by consensus and will not make decisions likely to be deeply controversial without first going back to the caucuses that make up the coalition. The groups will decide by consensus for the top 12 officer spots.

Structure proposals:

The coalition will adopt a 12-person steering committee that will be run by consensus involving 3 Unity breakers/independents, 3 members of RA, 3 members of NAC, and 3 members of MORE. The primary task of the group will be to prepare and propose an officer slate and facilitate subcommittees of the coalition. MORE agrees not to seek more than 3 seats (including one top spot) on the officer slate. All parties agree that there
needs to be a consensus on the 12 officer spots. This body is intended as temporary and will cease to exist after the election and any further collaboration between the parties will need to be renegotiated (this is not to say that MORE wouldn’t want to continue collaborating after the elections but we are wary about signing onto a decision-making body under a time crunch that winds up becoming permanent).

The coalition will adopt a "chapter leader first" policy for the remaining 90 e-board seats. This will increase our chances of winning since chapter leaders have proven constituencies. It will also prioritize giving leadership of the union to rank-and-file organizers. We will open up a period of time where each group solicits chapter leaders from their groups to run on the e-board slate. After that period closes and all current CLs are seated
the remaining seats will go 25-25-25-25 as proposed in Nick Bacon's proposal.

The coalition agrees to use MORE's meeting norms, including a cedar to assess and intervene when those norms aren't followed. The coalition also agrees to create an accountability committee to address past harms between people involved in the coalition and any harms that may come up in the campaign. Individuals with a community care background will assist in developing this accountability committee so it can be as effective as possible in resolving harm between the parties involved.

The coalition will agree that MORE and all other groups will be able to continue their work around areas that are not covered in the coalition platform, including Palestinian liberation, as long as our messaging around non-covered issues does not imply coalition support for those issues. No censorship will be applied to MORE’s social media accounts, literature shared with other union members, or events that MORE holds such as rallies, town halls, etc.

Platform proposals:

The coalition will agree to leave geopolitical issues off of the table in exchange for including language about defending members' right to free speech and protecting teachers who are targeted by media attacks and right-wing harassment campaigns.

The coalition will include on their platform to redirect UFT resources towards organizing at the chapter and district levels. Provide all chapter leaders, delegates, and chapter activists with organizer training, not just instruction on contractual minutia. Organize and empower strong chapters to take action at the school level and to educate and activate members to build up to being strike-ready by the next contract negotiations so we don't preemptively take our strongest weapon off the table during negotiations with the city.

The coalition will include on their platform to advocate for legislation like the New York Health Act, already approved by the UFT delegate assembly, that will permanently solve our union's healthcare crisis and allow contract negotiations to focus on wages and working conditions. Ensure that all members, including members who move out of state after retirement, have guaranteed access to high-quality healthcare and not a cut-rate Medicare Advantage plan.

The coalition will advocate for an end to the mayoral control system that has led to chaos and uncertainty at the individual school level. We will work with community and parent allies to establish a replacement system that will not resemble Unity’s short-sighted and incomplete plan to add one additional PEP member. The coalition will promise to defend curricular autonomy that has come under attack during the current mayor and
current chancellor's administration.

The coalition will advocate for a financial investment and commitment from the Department of Education to implement comprehensive restorative justice and conflict resolution programs in all schools. This will address disparities in discipline and the school-to-prison pipeline.

The coalition will advocate for wage increases that represent a real and significant raise over inflation and focus on sharply raising paraprofessional pay to ensure a living wage for all UFT members. The coalition will advocate for across-the-board increases to the FSF formula or other school funding mechanisms to ensure that schools are fully funded and to avoid any excessing associated with wage increases. The coalition will include in their literature and messaging a particular focus on fighting for significant increases for
paraprofessional wages and equivalent benefits such as LODI.

The coalition will commit to significantly reforming UFT leadership structures.
● Replace winner-take-all elections with proportional representation.
● Adopt level-based elections for level-based VPs.
● Adopt election by chapter leaders and delegates for district and borough reps.
● Adopt an open bargaining system for future contract campaigns.
The coalition will commit to adopting permanent reforms to the DA. This will need to be fleshed out but should
include things like:
● Creating a process where any DA proposal that meets a certain threshold of co-sponsors will be agendized in the order it was received.
● Limiting officer's reports to a total of 30 minutes and Q&A to a total of 15 minutes to ensure at least an hour for discussion and voting on all proposals and resolutions.
● Adopt a "consent agenda" for all non-controversial proposals to avoid wasting time.
● Adopting and strictly adhering to an alternating 1-for, 1-against system for all internal debate and restricting calling the question until after at least 4 members have gotten the chance to speak.
● Preventing the e-board or ad-com from unilaterally blocking the consideration of political issues and allowing the delegate assembly to have meaningful debate and take binding votes on controversial political issues.
 
 

Thursday, May 1, 2025

March 2007 - James Eterno: ICE BEATS NEW ACTION HANDS DOWN There's No Comparison; I've been with Both Groups!

Why run as an opposition group if you don't oppose much of anything the leadership does? Maybe you want to eliminate the real opposition: ICE-TJC. A truly independent opposition to Unity will strengthen the UFT. New Action's last stint on the executive board proved that some of their people didn't oppose or question Randi too often. I urge everyone to vote for ICE-TJC.

The ICE-TJC opposition to Unity over the last three years has been more active and effective as compared to the prior three when NAC was on the Executive Board, cementing their "bipartisan" relationship with Randi. We have a solid record of raising issues and actually getting some stuff accomplished at the UFT Executive Board.... In 2004 when the resolution to have the president appoint DR’s was up for renewal, only NAC's Ed Beller and I voted no. New Action's other representatives had changed their view or didn't vote..... James Eterno, ICE blog, March 2007

 

May 1, 2025 - Ballots go out today. A vote for ARISE is a vote for Unity.

New Action and Unity have been in the forefront of attacks on ABC in this election. But no surprise there. History counts.

As part of the ARISE coalition, New Action brags about its history and when challenged about their sellout to Unity Caucus from 2003 through 2016, they actually defend it by using the excuse of the Bloomberg attacks and the need for the oppo to work with Unity in bi-partisanship. Bring up the fact that many of the NAC pack were on the union payroll and they go silent. NAC is also a big component of Retiree Advocate and they still tiptoe around Unity.

ICE - Independent Community of Educators - was a group of individuals and ex-caucus members and similar to ABC in many ways - formed in response. The late James Eterno, Ellen Fox and Lisa North all left NAC to join ICE which allied with Teachers for a Just Contract (TJC) which became an active caucus in response to the sellout for elections and defeated the NAC HS candidates in the 2004 election. NAC then ran on the Unity slate in 2007 and won back those seats which they held through 2016. Just as the NACers in ARISE attack ABC in the 2025 election, they did the same to ICE in 2007 (and in other elections). 

Here in a 2007 pre-election blog posting, James compares his 7 years with NAC on the Exec Bd with his 3 years with ICE. I witnessed much of it and saw James grow into a tiger working with the ICEers Jeff Kaufman and Barbara Kaplan-Halper. When James was in NAC I used to sit behind him at Exec Bd meetings and prod him to break out of the NAC stranglehold. I remember a particular issue where some NACers were resisting a Unity push and the NAC leader, currently running for the second highest position in the UFT,  went around telling them to cool it because resistance would make Randi mad. 

In all the years of contention with Bloomberg over closing schools and other issues, I attended almost all PEP (Board of Ed) meetings with other activists to protest Joel Klein and his policies. Throughout the dozen years of Bloomberg, NAC had no presence in the resistance, so the Bloomberg excuse for running with Unity is bullshit.

Here James provides a preview of the different approaches between ICE and NAC which echoes the differences we see between the ABC and ARISE approach.

Thursday, March 08, 2007

ICE BEATS NEW ACTION HANDS DOWN

Saturday, April 19, 2025

ARISE Pro-Unity Positions Proves ARISE never AROSE: Don't Waste A Vote That Helps Unity Win - VOTE ABC

Saturday, April 19, 2025 - ARISE SINKS!

Proof is in the pudding. ARISE is not running against Unity but against ABC. 

Holy Cow - ARISE's Bacon increasingly takes the same line as Unity - this time on the Intro 1096 City Council law that so many retirees want to see passed to protect their Medicare. And engages in an attack on Marianne Pizzitola and her enormously successful organizing of retirees to battle for their medicare. 

Of course the motivation is that Marianne is supporting ABC and only wishes she would back ARISE and if she did you would never see him writing these comments. Even more interesting to me is that 2 of the 3 legs of ARISE - Retiree Advocate, and his own caucus New Action, are loaded with retirees - in fact 25% (140) of their candidates are retirees, many of them elected to the DA in the massive retiree win in last year's retiree chapter election, which they won with what Nick Bacon would call a "myopic" focus on the healthcare issue - and they won due to the massive support Marianne and her troops gave them. That election and the 75% win by Fix Para Pay are amongst the main forces driving the possibility of defeating Mulgrew -- note there are 70k retirees and 27k paras -- about half the total voting UFT membership. 

That FPP is aligned with ABC -- with 120 paras running with ABC - over 20% of the 560 candidates - unprecedented in the history of the UFT - irks ARISE which had reached out to FPP to ask them to run with ARISE, especially since ARISE does not seem to have many - or any - paras on their slate.  

Yet, ARISE continues to join in the Unity attacks on ABC for focusing on the issues of most concern to UFT members and attempting to create a broad-based non-sectatarian inclusive movement. Shame, shame, shame.

How does the position of ARISE on intro 1096 - which many of the 300 elected RTC delegates and Exec Bd members support - play out with them or even with the 140 retiree candidates?

This was posted by Dan Alicea on FB:

Whether fueled by political/personal vendettas, unabated paranoia or Mulgrew’s Unity talking points, Nick Bacon, the caucus boss of New Action, now believes full support for Intro 1096 is short-sighted and could adversely hurt active members. 
 
❌This despite an overwhelming majority of UFT retirees voting in favor of a reso in full support of Intro 1096 and their calls for our union to lobby and commit its resources to it.
 
🥸 This is strange since many of those who support the bill and the RTC resolution are RA, and even New Action (NAC) UFT retirees.
 
❌ Bacon thinks that we need a task force of UFT labor lawyers to decide our futures. Despite, MLC/UFT lawyer, Alan Klinger, on an audio recording not willing to call 1096 illegal but rather that he worries it would impact future options of the MLC to negotiate retiree benefits for active service benefits and wages.
 
UFT retirees, a vote for ARISE is a wasted vote. 
 
ARISE never AROSE. 
 
Nick has shown his MORE-led, caucus-first coalition is willing to ignore the will of UFT retirees. They are willing to bow to Mulgrew for political gain and election season posturing by pitting actives against retirees.
 
If you think it’s time to replace Mulgrew because our healthcare, pensions and benefits are too important to risk, only ABC offers a steady hand of seasoned union leaders and the unwavering commitment to support the issues that matter to retirees. 
 
On May 1st ballots will be mailed to our homes. In May, we take back our union and make MEMBERS FIRST, again! 
 
Vote for A Better Contract (ABC)
 



 

Wednesday, April 16, 2025

The NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees are having an in person mayoral forum on April 17th at CUNY, 6PM

Wednesday, April 16, 2025

ABC, A Better Contract, will have a bunch of people there.

The NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees are having an in person mayoral forum on April 17th. Many retirees live out of state and cannot attend. Retiree healthcare is not just an issue for those who are retired. This issue is important to us all, for our future. We need to demonstrate people power so that mayoral candidates know that we are paying attention. Candidates need to see we can deliver numbers. So, let’s stand in solidarity with all public service retirees and exercise power.




Of all the candidates that were invited, Curtis is attending as well as Jim Walden, Scott Stringer, Brad Lander, Zellnor Myrie , Michael Blake, Whitney Tilson, and Jessica Ramos. 

Zohran Mamdani backed out after agreeing, Adrienne Adams said no, Eric Adams ignored us, and Andrew Como said no. 

Attending is not an endorsement of any candidate. It’s demonstrating to all candidates that they must address the issues that are important to the constituencies they want to endorse and vote for them. 

Here’s the registration link
The NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees are having an in person mayoral forum on April 17th. Many retirees live out of state and cannot attend. Retiree healthcare is not just an issue for those who are retired. This issue is important to us all, for our future. We need to demonstrate people power so that mayoral candidates know that we are paying attention. Candidates need to see we can deliver numbers. So, let’s stand in solidarity with all public service retirees and exercise power.


Of all the candidates that were invited, Curtis is attending as well as Jim Walden, Scott Stringer, Brad Lander, Zellnor Myrie , Michael Blake, Whitney Tilson, and Jessica Ramos. 

Zohran Mamdani backed out after agreeing, Adrienne Adams said no, Eric Adams ignored us, and Andrew Como said no. 

Attending is not an endorsement of any candidate. It’s demonstrating to all candidates that they must address the issues that are important to the constituencies they want to endorse and vote for them. 

Here’s the registration link

 

 

Wednesday, April 2, 2025

Teacher Mike Schirtzer Celebrates Paraprofessional Day

For Unity, MORE, and New Action, this is an election gimmick...Mike S.
April 2, 2025

Mike, a candidate for HS Ex bd on the ABC slate, didn't mention that over 100 paras are running with A Better Contract through the Fix Para Pay group. This is the first time in UFT general election history that paras have joined groups running against Unity and Mike points out the failures of the past and even some current caucuses in their failures to work with paras - certainly United for Change in the 2022 election, of which I was involved, failed in this regard. I always wonder about all those teachers in the caucuses  and whether they talk to paras at all in their schools. Retiree Advocate has few if any paras associated with it and I'm trying to come up with paras who ran for the 300 delegates to the RTC. Note: This is also a failure on my part and had been for decades so I don't take myself off the blame list.


 
 
There is no bill yet and the 10K bonus is non-pensionable and looks like an election bribe but we still support them getting that money and despite Unity attacks, ABC has supported the 10K and signed the petitions while also being critical of the tactic of using bonuses that are not pensionable.
 
Some schools are holding celebrations:



Holy Paraprofessional Day! by Mike Schirtzer

As an ICT teacher for almost 20 years, I can’t even begin to tell you how incredible it has been to work with so many amazing paras. Every single one I’ve worked with has made my students’ days brighter and better. They’ve helped me become a better teacher. They are the backbone of our schools.


And let’s be clear—the foundation of any union is negotiating strong contracts. That’s why we pay dues. It’s so our union leadership can sit across from the DOE and fight for real raises, benefits, and protections. That’s how it’s supposed to work.

But what are we being told now? That we have to beg City Council for a raise because our union leadership can’t get it done at the bargaining table? That’s an admission of failure. You’re telling me that every other union in this city negotiates raises for its members, but for paraprofessionals, the best we can do is hope and pray politicians throw them some crumbs?

Crumbs in our weekly paycheck—and we’re supposed to be thankful? We’re supposed to rally and wear blue, but whatever you do, don’t bring up the shady backroom political deal. Don’t bring up that it’s not pensionable. Don’t mention that we’re not doing this for school aides and parent coordinators in DC 37. Just smile, say thank you, and keep paying your damn dues.

And even if this raise, bonus, City Council gift, or whatever we’re supposed to call it actually happens—it’s not pensionable. So when paras retire, they’re left high and dry. This is the same scam they pulled on teachers with those garbage bonuses that don’t count toward pensions. Who in God’s name gave Michael Mulgrew the power to hand out non-pensionable “bonuses” like some Wall Street CEO, while refusing to fight for real raises?

And one more thing—because my brothers and sisters in A Better Contract (ABC) have been too kind about this: Let’s talk about New Action and MORE, running under their front group Arise.

New Action has been around for 40 years. MORE for over a dozen years. And now they’re running around pretending to care about para pay? Have they ever made fixing para pay a priority? Hell no. For Unity, MORE, and New Action, this is an election gimmick. For us, it’s about a union doing what it’s supposed to do—fighting for real raises and making our paras’ lives better.

We have worked alongside the leaders of Fix Para Pay—not only including them, but taking our lead from them. Isn’t that how a real union works? A real union listens to its members and fights for their needs. Unlike Unity, MORE, and New Action, who treat para pay as a political prop, we believe in doing the real work to make our paras’ lives better.

This isn’t about political maneuvering—it’s about securing fair, pensionable wages through proper collective bargaining, not backroom deals or non-pensionable bonuses. Our paras deserve respect and real compensation, not empty promises.

Meanwhile, ABC has been fighting to fix para pay from day one. We’re running actual paras for the Executive Board because we believe they should have a real voice in this union.

Unity, MORE, and New Action haven’t cared about para pay—yesterday, today, or tomorrow. Don’t be fooled.

 

Tuesday, April 1, 2025

Beware of Unity & MORE, UFT! They ALL claim to be 'member-driven'. Part 1 - UFT Proud

An ABC supporter opines on this anonymous blog. (It's not me writing this stuff - too much research work for lazy me to do.)

Tuesday April 1 - and this post is not an April Fool Joke

I am tired of the caucus control of our union. This is our union. We need a better contract.

They ALL claim to be 'member-driven'. But can you truly be member-driven while forcing your own personal politics and personal agendas on union members? - Part 1

Do Mulgrew, Weingarten, and their Unity caucus really think they speak for us all? Who do they represent and speak for? Doesn't member-driven mean we have a say?



Beware Stock Illustrations – 65,361 Beware Stock Illustrations, Vectors &  Clipart - Dreamstime

Can Michael Mulgrew, Randi Weingarten and their Unity caucus separate personal politics and personal agendas with leading our union?

Do they even bother to ask us what we think when they act on our behalf?

Umm. No.

Here are just some recent examples that they don’t give a darn about our diverse views, nor do they bother to get our input before they act on our behalf.


  1. Congestion Pricing - Mulgrew decided he’s against congestion pricing, therefore, the UFT is against it. He never polled us. We never spoke about or debated this issue at a UFT delegate assembly or UFT executive board. Like the dictator he is, he used our dues to file a lawsuit without our consent.

    Maybe he has a point about how it affects working class folks? Maybe he’s ignoring the body of environmental studies that prove him wrong? Maybe some of us agreed with him regarding congestion pricing. Yet, we also know just as many of us didn’t. Either way, he didn’t care to ask because he doesn’t think he has to.


  1. Israel/Gaza - This is an issue that has many strong, passionate, polarizing and personal positions among Americans and our union members, alike. Despite the inherent dissension this issue inevitably brings, Unity decided they would pass several geopolitical resolutions locally and nationally without speaking to members, first. Why bother, right?

    Even when some in Unity pushed back behind closed doors about the need to make sure that any stated position included our union’s diversity of voices, or that perhaps a press statement might be better, they didn’t care to ask or include members in the discussion before writing and forcing through geo-political resolutions with limited debate.

    As some know, Unity doesn’t just control our local union but Randi Weingarten leads Unity’s equivalent in our national union, the American Federation of Teachers.

    Did Randi or Unity poll teachers on a national level if the union should have a “Ceasefire Resolution”, condemn Netanyahu, or that the union must support a “two-state solution”? Nope.

    Ask most on the various sides of the Israel-Gaza issue and sufficed to say that the majority these days may likely not support a “two-state” solution. Some of us are not even sure our unions need to have a union position on geopolitical issues.

    One AFT delegate, Amy Lesser, from Los Angeles, holds a view many others in our union have expressed. She stated in a recent interview:

    “We are not international politicians,” she said. “And there is no foreign government that has any interest in what the teachers union or any labor union has to say about how they should function. . . . So the entire purpose behind these motions and these resolutions is that they generate a hostile teaching environment and learning environment for students.”

    Nonetheless, Unity didn’t bother to ask you or me, once again. They voted as a bloc in Houston, Texas, in the summer of 2024, for a “two-state solution” because of their oath that binds Unity delegates to vote for whatever the caucus leadership decides.


  2. Divesting our pensions and union assets from Musk’s Tesla? - We all know that Randi and Unity are tied to the hip of the establishment Democrat machine. They may try to appear to be neutral but those of us who attend delegate assemblies heard when Mulgrew included us as part of the DNC’s operations. He blurred the lines with the DNC when he spoke about ‘WE’ will be door knocking and campaigning for the Harris for President campaign in Pennsylvania.

     
    Who can forget Randi and the UFT making public endorsements of Kamala Harris the minute front page news shared that Biden would no longer be running and Kamala had declared her candidacy before rank and file AFT delegates voted on the matter? They boasted about being the first union to endorse Kamala while unions like the Teamsters deliberated and polled all of their members. Teamsters did the unimaginable in Unity circles these days — they made no endorsement.

    Now that Harris lost the presidential election handily and Trump has included Elon Musk in his administration, Randi is really mad and obsessed about losing to the will of the American people, Trump and Musk. She dedicates a lot of her time and effort these days in a Twitter/X war with Elon and has gone as far as asking that pension and asset managers divest from Musk’s Tesla company.

    It seems that her personal politics and petty partisan online bickering now affect our financial bottom lines, too? Randi, have you reflected about why so much of the working class isn’t voting for your side these days?

  3. The New York Health Act - Here’s a little secret Unity doesn’t want you to know. Retirees, take heed. Our union’s official position according to our highest-deliberative body is that the UFT SUPPORTS of the New York Health Act.


    Did you know that Unity is actually behind writing, motivating and passing the two UFT resolutions that affirm the union’s official support for the New York Health Act? They have a really crazy way of gaslighting us to deflect from their own deeds.

    In 2015, most of the left and even centrist Democrats were staunchly behind Bernie’s Medicare for All. For a season, it was politically cool and fashionable to support single-payer universal healthcare. Following the political headwinds of the day, Unity wrote and passed a resolution in support of NYHA that seeks to a create a single payer healthcare system for all in New York.

    In May of 2015, the former Unity-UFT Secretary, Emil Pietromonaco, can be found here motivating the Unity crafted UFT resolution in support of the New York Health Act. It passed overwhelmingly by the Unity dominated executive board. Shortly after, it passed overwhelmingly in their rubber stamp, Unity dominated delegate assembly.

Another Unity inspired reso in 2017 that affirmed our union stance on the New York Health Act was motivated by current UFT secretary, LeRoy Barr. It too passed overwhelmingly in the Unity-dominated exec board and delegate assembly.

So what changed? Why did Unity waffle on its own stance on the New York Health Act? Did they see the light? Did they finally realize it may affect retiree Medicare? Or did they have a “come to Jesus'“ moment as to how to fund it? No, the Biden-Harris campaign for President in 2020 changed the DNC’s views on single-payer universal healthcare, at least for now.

The 2020 Biden campaign may have still supported a path to universal healthcare but it also believed it could become a reality through privatization — rejecting a single payer option exclusively. We see this in his stated campaign positions.

We also see the AFT and Randi abandon its hardline single payer stance from the Bernie days and fall in line with the Biden-Harris privatized insurance plus public option view.

The Uniry-led AFT passed a resolution during the pandemic changing labor’s long held position regarding univeral healthcare with a single payer option to supporting the possibility of achieving it with “private insurance with a public option.”

Circa 2020, the current union leadership pulled back on its own single-payer healthcare position, despite their own resolutions in support of NYHA, and they began to publish contradictory anti-NYHA messaging on our union web pages. Mulgrew openly attacked the will of the union’s deliberative bodies and blamed union activists, except it strangely was their own Unity caucus machinations.

In this insider, establishment political see-saw game, they didn’t ask you or me. Their flip-flop regarding the New York Health Act wasn’t because they sought input from the membership. It had more to do with the Big Healthcare lobbyists having the ear of the Biden Administration while it fiercely lobbied in states that were considering a single-payer option or a public option.

So maybe they just changed their minds? So why not use the executive board and delegate assembly to change the union stance on NYHA?

These days they have no guarantees in ramming things through the DA because of their shrinking majority and why should they if Mulgrew can do whatever he wants without consent, even if the consent is performative.

Did they realize how it would impact their control of the Welfare Fund? Maybe. We also can’t discount Mulgrew’s dance with the City to achieve health care cost savings in exchange for retro raises and the bill that came due in 2018 . Or that he created a Medicare Advantage plan that sought to force Medicare eligible retirees into it to pay for his givebacks.

To Cuomo or Not to Cuomo?

A test of Unity’s disdain and mistrust of members will be on display during this pivotal upcoming mayoral election. Will Unity actually poll us for our desired endorsement picks as to who should be the next mayor of NYC? Would they bother to share the poll results with us? Already Unity apologists are making a case for disgraced, former Governor Andrew Cuomo who has a marred history steeped in anti public education and anti-union policies, creating Tier 6, and multiple allegations of sexual harassment of 13 women. Mulgrew already has shown his cards and thinks Cuomo is worthy of our consideration.

And still our voices and input don’t matter to Unity in our union’s political decisions. Member-driven? Not in 60 years. Not ever.

Member-divisive. Yes.


Up next: If a MORE-dominated ARISE coalition is elected, can it genuinely be MEMBER-DRIVEN?

Can MORE caucus and its political front groups, like Educators for Palestine, separate their own personal politics and personal agendas from leading our union?


We need new leadership that’s committed to being member-led, member-centered and MEMBERS FIRST. That’s why I’m voting for the A Better Contract slate. Caucuses like Unity and MORE only pursue their own self-preservation. While ABC believes in genuine member voice and referenda — no more decisions on big issues like political endorsements without bringing it to the membership, first.


  • A Casino in Queens or Time Square? - Most of us still don’t understand why he used the weight of the union or had union officers at public hearings fighting in this casino bidding war among the city’s billionaires as to whose project should be approved by the City. Mulgrew decided that he was firmly with Team Billionaire Steve Cohen and that Queens residents deserve a new casino in their backyard— not in a business district like Time Square. Mulgrew’s close ties to chief lobbyist, Louis Cholden-Brown, for Cohen’s casino empire bidding operation raises a lot of eyebrows. Should our union be involved in this? Were we consulted or briefed? Ha!