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?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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!