The iron law of institutions
states that people who run an organization care more about keeping
their own power than helping the organization succeed....political analysts use this concept to explain why progressive or
liberal groups, labor unions, and activist spaces sometimes prioritize
internal control, ideological conformity, or leadership survival over
winning broader elections or achieving their stated social goals.
The institutional Dem Natl Comm are so threatened by a statewide win by a progressive in Michigan, they spend more time attacking him than his Republican opponent --- thus you see the name Hassan Piker being raised in every media, both Republican and Democrat circles. Dem Doyone Neera Tanden who heads the misnamed Center for American Progress (I prefer Regress) had 15 tweets about Piker over two days. She'd rather see a Republican win in Michigan and lose the Senate because a win by Abdul will negate her influence and power. Tell her to GFH with a donation to him.
Keep these points in mind while I switch gears.
The first EdNotesOnline post on Aug. 27, 2006:
An attentive class size of three
Sadly, all 3 cats are gone, the last one in 2011 - but we did have two more after that, but they are gone too -- so, we are catless for the first time in 55 years.
Monday, August 31, 2026 - Celebrating 20 years of blogging.
Education Notes has been around in print and online for almost 30 years. I began publishing the print editions in 1998 but they are not online yet.
An item I published 20 years ago (see below) turns out to have some relevance to the sturm und drang taking place in the world of UFT retirees over the differences between the Retiree Advocate/New Action tandem and Fix Retiree Benefits. The discussion broke out in the RTC Ex Bd and beyond on some listserves when a group of independents unaffiliated with either group, seeing a Unity retake of the RTC as an existential threat to retiree healthcare, began demanding there be a united slate in the spring 2027 RTC election.
RA/New Action group dominates the 25 member RTC officers and Ex Bd with 9 out of 10 officers (Arthur Goldstein of FRB is the only non RA member) and also occupy 6 of the 15 EB. Given the level of outreach to a broader level of retirees, with the help of Marianne Pizzitola's NYCOPSR, FRB is asking for a 50-50 split of the 25 seats with the odd position going to the group that doesn't choose the chapter leader. The response has not been encouraging, indicating that the current RTC leadership is happy with the status quo and wants to maintain control.
(See above, The iron law of institutions).
One concern with the RTC leadership over the past two years has been a lack of pushback against the UFT/Unity leadership - the subservience to Mulgrew and Unity Caucus retirees who are scheming to take back the chapter and are getting little resistance.
I helped form the Independent Community of Educators in late 2003 to run in the 2004 election because of the NAC deal with Unity - details another time - but search this blog for New Action if you want to know more. Let's go back 20 years to August 31, 2006 when I included an item on the upcoming UFT elections in the spring of 2007 https://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2006/08/ednotes-online-august-31-2006.html, with this snippet.
With New Action not revealing their intentions at this time other than to give strong indications they will not run with the ICE-TJC slate despite an offer that was made to have them join the slate, there is an opening for them to play a spoiler for Unity by dividing the opposition vote and allowing Unity to regain control of 100% of the Executive Board. Of course, New Action could choose not to run at all but without some statement from New Action affirming that position, ICE-TJC must now go on the assumption New Action might agree to be a stalking horse for Unity. ICE-TJC welcomes individuals in New Action who wish to run with them.
What is old is new again.
The co-chairs of New Action 20 years ago were Michael Shulman and Jonathan Halabi, both leaders of the current Retiree Advocate (Shulman is still co-chair of NAC) and are among the 10 officers of the RTC and viewed as the major resistors to running a united slate in the RTC election to prevent Unity from regaining control of the chapter.
(See The iron law of institutions).
New Action spawned Retiree Advocate over 30 years ago and reps from both ran in UFT elections in cooperation with Unity by endorsing Randi for president in 2004 and 2007 and Mulgrew in 2010 and 2013 and ran on the Unity slate in 2007, 2010 and 2013, getting their reps elected to the Exec Bd with Unity votes, including both Shulman and Halabi.
While I criticized RA and NAC during those years, we made peace in 2016 when they left the Unity fold and I and others connected to ICE and MORE joined RA and worked hard in the election 2 years ago. We also worked together in the 2022 UFT elections. I make these points to those who claim we are driven apart by personal pique and egos. If we worked together over almost 10 years despite differences, we are still willing to see Unity as the common enemy.
And therein lies the rub. NAC and RA people often chastise critics for pointing to Unity as an enemy. "They are just fellow union members," they say. "Sure," I reply. "Fellow union members who advocated for taking us out of Medicare." If they had succeeded, with my current medical condition I'm not sure I'd still be alive. Sorry, people who are willing to risk our lives are enemies.
=====
Both Halabi and Shulman are prominently mentioned in a recent post by Arthur Goldstein, the only one of the 10 RTC officers not in the Retiree Advocate steering committee.
RA Leaders Resist a Unified, Equitable Slate
One of their leaders opposes 1096/1008. Another criticizes aligning with Marianne Pizzitola.
There’s been a flurry of mail directed to RTC Executive Board members, urging we build a united front to fight Unity in the next retiree election. That’s a good idea, though not a new one. I started contacting people the day after the last election to try and organize.
My friends at Fix Retiree Benefits (FRB), an offshoot of ABC, agreed. We decided we’d have a better chance of beating Unity if we ran cooperatively with Retiree Advocate (RA). Newly formed ABC got 9,000 retiree votes last year, while RA went from 17,000 to 3,000. Unity edged us all out with 13,000. This told me that we needed to put aside our differences.
I thought of a way we could run together—a way that, to my mind, was generous. Rather than demand we get the three to one representation election results indicated, we’d split it right down the middle, 50-50. My FRB friends agreed.
After a year of no response, RA met with us twice. Both times, they said they had no authority to make agreements, and no proposals of their own. They canceled our third meeting, scheduled for June. Now RA’s Jonathan Halabi, who openly opposes 1096/1008, has emailed a proposal for something his caucus calls an “Open Election Slate.”
It’s open to the degree that any RTC member may apply. However, RA continues their policy of keeping total control in the hands of their now 15-member steering committee, in that “All nominees will be vetted by the Committee.”(Correction—They say they are forming a committee to do that, and it will not necessarily be the steering committee.) That’s a far cry from running cooperatively.
Protecting Retirees Shouldn’t Require Choosing Sides
If Retiree Healthcare is the main issue, why I am the focus of Nick Bacon?
Nick Bacon’s piece deserves a response, not because NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees needs to defend its independence, but because his argument appears to conflate two entirely different questions:
Should the UFT formally affiliate with NYCOPSR?
and
Should UFT members or opposition caucuses be free to work with an independent retiree organization on issues where they share common goals?
Those are not the same question.
Nick spends considerable time explaining why the UFT shouldn’t formally partner with NYCOPSR. But who is actually proposing that? If the current question is whether different UFT opposition groups should work together, why is NYCOPSR being presented as the obstacle? If Daniel Alicea, Arthur Goldstein, or others want to work with NYCOPSR on retiree healthcare, that does not mean NYCOPSR controls their slate. It doesn’t mean they surrender their independence. It doesn’t mean they agree with us on every issue. We do not. It means they recognize that on one important issue, protecting retiree healthcare, they share common ground. That is called coalition politics. We align on what we agree with, and not where we don’t.
And if someone believes that working with NYCOPSR should disqualify an opposition group from participating in a broader UFT coalition, then they should simply say that directly. Don’t disguise a political decision as a legal necessity
Continue: https://mariannepizzitola.substack.com/p/is-this-really-about-retiree-healthcare
RTC Chapter Representatives
Officers
- Bennett Fischer — Chapter Leader RA
- Gloria Brandman — Secretary RA
- Gregory Di Stefano — Vice Chair Leader RA
- Novelette Foote — Vice Chair Leader
- Arthur Goldstein — Vice Chair Leader FRB
- Michael Shulman — Vice Chair Leader RA
- Sheila Zukowsky — Corresponding Secretary RA
- Jonathan Halabi — Assistant Secretary RA
- Bobby Greenberg — Treasurer RA
- Michelle Rayvid — Assistant Treasurer RA
Executive Board
- Fred Arcoleo
- Joel Berger NAC
- Regina Gori NAC
- Doug Haynes NAC
- Scott Henstrand
- Prudence Hill RA
- Bruce Markens
- Herb Michael
- Dacio Quintana NAC
- Denise Rickles RA
- Roque Ristorucci
- Norm Scott FRB
- rAlan Stein
- Doris Wallace
- Mary Therese Whelan







