20th Anniversary of EdNotesOnline - Some Issues Never Go Away

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. 

Recently RA put out a proposed platform with no mention of Unity Caucus, who they are supposedly running against. There's a history at play here - the long-time dozen year relationship between NAC/RA and Unity. 

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. 

Like I said, some issues never go away. 

===== 

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.

Arthur Goldstein

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.

Continue reading: https://arthurgoldstein.substack.com/p/ra-fights-a-unified-slate-tooth-and 

 

And Marianne Pizzitola who has lead the NYC Retirees over the past 5 years to many court victories to stop the plan to put retirees in Medicare Advantage and also to fight co-pays, takes on NAC co-chair Nick Bacon (who replaced Halabi, and spends most of his writing time attacking Marianne, ABC and FRB while making excuses for Unity.)  

Is This Really About Retiree Healthcare or About Who Gets to Challenge Unity?

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

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

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

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

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

Fix Retiree Benefits in the house

 

 

Saturday, August 15, 2026 

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

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

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

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

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

The full text of the bill reads as follows:

Int. No. 1008

 

 

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

 

Be it enacted by the Council as follows:

 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

NYC Retirees Battle Back with New Bill to Protect Healthcare

Top Story

Aug 13

 

By Joe Maniscalco

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

 

Marc Kagan, Mamdani's Favorite HS Teacher Sends a Message Re: Para Bill

Important analysis from Marc Kagan and a message to Mamdani who was one of Marc's HS students. His substack is: The Labor Movement is a Mess... and What We Can Do About It

• What the Politics of “Paras” Tells Us About Mamdani, Menin, and Mulgrew

In fact, Mamdani identifies Marc as his favorite teacher and they still have a good relationship. I was concerned that Marc would treat his former student with kid gloves. This piece belies that, in a very honest assessment as he gives Mamdani performance grades, the most significant being: 

On public sector workforce, a D.

Now, let’s be fair to Mamdani. He has to live within his budget. If he chose to shower public workers with money, then that’s money that can’t be spent on reducing class sizes, or building playgrounds, or subsidizing affordable housing. Even after we have real socialism, those tensions will continue to exist.

But what I hoped Mamdani would do is to quickly fix outstanding inequities. The gross underpay of Paras. The gross underpay of Emergency Medical Techs. I want him to put his thumb on the scale for job security for CUNY Adjuncts.

I wanted – and want – him to tell the Office of Labor Relations (OLR) – where he reappointed the same commissioner who’s been in that office since Bloomberg (ugh) – that her job is to fix problems, not stonewall. I want him to tell agency commissioners that part of “efficiency” is mandatory discussions with workplace-level union reps. That they will be graded and assessed on their ability to reach mutually agreeable solutions to problems – worker problems as well as agency ones.

Instead, the City’s labor relations seem like business as usual. I was not wholly dismayed when he answered my question in April about collaborative bargaining by saying ‘I need to talk to my people about that.’ That’s was not an illegitimate answer, although a socialist should have labor questions at the top of their list of issues to address. But who did he talk to - the same OLR that is the problem? 

 I think contract negotiations, given the budget issues, will be a downfall for Mamdani. A socialist whose main agenda is affordability, money for labor should be a priority but the pressures for him, facing the enormous enmity of so many groups, that will be a hard pull. Mamdani has made a few errors and as time goes back a mayor's popularity fades. 

For Mamdani lovers, beware.

 

And Yes, for Mamdani haters, Julie Menin is running for mayor. And her alliance with Mulgrew has already born fruit for the millionaire.

 

NY Post: 

Will Mamdani have the courage to stare down the teachers union boss?

United Federation of Teachers boss Mike Mulgrew threatens “all-out war” if the mayor vetoes the bill to award the cash, but the mayor owes the UFT nothing — and it’s his duty to the general public to say no.

No city union should ever get a raise outside the collective-bargaining process: Since City Hall can’t cut union pay in other ways, it’s robbing the taxpayers if it doesn’t make labor negotiate for any hike.

Menin, in fact, should feel ashamed of letting the giveaway go ahead — this simply shows that the council’s incapable of being more fiscally responsible than even a declared socialist.

Ha. Just watch the NY Post pump Menin over the next few years. Imagine the Post supporting the collective bargaining agreement. And if Mamdani, as he should, gives the paras a permanent,  pensionable large raise so they can afford to live in the city, the Post will slam him. 

 

The 10K was designed to counter the Fix Para Pay election win and it did in the election last year where we had hoped there would be a big turnout against Unity, as an ABCer one of my expectations that we had a chance to win that election. As the ABC crew has been pointing out, the one time only 10k will fade. What's needed is contract guarantees.

Mayor Mamdani has argued that it is illegal for the Council to allocate money to improve public workers’ wages (or benefits) – that all money issues must be collectively bargained. “The Council’s passage of this legislation is in direct violation of the Taylor Law,” he says. There is some discussion that the City’s lawyers will challenge this legislation in court. 

Now there is some irony in Mamdani reversing himself on the 10k and claiming it violates the Taylor Law, the same excuse Mulgrew has been using to oppose the retiree protection 1096 City Council bill. When the RTC delegates finally got the floor in 1096 at the last DA, Mulgrew ruled it out of order on those ground.

 

While Mulgrew is wrong, Mamdani may prove to be right. In essence he issued a challenge to Mulgrew to solidify the gains for paras in the upcoming contract negotiations. 

As Marc points out,  

Mulgrew is a center/right Democrat, as is Weingarten and the entire UFT/AFT apparatus, despite some progressive rhetoric and Randi's resignation from the DNC - a purely "finger in the air" move. A leader of the DNC lives in my building and rolled his eyes when Randi's move came up and called her a political opportunist - she should wear a sign.

Marc cites Daniel Alicea's EONYC: 

As explained and itemized in this article by Educators of New York City, in the most recent contract round, Mulgrew made various concessions that gave him $450 million to allocate as he saw fit, above and beyond the “pattern” raise that all city workers received. Mulgrew could have allocated it to increase Para salaries. Instead, he used most of that money to give an additional $1000 to each member. I think this EoNYC image really sums up the UFT’s “Teacher’s first” decision: 

 

Daniel has been doing yeoman work on the para issue: 

 July 11, 2026

The Newly Revised UFT Para Bill: The Promise That Kept Shrinking: How the UFT sold a permanent para pay index that would seek to offset pattern bargaining—and ended up with a temporary one-year payment. And only if it passes or survives legal challenges at all.

Educators of NYC

 

Followed on July 19 with:

The Respect Check Passes: A Temporary Victory Built By Pressure - And the Unfinished Fight: How rank-and-file pressure pushed paraprofessional pay from a union fight to a City Hall vote—and why the legislation remains temporary, non-pensionable and legally unsettled.

Educators of NYC

And he followed up with Part 2

For roughly sixteen years under Michael Mulgrew’s leadership, there was no fundamental effort to restructure paraprofessional salaries. Aside from modest improvements to longevity raises in the 2018 contract, paraprofessional pay remained largely governed by the same pattern bargaining that had left many struggling to survive.

Then came the last contract.

The UFT had roughly $450 million in recurring, non-pensionable retention money available.

The Good, Bad and Ugly - The NYC Para Bill: A deep dive into the UFT and City Council's $10k pay plan for paraprofessionals.

Educators of NYC

Jul 21, 2026

 

BTY - listen to Daniel's interview with para Alyson Monzon in his Talk Out of School WBAI program: https://wbai.org/archive/program/episode/?id=66311

Alyson's substack: 

Why I’m speaking up for us!

Election Mania: Mamdani Wins Big, UFT Loses Bigger, The State of DSA in the UFT

I hold this truth to be self-evident: 

The UFT leadership continues to be in bed with the establishment political machine that often is not aligned to our values and not held accountable for making decisions that affect us.  The uft is the democratic establishment and Mulgrew will try very hard to keep the Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Grace Meng, Hilary Clinton, Randi weingarten etc etc etc power going along with his own.

Sunday, June 28, 2026

Before I get into thoughts on the recent election, tonight is a Fix Retiree Benefits Zoom. Stop by and check it out. The goal is to do one hour from 7-8 but it might run a bit longer. I need to write a lot more on what's going on in the retiree chapter and might get a chance at the zoom tonight.

28 Jun 2026WEBINAR

Fix Retiree Benefits Launch Town Hall Meeting

7:00 PMZoom

RSVP

Congrats to all my still in-service friends on the end of the school year and another step to retirement. But I should point out that a number of my colleagues in ABC ended the school year writing about how much they still love teaching ever two decades in.

I'm about to head out to a DSA celebratory beach party that will last all day.  

Tuesday I speculated on the election outcome. I expected a closer race in 7 where Reynoso had the advantage of the Nydia Vazquez and his own machines, which turned out to be barely machines at all, a sign of the deterioration of the Dem Party generally and how non-competitive it has been nationally. National and local media were going nuts in shock over the big 3 wins by Mamdani as all losing candidates were backed by the Dem machine led by Hakeem Jeffries.  And if Mamdani had allowed Chi Ossi to primary him, guess what? 

Jeffries will face a primary next time and if he was smart he would take a run for Chuck's Senate seat, though DSA will probably go for that, though I'm not sure there is enough DSA muscle to win a state race. Or Jeffries might just do a turn around if he's a good politician. But DSA should also keep its discipline and talk of a 2028 candidate is fantasy at this point, though Ro Khana is beginning to look like an acceptable candidate along the lines of Brad Lander has been. Not as left but not center.

It was a smashing victory for DSA which also elected 16 members at the state level and is spreading outside NY. 

DSA Dominates Albany Elections Despite Super PAC Deluge:  The DSA made gains in New York despite super PACs spending $9.6 million in state legislative races — nearly five times the total from 2024... ny focus

Note this Jacobin headline: 

Socialists Won Big in NYC Last Night and Aren't Done ...

Reynoso was more embedded in traditional backroom political dealmaking and backed by the low-expectations wing of the labor movement, in which politics is mostly a matter of making safe bets on electing and reelecting traditional corporate Democrats — even in cities and neighborhoods where it’s clear that the horizons have shifted in a more expansive pro-worker direction. That approach to politics was decisively defeated.

Center Dems don't seem to have enough of a ground game left, relying on endorsements and ads but not enough of a GOTV game. 

I would apply the same idea to UFT elections where the only way to defeat Unity is with a ground game, which the oppo has never developed. 

I've been a fringe member of DSA for about 8 years even when I disagree with a bunch of their positions but love the energy and organizing ability. I attended South Brooklyn branch meetings until the pandemic. They live up to the democratic label with extreme democracy at local levels. I get to vote on so many issues and leaders. Recently I've hooked up with a group of DSA in Rockaway and we canvased for Mamdani. They are even having an all day beach party in Rockaway today. 

Tuesday was also a smashing loss for the UFT/Unity leadership. Look at this graphic:

An ABCer on FB commented:

Michael Mulgrew and the UFT leadership not only once again backed a losing political candidate, they did so:

a) when every single poll had him behind the candidate that ultimately won — at one point Goldman was polling nearly *thirty points* behind Lander, and

b) without a vote from the Delegate Assembly, the only body in the UFT with the authority to make political endorsements (unless the Delegate Assembly votes to kick the decision to the Executive Board, which to be clear in this instance they didn’t) 

Three out of four lost, though I liked the Bores endorsement which was interesting since the UFT endorsed Micah Lasher last time for the state assembly, as I wrote about a year ago:

Another Unity/UFT Sellout - Backs Micah Lasher, Bloomberg pro Tier 6, Charter School, Student First Acolyte - for State Assembly

What happened I wonder for them to abandon Lasher? Maybe the Tier 6 issue stuck?

Mulgrew endorsed every one of the three losing Congressional candidates. The UFT endorsed Goldman over Lander without an endorsement vote from the Delegate Assembly while Mulgrew lied, claiming NYSUT endorsed Goldman. Which means someone somewhere in the union (guess who?) made a decision to undemocratically exercise their political prerogative over the members. Doing this not only violated the UFT constitution, but more importantly it’s flat-out wrong and selfish, and made all the more so when you consider that whoever this presumed "expert" was backed a candidate that lost by nearly 30%.

The union leadership continues to be in bed with the establishment political machine that often is not aligned to our values or not held accountable for making decisions that affect us.

DSA has been a hot item in the mainstream press with the emphasis on the growing threat to the Democratic Party by both the right and the so-called "moderate" Dems, which is really corporate/AIPAC friendly. James Carville positively lost it, joining Trump in seeing a threat to the nation by DSA wins. 

Think of the Corp Dems calls for DSA to stay out of the Dem Party and form their own party. The James Carville off the wall comments. Imagine they replaced the Green Party in a much more effective manner and ran a third party presidential candidate, thus making the Dems a sure loser. Oh the howls of protest for them doing exactly what they are being told to do if they did not be part of the big tent? 

Most Dems still say the party is big-tent even with the extreme views expressed by some winning candidates. Now never forget that our own beloved UFT/Unity leadership are very much part of the anti-left Dem Party going back to the Shanker roots of supporting the Vietnam War. The Mamdani endorsement was forced on them by the stark choice of him or Cuomo - and the clear direction of the momentum. But make no mistake, the UFT fundamentally is where it was politically in the Shanker years. 

The UFT leadership engaged in a vicious red-baiting attack on DSA as recently as January, 2025:

 

How different is this from the Trump comments?

I blogged about that post: 

DA Chaos - Unity Goes Red-Scare Wilding In Dual Attacks on MORE Caucus and Arise - And also Aims Dart at Marianne

 I noted:  

A strong candidate for mayor, Zohran Mamdani is in DSA. Imagine the UFT, given a choice between Cuomo and Mamdani, will back Cuomo because of their 65 year history of vicious anti-communism and red-baiting. 

Well I was wrong on that as it was clear Cuomo was going down and give Mulgrew credit for hopping on board with a winner, though it may not help much in upcoming contract negotiations.

The Unity crowd toned down their critiques of MORE and ARISE with the rise of ABC, a big tent group that both ARISE components and Unity see as a bigger threat, as it proved in the election with their 32% compared to the ARISE 14%. 

How come the DSA crowd centered in the 14-year old MORE Caucus has failed to develop a ground game in the UFT, as evidenced by the 14% vote in the 2025 election for the ARISE slate? Remember, the other two caucuses in ARISE are retiree RA and the mostly retiree New Action, so MORE was expected to carry the load and clearly failed. The failure of DSA people in the UFT compared to the success of DSA on the larger playing field is worth exploring in a follow-up but here's my initial view: MORE began in 2011 as a big-tent operation but post-2016, the DSA/ISO (now defunct) leadership decided to narrow the tent with a move to the left that pushed out even fellow-leftists, many of whom have drifted to ABC. 

One of the keys has been the hemorrhaging of MORE members who leave teaching or jump out of the intensity of the regular classroom. Or jump from school to school. I came into my new school after 3 years of teaching when I got my full appointment as the resident big mouth radical and turned many people off. It took me 5 years to begin to gain the trust of my colleagues and yes, I modified my big mouth radicalism. I heard Hasan Piker last week make the point that newly organized often go over the top and it takes years to learn to temper things as you work with people not of your views. 

The internal big tent vs narrow tent struggle in MORE was between the older lefty ICE people and the younger International Socialists who at one point according to internal memos, considered giving up on the MORE project until they came up with the idea of going to DSA to recruit teachers into MORE - and they were so successful they were able to dominate by 2018 and push the ICE people out, this cementing MORE as a hard left caucus, which meant they could never win a UFT election on their own, as they found out when they ran alone in the 2019 election, thus forcing them into alliances with United for Change in 2022 and ARISE in 2025, with increasing alienation from a strong minority that either doesn't want to run in elections or doesn't want to compromise with other groups that don't adhere to their rigid ideology.

Big tent vs narrow tent

Unlike the DSA in the big tent Dem Party, the DSA faction in MORE believes the caucus must remain small tent pure. I contend that if the original MORE as big tent that included people from ICE had been adhered to, MORE would be a contender. Let me give you one example of a hard-core MOREista I was friendly with a few years ago. She texted me asking where I stood on Israel about a year and a half ago and I replied I was still working things out due to my growing up in the post-holocaust era. I was Done. Ghosted. 

The DSA has proven it can be a major force on all levels of politics with a big-tent approach in the Dem party and internally there is some room for a variety of caucuses to operate. Is that a perfect solution to democracy? I had offered that type of idea at the very first meeting of MORE -- let ideas compete in an open way. But that's not the way of ideologues. 

In my final days in MORE I proposed they were more of a club or advocacy group in the UFT, which I was fine with -  just not a caucus in UFT elections and I have been proven right. My advice is to not run as a caucus in UFT elections but to be open to whatever members who do want to be involved do so. ABC would be the perfect place for them to land. If MORE followed my advice, ARISE would be dead, it it already hasn't died and we would have one group facing Unity head on, with an actual chance to win in 2028. But don't expect practicality to win out. 

Afterburn 

Check out Ross Barkan  

The New Socialist Revolution: Zohran Mamdani's remarkable night

Mamdani cannot impose his will on the Democratic Party like Trump has on the Republicans. The moderate, institutional Democratic faction lucked out; they will not, for now, be driven to extinction. They will not suffer the fate of all the Republican politicians who stood against Trump over the last decade. Luck, though, comes with caveats. Within the five boroughs—this beating heart of Empire—they are going to have to fight for their life.