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

$53 Million Settlement for NYC Retirees: August 5th, 10:30 am - Press Conference and Rally - WE WON

Mulgrew and his Unity flacks must be in mourning since he never met a co-pay he didn't like. 

Wednesday, Aug. 5, 2026

Tomorrow is the 20th anniversary of the Ed Notes blog.  

I'm in Manhattan and heading down to the presser and rally at City Hall. Don't expect any UFT officials to be there. But will Retired Teacher Chapter officers and exex bd members be there to celebrate a freeze on co-pays for the rest of this year? 

I will be taking photos and report back tomorrow with an analysis of the rift between most of the RTC leadership and Marianne, a leading cause of the current rift within the RTC chapter that just may hand back the chapter to Unity, which will be a disaster for the future of our healthcare. Mulgrew and crew is probably moaning over the fact co-pays are frozen until Jan. 1 2027. Due to my medical condition(s) - diabetes and cancer plus the usual assorted issues any 81 year old faces, I see many doctors. 

Just yesterday I left my house at 7AM to catch a ferry to 34th St (an hour and a half) and then a bus uptown to 74th St, another hour including a 15 minute walk to the Koch center, where I had blood taken (ca-ching) and a meeting with the endocrinologist nurse (more ka-ching? Next week I have 3 appointments in one day. And the co-pays come flying into my in box. 

I was told the other day that Marianne has over 10k UFT retirees in her network. My election analysis has shown that Marianne brought over 9k retiree votes to both the 2024 victory in the RTC election and in the 2025 UFT election. Those 9k votes are up for grab in next year's RTC battle between Unity and Retiree Advocate and Fix Retiree Benefits. There are some serious differences between RA and FRB, some over Marianne who some in RA don't consider kosher enough politically to support plus major resentment over her support of ABC in the election last year which brought them those 9k votes. 

There are also differences over the lack of pushback against the UFT leadership where FRB feel the RTC leadership (10 officers and 15 Exec Bd members ) has been weak in defending our healthcare, seemingly distracted by outside factors - very quick to support workers in other unions but I've seen nothing out there urging members to show up today. 

I will be taking attendance and some photos. 

 

NYC PUBLIC SERVICE RETIREES TO HOLD RALLY ON CITY HALL STEPS FOLLOWING $53 MILLION HEALTHCARE SETTLEMENT

WHO:

• Marianne Pizzitola, President, NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees
• Jacob Gardener, Walden Haran Williams LLP
• Steve  Cohen, Pollock Cohen LLP
• New York City public service retirees
• Supporters and advocates
  
  

WHAT:
Following the announcement of the $53 million class action settlement between the City of New York, EmblemHealth, and more than 250,000 retired City workers over unlawful GHI Senior Care co-pays, retirees will gather on the steps of City Hall to discuss what the settlement means—and why the fight to protect earned retiree healthcare benefits continues.

Speakers will address the significance of the settlement, the impact on retirees living on fixed incomes, and the organization's call for long-term protections for retiree healthcare. The Speaker's Office must permit legislation to properly protect retirees to be introduced. 

WHEN:
Wednesday, August 5, 2026
10:30 a.m. ET

WHERE:
Steps of New York City Hall
New York, NY

VISUALS:

• Marianne Pizzitola speaking on the steps of City Hall
• Retired New York City public servants gathering in support
• Interview opportunities with retirees directly impacted by the healthcare changes

MEDIA OPPORTUNITY:
Marianne Pizzitola and retired New York City public servants will be available for interviews immediately following the event.

MEDIA CONTACT:
Deborah Schonfeld
Communications Consultant

310-985-4902

dschonfeld@gmail.com

Marianne Pizzitola

President

NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees

631-793-9715

 

NYC Retirees Win Co-Pay Suit - NYC and EmblemHealth Settle Senior Care Co-Pay Class Action for $53Million

Monday, Aug. 3, 2026

Boy there's a lot on the plate to report and every day when I don't post, the list gets longer. This morning, NYC Retirees led by Marianne Pizzitola made a historic announcement. Another monumental win for NYC Retirees led by their president, Marianne. 

Wednesday, August 5 Rally and Press Conference  at City Hall:

 

There is some irony in that one of the sticking points in the (rare) negotiations between Fix Retiree Benefits and Retiree Advocate over the upcoming Retiree Chapter Election next spring is over an alliance with Marianne who has come under criticism from some ideologues over what may or may not be her personal politics, which frankly I don't give a rat's ass about since she is focused on one issue: protecting retiree benefits of all municipal workers.

Marianne appeared in NY1 last week and when asked what would be her number 1 wish, it was to end the co-pays. While she did win backpay, she also won a freeze on raising co-pays for this year. I know full well about co-pays as I have a few every week.

 

https://ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/the-rush-hour/2026/07/29/public-service-retirees-call-for-better-healthcare-protections  

 

Read more about what amounts to one of the largest class action settlements in NYC history.

NYC and EmblemHealth Settle Senior Care Co-Pay Class Action for $53Million One of the Largest Class Action Settlements in City History Marianne Pizzitola Aug 03, 2026

New York, NY, August 3, 2026 – In a major development, the City of New York and EmblemHealth agreed to pay $53 million to settle a class action lawsuit on behalf of more than 250,000 elderly and disabled retired City workers enrolled in EmblemHealth’s GHI Senior Care Plan. The suit was brought by the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees and a handful of retirees. The signed settlement papers were sent to New York County Supreme Court Justice Lyle E. Frank for the Court’s approval.

The settlement refunds co-pays that retirees were unlawfully charged for medical visits between January 1, 2022 through January 31, 2023. The $53 million represents 100 percent of the co-pays retirees had been charged. In addition to the monetary settlement, the City and EmblemHealth also agreed not to increase the existing $15 Senior Care co-pays through at least December 31, 2027.

The $53 million settlement amount is one of the largest class action settlements in New York City history. In addition, the lawsuit saved retirees an estimated $106 million through a temporary injunction, which halted the co-pays for two years.

This settlement is just the latest healthcare victory by the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, which has, to date, collectively saved retirees approximately $3.16 billion since 2022. The Organization stopped the City from forcing retirees to pay for Senior Care, which the City itself has valued at $600 million per year; prevented the City and EmblemHealth from charging retirees co-pays in 2023 and 2024, which (according to EmblemHealth’s records) was worth approximately $106 million; and pioneered this class action settlement that is returning $53 million to the pockets of retirees.

“This is a wonderful victory for retirees,” said Marianne Pizzitola, president of the NYC Organization of Public Service Retirees, one of the named plaintiffs. “The older people get, the more likely they are to need medical care, and co-pays are one of the worst, most regressive burdens making healthcare unaffordable. We hope Mayor Mamdani and City Council Speaker Menin recognize this and roll back co-pays.”

“Retired City workers have proven once again that they will fight relentlessly, and successfully, to protect their healthcare rights, which have been under constant attack for the past five years,” said Jacob Gardener of Walden Haran Williams LLP, one of the lead attorneys for the retirees.

“It is another step forward in ensuring affordable healthcare for our seniors,” said Steve Cohen of Pollock Cohen LLP, the other lead attorney for the retirees. “Now we have to get the City Council and the Mayor to eliminate co-pays for seniors entirely. They were promised and deserve free healthcare in retirement.”

The settlement papers can be found here.

 

Public Control or ‘20th-Century Socialism’? The Bruhaha over a few publicly supported super markets p o in NYC by Mamdani

One of the (many) controversial policies of DSA is public ownership of the means of production, which causes outrage. Oh the outrage over the Mamdani plan which the right wing and even some Dems are calling "free food" when in fact it is reduced price food. I find it funny how the anti-Mamdani cabal will hang onto anything they can grab, led by the NY Post.

DSA - NY has called for a takeover of Con Ed and other public utilities. Our water and sewage systems are publicly owned and managed. How would you feel if we sold them off to private equity?

The major public entity in this country over the past 200 years has been the public school system, which of course there has been a major move to privatize, with charter schools being the spearhead, but even that is not good enough - thus vouchers. I'm surprised they haven''t moved to make all learning remote and sell off all the school buildings to turn them into condos. Boy, my old school in Williamsburg built in 1904 has high ceilings and big windows. 

In fact, we have found over the past 50 years that the reduction of public regulation, if not outright ownership, has been a disaster in this country. Think of Chicago selling off its parking meter system.

Chicago's parking meter deal still haunts the city's finances 

Chicago parking meter deal: City's meters sold to another ...

Margaret Thatcher destroyed the public ownership of so many areas of England in the 80s, even weakening the vaunted public health system - yes, in England healthcare was publicly controlled. So here is an article in the July 29 NYT business section, that has not been receiving the outrage from the Wall St Journal - yet. 

Public Control or ‘20th-Century Socialism’? U.K. Debates a Different Way.

The new prime minister, Andy Burnham, faulted Margaret Thatcher’s privatization in the 1980s. He wants an alternative economic model, especially to run utilities.

By Eshe Nelson

Reporting from London

July 28, 2026

Andy Burnham, Britain’s new prime minister, began his leadership with a full-throttled rebuke of the past 40 years of British policymaking. Rejecting the sweep of privatization introduced by Margaret Thatcher, Mr. Burnham said he would bring in a new political and economic model.

A central pillar of that approach will be more government control over utilities and services that were handed over to private companies starting in the late 1980s, like water and energy.

Mr. Burnham was ushered into office extraordinarily quickly. A little over a month ago, he was the mayor of Greater Manchester in the northwest of England, without a seat in Parliament. Now he is vowing to remake Britain, and little is known about the details of his economic agenda.

One result has been the start of a vivid debate about privatization — whether it went too far and how best to fix its failings. Mr. Burnham calls for more “public control” of services, not necessarily government ownership. But the vagueness of the term has left a lot open to interpretation and speculation. It has come to encompass everything from a socialist turn into widespread nationalization to tighter regulation of utilities.

Mr. Burnham said that later this year he would release a 10-year plan to increase public control and reduce the cost of essential services like water, housing, energy and transportation.

Mr. Burnham should create the “feeling that the state is back and it’s on our side,” said Danny Sriskandarajah, the chief executive of the New Economics Foundation, a progressive British research group. “That’s what’s been missing.”

Arguments about ownership frame the debate.

As prime minister in the 1980s, Ms. Thatcher fundamentally reshaped the British economy. Her 11-year tenure increased private homeownership, greatly enhanced the financial services industry and diminished manufacturing. Her government also privatized huge segments of the economy, including energy, telecommunications, airports and water.

The resulting companies were floated on the stock market. The idea was to bring about mass public ownership through these shares, but many companies ended up in private hands and most were delisted from stock exchanges.

The forceful opening of the British economy led to wealth creation and prosperity. It also wrought regional inequality through deindustrialization in the north and accelerated the shift to an economy more dependent on financial and business services, which were clustered in London and the southeast.

“In the 1980s, Britain took some wrong turns,” Mr. Burnham said on July 20, standing in front of No. 10 Downing Street, just moments after he became prime minister. “Political power was centralized, economic power privatized, large parts of the country deindustrialized, and they still haven’t recovered.”

But is ownership really what makes the difference in how well a utility or service, like trains, is run? Economists and policy strategists aren’t decided either way.

Mathew Lawrence, the founder of Common Wealth, a British think tank, who has presented his ideas to Mr. Burnham’s team, is in favor of some public ownership.

“Public ownership and public provision are not panaceas, they are tools,” he said, and shouldn’t been seen as “magic wands that fix everything.”

But previous periods of nationalization, such as after World War II, had notable successes, including the building of more public housing and the transformation of the energy system from an inefficient patchwork of thousands of companies into a few centralized and regional systems.

Ownership is important because it enables profits to be returned to the government, Mr. Lawrence added, and then a choice can be made about how to spend them in the public interest.

Others are less convinced. Diane Coyle, a professor of public policy at the University of Cambridge, said that how services were regulated and the sectors were organized to create competition mattered more than if they were run by private firms or public agencies.

There’s a strong argument, she said, for a system where state-owned companies compete with private enterprises. That way, public ownership can lead to diversity in business models, more competition and more informed oversight.

“People obsess too much about ownership,” said Ms. Coyle, who has influenced policymaking in Manchester and at the national level. “It isn’t the ownership, it’s the structure of the market that makes a difference in the kind of outcomes for consumers and citizens.”

Some government takeover is already happening.

More nationalization is already underway in Britain. On several occasions it has been an act of last resort.

Under the previous prime minister, Keir Starmer, the government had started to bring the railway system under full public ownership and was pulling more than a dozen train operators into one public company, Great British Railways. Several operators were already nationalized by the previous Conservative government for financial or operational failings.

One of Mr. Starmer’s last acts as prime minister was to complete the nationalization of British Steel, which operates the country’s last blast furnaces for making steel. It seized control of the company last year after its Chinese owner, Jingye, appeared to be trying to shut down operations.

Water companies could be next. In the late 1980s, Britain went further than almost anywhere else in the world when it privatized the water authorities of England and Wales, selling off assets such as pipes, land and reservoirs. After decades of private ownership, much of the county is fed up with rising bills, pollution and chronic underinvestment that followed a period when billions of pounds were paid out in dividends. A few years ago, every major water and wastewater company was under investigation for dispensing sewage in rivers and other waterways.

The poster child of the failure is Thames Water, the country’s largest water company. Weighed down by enormous debts, it has been on the brink of financial collapse for years and faces the possibility it will be temporarily nationalized. It currently has only enough cash to last until the end of the year. Last month, the government rejected a rescue plan by Thames Water creditors, which include the large American funds Apollo Global Management and Elliott Management. Mr. Burnham will need to decide what to do about Thames Water.

For some, it could be a test case for the rest of the industry. GMB Union, one of Britain’s largest labor organizations, has called on Mr. Burnham to “take decisive action and nationalize Thames Water.”

Public ownership is about politics, not just economics.

It’s one thing for the government to prop up operators of essential utilities offering substandard services or in financial distress. It’s another entirely to bring companies and services into public ownership on the argument that it’s a superior model.

For some services, the public has taken a side. More than 80 percent of Britons believe water companies should be run in the public sector, and 70 percent say the same for energy, according to recent polling.

Still, widespread nationalization of services is unlikely.

Mr. Burnham said he wanted to be a “business-friendly” leader. His method of public control is likely to be influenced by changes he made to the bus system in Manchester, where a franchise model allows a local authority to set the routes, fares and other conditions, while private companies bid on contracts to operate the service. And so, in his 10-year plan, private companies are expected to play an important role.

“The state has withdrawn too far on the basic essentials,” said Mr. Sriskandarajah of the New Economics Foundation. “But its re-entry doesn’t need to be 20th-century socialism.”

 

Unity Spends over $1.5 million to send over 700 Delegates to Control the AFT Convention -AFT Needs Direct Elections

In 2024, UFT sent an incredible 734 delegates to the national convention in Houston, even though its voting strength is not dependent on how many delegates it sends. UFT delegates to the convention had a voting strength of 16% of all delegates, but sent 27% of all convention delegates. This was an overwhelming show of force. No other AFT local even sent 70 delegates. Meanwhile, the bottom 90% of union locals and state federations represented at the 2024 convention sent less than 10 delegates each.

How much did UFT spend to send 734 delegates from New York City to Houston for 5 days and 5 nights in 2024? A probably too modest $2,000 per delegate would come out to at least $1.5 million. And the bill was likely much higher than that.

Needless to say, most union locals don’t have that kind of money. And even if they did, their leaders would have to justify to their members why they would spend their dues for this kind of expense. If the national AFT election is already locked up, why bother? And so the de-mobilizing, demoralizing cycle of rule by political machine repeats itself every two years.^[i]...  The Future of Our Schools Collective

Late BREAKING - Randi Re-elected 

 

Those who think the UFT/Unity leadership is corrupt, don't know the half of it. Trevor Griffey just published a piece on Jul 15, 2026 on the current AFT convention that reveals a lot of truths.

This is Not What Democracy Looks Like: The AFT Convention and the Future of the US Labor Movement:  Trevor Griffey, a lecturer in Labor Studies at UCLA and US History at UC Irvine who serves as Vice President of Legislation for UC AFT, comments in our newest post about the upcoming AFT convention.

I commented the other day at Ed Notes on the convention:

• 750 Unity Loyalists Junket in Washington for AFT convention

I pointed out that Unity received 54% of the vote in last year's election but gets 100% of the 750 delegates, thus shutting out the points of view of a significant proportion of UFT members from national and state educational policy debates (those 750 are also NYSUT reps).

 

So not only are the almost 20,000 teachers who voted against Unity denied representation, the entire union is snookered over the massive expense. AFT delegates will debate as many as 108 resolutions and constitutional amendments including voting on whether to increase the dues paid by AFT’s 1.8 million members. I can guarantee this dues increase will pass because Randi wants it passed and that means our dues here in NYC will also go up as a major portion of our dues goes to the AFT.

 

You will see headlines today or tomorrow announcing Randi's re-election

I pointed out that Randi Weingarten would be elected with 95% of the vote - if she has any opposition at all - Randi loves it when she has no opposition - see her deal with New Action for the 2004 election:  New Action/Unity in Corrupt Bargain - Why I Left New Action!!! by James Eterno, UFT Executive Board.

 

85% of AFT Locals Do Not Send Delegates to Convention while our dues fuel the UFT spending a million and a half on covering expenses for Unity members.

  

A way toward democracy is to have the entire AFT membership vote instead of the Unity dominated delegates. This major change occurred in the UAW which led to Shawn Fein's election. Chris Bohner recently wrote in Labor Notes, “Direct Elections for Labor Leaders Make for More Militant Unions.”

 

You can see why the threat of losing the NYC local election is such threat to Randi and the AFT/NYSUT/UFT union hierarchy, one reason why ABC's insurgency has made them nervous. Don't think the recent 10k para bonus designed to weaken para anger at their situation is not connected to the threat. ABC had over 100 paras run with them and the para functional chapter is the second largest with 27k members to the 70k retiree chapter, which Unity lost. If the insurgency in these two groups aligned with the growing dissatisfaction among working members, there would be a massive shift in educational unions, especially with both Chicago and LA being progressive unions. Why haven't the revolted after a decade or more in power? Randi has the power of the purse to support them - or not - in their local struggles.

 

Trevor:

......leaders of AFT locals, including mine, would be more open to subsidizing convention delegate travel if they thought convention business was directly tied their union members’ needs, and if they thought their delegates’ participation would make any difference whatsoever on decisions made at the convention.

The fact is, once delegates elected by their locals arrive at an AFT convention, they find themselves operating within a one-party state run by the Progressive Caucus, which in turn is run by the Unity Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT)— the largest AFT local in the US.

UFT delegates have dominated AFT conventions through slate elections at the local and national level for over half a century. Every AFT President for the last 62 years emerged out of UFT leadership, except for four years from 2004-8 when Edward McElroy served two terms as a “transitional president” following Sandra Feldman’s diagnosis with breast cancer..

The AFT has been controlled for over 50 years by one caucus - a national version of Unity called The Progressive Caucus. Of course our beloved 750 local Unityites are the main instrument of control. They also control the NY State Unity.

 

Lois explains:

The Unbeatable Slate: Progressive Caucus Dominates AFT for More than 50 Years

The issue that shapes union leaders’ decisions to effectively boycott the convention is the perception of a lack of democracy within AFT.

Financial barriers to sending delegates thousands of miles away for five days of convention deliberations are significant, and union leaders who express concerns about the costs of convention attendance shouldn’t be dismissed as simply lacking solidarity.

But leaders of AFT locals, including mine, would be more open to subsidizing convention delegate travel if they thought convention business was directly tied their union members’ needs, and if they thought their delegates’ participation would make any difference whatsoever on decisions made at the convention.

The fact is, once delegates elected by their locals arrive at an AFT convention, they find themselves operating within a one-party state run by the Progressive Caucus, which in turn is run by the Unity Caucus of the United Federation of Teachers (UFT)— the largest AFT local in the US.

UFT delegates have dominated AFT conventions through slate elections at the local and national level for over half a century. Every AFT President for the last 62 years emerged out of UFT leadership, except for four years from 2004-8 when Edward McElroy served two terms as a “transitional president” following Sandra Feldman’s diagnosis with breast cancer.

Today, the three top officers of AFT and every one of the 43 national Vice Presidents are all members of the Progressive Caucus. They run as a single slate that depends upon bloc voting. The leader of the caucus is the President of the union, who is also at the top of the slate. A recent google form to join the Progressive Caucus even called its slate “Randi Weingarten’s slate.”

One can’t simply declare one’s intention to join the caucus as a candidate for elected office, as candidates for elected office do in the US. You have to be invited. And most of the people invited are representatives of the largest labor unions in the federation. Inclusion on the slate provides direct personal access to the President, who can provide favors in the form of spending and staff support for causes that officers care about. But inclusion also requires supporting every candidate on the slate. Failure to do so will get you kicked off the slate and effectively lock your union local out of national power.

Once most of the leaders of large unions pledge to turn out their delegates to support the union President, the election is all-but-over. Support has been traded for access before the votes have even been cast. Slate voting— which allows a delegate to simply check one box for an entire slate instead of voting separately for 46 different officers— tilts the scales even more by creating a disincentive for even thinking about the merits of individual officers.

Anyone in AFT who dares even exercise their right to participate in union elections outside the Progressive Caucus has to position themselves against the entire power structure of the union— including the President— whether they want to or not. Unless the Caucus splits, which so far it never has, such challenges (recently by small groups like By Any Means Necessary, or BAMN) are dead on arrival. 

 Since so many locals can't afford to send delegates to the AFT conventions, not only 46% of NYC teachers are left out, but the small locals all over the country too.

 

 Read the entire article on the substack: https://futureschools.substack.com/p/this-is-not-what-democracy-looks and note the disparity in delegates attending - ie Chicago only 68.

Top 20 largest union locals that sent delegates to AFT 2024 Convention.

 

For Immediate Release July 19, 2026

Contact: Alexis Lopez 305-878-9836 alopez@aft.org

AFT Re-elects Officers, Hears from Union and Political Leaders, Passes Suite of Resolutions at 2026 Convention   National Teachers Union, at Highest-Ever Membership, Caps Four-Day Confab that Drew 3,000 Delegates to DC

WASHINGTON—The 1.88 million-member AFT wrapped its 89th biennial convention today, with union delegates voting overwhelmingly to re-elect President Randi Weingarten, Secretary-Treasurer Fedrick Ingram and Executive Vice President Evelyn DeJesus to new two-year terms.   In six packed sessions over four days, more than 3,000 delegates debated and passed resolutions on a range of pressing issues—from reclaiming the promise of public education, to protecting immigrant communities, to rebuilding public health, to preparing for the age of artificial intelligence, to tackling the affordability and student debt crises. Dozens of breakout meetings and receptions covered rural issues, faith and religion, international solidarity and more.   AFT President Randi Weingarten said: “Our convention theme was ‘fighting for a better life for all.’ That’s not a mere slogan—it’s the promise and potential to be together, to work together, to bargain together, to protest together, to vote together, to act together to bring about change—real, lasting, life-improving change for every person in America.”   The union heard from a bevy of high-profile guests and speakers, including Maryland Gov. Wes Moore, U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock, U.S. House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, former Georgia state Rep. Stacey Abrams, Democratic nominee for D.C. mayor Janeese Lewis George, Pennsylvania state Rep. Jen Mazzocco, former U.S. Rep. Mary Peltola, IAM Union International President Brian Bryant, and IAM Texas State Council President and Texas state Sen. Taylor Rehmet.   Outgoing American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees President Lee Saunders, the first African American to lead the union, received the AFT’s Bayard Rustin Human Rights Award, and labor leader Dolores Huerta was honored with the AFT’s Lifetime Achievement Award for her decades of work with the United Farm Workers. And after a rousing Saturday address from Association of Flight Attendants-CWA President Sara Nelson, delegates unanimously passed a motion from the floor pledging support for the campaign to unionize Delta flight attendants.   At the onsite Activist Hub, delegates signed more than 1,000 “Free D.C.” postcards addressed to state governors to demand they recall their states’ National Guard from their deployment in the District of Columbia.   Weingarten, who taught social studies and civics at Clara Barton High School in Brooklyn, N.Y., was re-elected to a 10th term Saturday night, while Ingram, a high school band director in Miami, and DeJesus, an early childhood educator and reading specialist in New York City, were elected to sixth terms. The union also elected 43 vice presidents from around the country.   AFT Secretary-Treasurer Fedrick Ingram said: “There is only one way we all win and that is working together to push back against the forces that are so eager to tear us apart. That is why I have made union work my life’s work and why I remain committed and ready to serve this union as an officer. It is a distinct honor to work with the best this country has to offer, in order to ensure everyone has a real shot at success, happiness and security.”   AFT Executive Vice President Evelyn DeJesus said: “As the onslaught of ICE attacks against Latino communities continues, today I stand prouder than ever to be the first Latina officer elected and re-elected six times to serve the 1.88 million members of this powerful union. We must look out for, show up and protect one another, because only together can we make a better life for all. Sigamos luchando por la democracia, la libertad y una vida mejor para todos.”   “Our delegates and committees tackled the issues keeping families up at night, from the affordability crisis, to defending immigrant communities, to the reassurance that AI won’t take our members’ jobs, to the protection of democracy as a whole,” Weingarten added. “To create an America where everyone has the education, economy and opportunity to build a good life; an America where everyone’s dignity and rights are respected; an America whose democracy not only endures but finally lives up to its noble ideals, will take all of us—standing together.”   Click HERE for more convention highlights. All passed resolutions can be found HERE.

How Mulgrew Undermined the UFT Pension Dept., Broken Promises Over TRS Election - Part 1

 

July 6, 2026

I am seeing things in a new light. I always assumed Unity was monolithic and there was little internal debate - that since Shanker the person at the top controlled everything. But an interesting perspective is emerging as current and former higher level Unity reveal the internals. This is Part1. Part 2 is here: https://ednotesonline.blogspot.com/2026/07/nepotism-and-cronyism-mulgrew.html

Despite serious disagreements, activists within the usual suspect legacy caucuses opposed to Unity managed to have some working relationships with the leadership. In a sense, the active Unity and oppo people became a sort of sub-class in the union of people who were involved beyond the regular membership - a sort of synchrony of common interests, which comes undone for a few months every 3 years during UFT election. These are the people you are likely to see in early September at Labor Day Parades where all sides greet each other with some warmth. 

We knew which officials were competent, such as Amy Arundell. Appointees to union positions has always been political and based on loyalty to Unity Caucus and the leadership but being capable and competent was part of the equation. 

Yet, over the past few years there has been a shift as we saw less and less competence  and internal and external unhappiness with the Mulgrew leadership and we see major purges within the caucus and threats to those who don't conform.  

The theme of this post delves into this Mulgrew shift - total control of every aspect of the UFT, total loyalty expected and valued over competence, as evidenced by comments from current and former Unity and union officials. That has led to fear and resentment among the Unity faithful. 

UFT full time and part- time staff were threatened with their jobs if they didn’t get the votes from their school for Tom Brown in the TRS election, a pattern Mulrew has set since The Friday Night Unity Purge/Massacre of June 27, 2025. The Queens Borough Rep, who replaced Amy Arundell, held meetings telling pension consultants, “If you don’t get the votes for Tom, you are replaceable." In areas where Tom Brown votes were weak there may be some nervous district reps.

I use the Frank Panebianco story as a case study of the loss of competence at the UFT, not to mention David Kazansky, both of whom ran against Tom Brown, their former colleague, in the recent TRS election. Shedding these two, along with Amy, D. 30 Rep Ashley Rzonca, Leah Lin, paras Hector Ruiz, Jr., and Migda Rodriguez is a serious brain drain. A Unity insider commented:

Downgrading competence: The essence of internal UFT policy: Never pick a successor who might do a better job than you. Always pick someone less competent than you so they won't do better.

UFT members have been noticing. 

More Words from inside Unity:

• No one is a free thinker anymore. Mulgrew controls every aspect of the union. When I started and was recruited to Unity, there were spaces for debate, conversation, dare I say suggestions. All totally gone now. 

• Mulgrew makes everyone have a fear-based mindset so even if you’re good at your job you don’t really do it the best it can be done because that’s not what’s wanted.

• The entire union. Teacher center, and welfare fund are cash cows.  

• Numerous Unity oldheads told us that under Randi, it was also a dictatorship, but that she at least not only tolerated dissenting voices, but wanted a couple of them in the room when an issue was being considered. When she made her decision that was that, but at least she heard both/all sides before she did. Under Mulgrew all of those dissenting voices have been pushed out. 

• Don't forget the ouster of Maria Niera from NYSUT Leadership a decade ago and making sure we all voted for their endorsed candidates by checking the ballots before we submitted them. 

• The firing of pension expert Frank Panebianco days before the end of summer because he was telling people he was going to run for TRS because Tom Brown told him he would retire. When he asked Mike Sill and Mulgrew about it, they said they knew nothing about it. So who fired Frank? Read the surprising answer below. 

• Mulgrew shook hands on it: "I give you my word and nothing means more to me than my word." Soon after, Mulgrew went back on his word. 

Like Trump, Mulgrew seems to have the ability to unite more and more people against him, even those with differences.

 

My mantra over the past few decades has been that Unity will not be defeated until the oppo organizes in enough schools to challenge their control. Yet, as elections have proven, other than high schools, there has not been much of a dent in Unity control with the exception of the 2024 retiree win, which is proving that unless you win the entire union, not a lot changes. 

 

The 2025 general union election showed that there are defections from Unity but many defectors did not feel comfortable landing in one of the existing legacy caucuses but did feel comfortable with ABC, a new entity. The question is can humpty-dumpty be put back together again where legacy caucuses and ABC can come to some form of accommodation? 

 

Their combined total of 46% offers the possibility of victory in 2028 but the resentment towards ABC upstarts is palpable, from the legacies and Unity, where we see them at times working together as both are threatened. As legacy groups fade in influence, the future oppo to Unity may hold the irony of Mulgrew's actions are helping form that opposition. 

 

Let's look at some of the growing cracks in Unity by focusing on the Teacher Retiremee election and how it is linked to the pension department S candidates and the impact on the pension department.

 

My recent blogs on the TRS election leads to bigger conclusions on the way the leadership has politicized the formerly semi-independent areas of the union. 

• David vs Unity Goliath in TRS Election as Fear and...
• TRS Election Pre-Outcome Analysis
• TRS Election Count - No Final Results Until June 2...
• Mulgrewism is the UFT Version of Trumpism MAGA     

Mulgrew wants tight control and total loyalty from every corner of the union. Current and former Unity insiders point to:

• Pension/TRS: Victoria Lee acts as boss in Mulgrew's name.
• Welfare Fund: Geoff Sorkin in name only.
• Call Center: Salesforce replaces UFT staff.
• Teacher center: Mary Vocarro turns it political.
• Grievance: Mark Collins. There hasn’t been a real grievance chair since Howie Solomon. There is no institutional knowledge and a fear to take cases. So much is non-precedential, so it’s wack a mole.
• Political action: The director is there just as a figure head. Cassie Prugh and Mulgrew make all the decisions. (Witness the decision to endorse Dan Goldman over Brad Lander, exposing Mulgrew's true politics.) 
• Borough offices: Amy Arundell fired from Queens office, along with Leah Linn, not the first time put in someone under his thumb. In 2016 Mulgrew replaced the popular Brooklyn Boro rep Debbie Poulos with a political hack according to some staffers. Some point to changes in the Bronx office too.
• NYSUT - Mulgrew's total takeover 2014 NYSUT Election Update: Message to Revive: Now that...NYSUT Election Update: Julie  Cavanagh Defeats Mulg...  NYSUT Update: MORE's Lauren Cohen Stands Up to Bul...

All politicized. The removal of institutional knowledge and so similar to Trump.

 

Coming Next: Part 2 - Genesis of the 2026 TRS Election.

The TRS election put a focus on former Unity loyalists who have been cast out of the cult. Recent history of TRS elections. How Mulgrew undermined trust by politicizing the pension dept and putting loyalty over competence.