Briefing paper, January 7, 2026, V3
The unions’ claim that they can negotiate for current
retirees is specious for all of the following:
·
There is no such thing as a collective
bargaining certificate for retirees.
·
Except for UFT retirees, we have no say
in electing the union leadership. Even then UFT retiree votes are capped at a
certain number.
·
To my knowledge, neither OLR or the MLC have cited
a specific section of the Taylor Law that 1096 violates. Any legal memo the city or the unions have is
not public so no one can comment. Would you accept an unsupported allegation like
this in a high school debate class?
The unions don’t mean this as a
policy discussion. It is meant to intimidate any city council member that asks
too many questions and threaten with a primary challenge.
·
When a union does negotiate, at least in my
local, 371, AFSCME (DC 37), the members approve the collective bargaining
demands. No such vote was held.
·
The results of any collective bargaining from an
AFSCME entity holding a collective bargaining certificate must be approved
by the membership. No such vote has been held.
·
Christopher Marte’s office has cited a US
Supreme Court ruling Chemical Workers V Pittsburg Glass, 1971, in which
it ruled that retiree benefits are not negotiated by a union
· Marte
also points out that in the past DC 37 and the UFT have supported city council
legislation protecting retiree health care and never cited the Taylor Law.
Because unions cannot bargain for retiree health care, the city council must
pass legislation to change it.
Status of Lawsuits (Brentkowski case; I don’t know how to
spell it)
·
Marianne’s group filed a lawsuit in September
2021 saying that the city cannot only offer one health insurance plan for
retirees and must offer traditional Medicare and a wrap around. They cited 12
“causes of action” why the city could not do what they wanted.
·
The trial judge ruled “irreparable harm” and
issued a TRO. He only ruled on one of the 12 causes of action. The city
appealed and four years later, the Court of Appeals overturned the trial
judge’s ruling and sent it back to the trial judge for ruling on the other 11.
·
Should the city and/or the unions (one entity
for this purpose) be so reckless as to try this again, the trial judge would
likely issue another TRO and the city and the unions will be wandering in a judicial
morass for another two or three years with an uncertain outcome.
·
Retiree will not accept a Medical Advantage Plan
as the only option for health insurance. We will fight this politically and
legally. The city council has already seen what we can do. Do you really want
to try it again?
The Comptroller’s Audit
·
The audit confirmed what retirees have been
saying since 2021: that the fund was knowingly misused by the MLC and OLR and
lacks transparency.
·
OLR tried to cover this up by submitting false
annual certifications to the Comptroller’s Office, asserting in writing that
the Fund is in compliance with Directive 27 requirements, that Fund balances
are accurate, and that the Fund will be used for its stated purposes.
·
The audit also found that HISF lacks
transparency and has inadequate governance and decision-making capacity. HISF
does not maintain meeting agendas, materials distributed at meetings, or
records of discussions held at meetings—such as recordings, minutes, or
notes—and stated that it relies on HISF’s monthly reports which include only
the Fund’s revenue, expenses, and cash balance.
·
Furthermore, while the $600 million would have
improved HISF’s financial position somewhat, it was not sufficient, on
its own, to keep HISF solvent
·
As detailed in Table XV in the audit, OLR and
the MLC did not report significant HISF liabilities as required by
Comptroller’s Directive 27 and GSAB Statement No. 54.
Garrido Speaks Untruths
·
In February of 2021, Henry Garrido reported to
his delegates (I am one) that he was shocked, absolutely shocked, to
discover that the HISF was bankrupt and retirees would have a new, improved
health plan.
·
I spent almost two years plowing through federal
legislation and virtually nothing he said checked out. The HISF did not
suddenly go broke, and the new plan was only better in the warped minds of
Garrido and Michael Mulgrew.
·
For example, they touted free gym membership but
never reported on how many retirees not currently belonging to a gym would
enroll. I believe that the number would have been miniscule and almost everyone
who would enroll would drop out after a few months of basically not using it.
And which gym? Not Equinox.
The Management Benefits Fund offers gym
reimbursement but it is capped at $50 per month. Someone claiming such a
benefit has to keep records and file a claim.
·
I then discovered that the new plan would be
administered by a for-profit private insurance company accountable only to its
shareholders. The newspapers over the past year or two have been bursting
reporting on the fraud riddling these plans. In the 2006 amendments to the
Medicare Act (best known for creating Medicare Part D), it was an experiment to
see if private for-profit companies could deliver high quality health care and
have cost-savings as well. It’s no secret that this experiment has failed.
·
Unanswered is why the union leadership was
comfortable consigning retirees to a fraudulent system where the profits
depended on denying care recommended by medical professionals.
·
Garrido got one thing right: the HISF was
created to cover health insurance expenses for actives and retirees. I
incorrectly thought it was created only for retiree health care.
·
I have an incurable but treatable neurological
disease and I go three times a month for infusions. The price per infusion for
the uninsured is $45K. Medicare pays about $7K. You can imagine the lack of
enthusiasm that a private for-profit insurance company will have for such
treatment.
Other reasons we need 1096:
·
The initial number cited by the city and the
unions was $600M, however that was calculated. Henry Garrido reported to his
delegates in the spring that because of DC budget actions that number was now
$300M, however that was calculated.
·
Assuming that $300M has not vaporized further,
we know from years of reports delivered to his delegates by Henry and from
other sources that whatever number is being conjured by the MLC’s consultants,
was going right back into the same slush fund bankrupted by the city and the
unions.
The Thieves Have a Falling Out:
·
Now there is a falling out among the thieves
over an alleged $4B, give or take $1B, in health care savings that the parties
failed to generate in allegedly contractual commitments.
·
Henry Garrido has publicly and privately
reported that he has in writing that the unions have been relieved of any
commitment to save the $600M (or $300M. Or whatever number they are flying this
week) by forcing retirees into a Medicare Advantage Plan. So the current $$$B
squabble has absolutely nothing to do with retirees and we will not take the
fall.
The Thieves Open The Backdoor
·
Frustrated by their unsuccessful attempt to
steal health care directly from retirees, they have resorted to slapping $15
co-pays on every medical interaction after the deductibles are satisfied. This
piles fees on top of one another so prevalent that retirees cannot afford them;
you can’t tell where one stops and another starts.
·
The “lucky” ones have incomes so low that they
are dual eligibles (Medicare and Medicaid) if you are callous enough to call
being living in poverty “lucky.”
·
The rest of us have to pay deductibles that are
not reimbursed, Rx drug co-pays that are not reimbursed, transportation, vision
above what is reimbursed, dental above the cap, and front $2430.80 for 12
months’ premium before being reimbursed. This comes to about $5,000.
·
The 27% of city retirees who exist on pensions
of $15K or less (even with a reasonable amount for social security added)
simply can’t afford it. The 57% with pensions of $35K or less, with an
appropriate amount for social security, aren’t doing so great either.
·
The contract for the wrap-around, currently
GHI/Emblem Health Senior Care, will be re-bid this year. I an working on a
table, not straightforward, showing how devastating the co-pays have become. I
will forward when ready later this week.
·
I, personally, begin the year with 86 co-pays:
36 for the above mentioned infusions and 50 for weekly psychotherapy. That’s
$1290 (minus the deductibles.) Now, I’m in physical therapy twice a week. This
is a heavy hit. There is no indication that the unions will reduce the out-of-pocket
in the bid document. I wonder who they think they represent: the taxpayers or
their former members.
They have no shame:
·
DC 37 ought to be ashamed. Most low-income retirees are their former
members. They are stealing money from those who can least afford it to
subsidize taxpayers. (If not for the co-pays, the premiums paid by
the city likely would be higher.)
·
While DC 37 and other unions’ welfare funds
provide an Rx benefit (with co-pays), many other retirees have to purchase city
of New York Rx Part D with a 2026 monthly premium of $180 (some of which is
reimbursed by the city or various union welfare funds). They also may face a
Part D surcharge that is not reimbursed.
What can the city council do?
·
Enact 1096 which will end any discussion of a
Medicare Advantage Plan or co-pays.
Bob
917-733-0925
