Successful anti-MulgrewCare Rally - Politicians support including Jumaane Williams (for Gov) - Cross-union Retiree Organizing Committee (CROC)

Retiree Advocate/UFT is part of CROC --- a really good group of NYC union people -- one of the more successful broad union groups brought together by the attack on our Medicare by our own union leaders.

If you wander what UFT retiree activists do, we have noon rallies, followed by a trip to a bar. We had a great rally on Thursday outside the gates to City Hall - much bigger attendance than I expected. What surprised me the most was how many electeds support us. Jumaane Williams on the way to another event in his run for governor, lent some cheer.

Of course we went to a bar afterwards -- but our old fave on Murray St has closed down permanently but we found another.

Signatories on Open Letter to NY Elected Officials Public Advocate

Jumaane D. Williams

New York City Council Members

Kristin Richardson Jordan Christopher Marte
Sandy Nurse
Charles Barron

Kamillah Hanks Shahana Hanif Alexa Aviles Julie Won Althea Stevens Tiffany Caban Carlina Rivera Lincoln Restler

NYS Assemblymembers

Robert C. Carroll Peter J. Abbate Stacey Pheffer-Amato William Colton Demond Meeks

Jo Anne Simon Gina L. Sillitti Kenneth Zebrowski Harvey Epstein Yuh-Line Niou

NYS State Senators

Jabari Brisport

 

Old ICERs: Pat Dobosz, Sean Ahern, Ellen Fox

Bobby Greenberg on right - New Action and Retiree Advocate

 

For Immediate Release

June 16, 2022

Contact:

Sarah Shapiro, CROC

smshapiro@hotmail.com

Municipal Retirees and NYC Elected Officials Demand Mayor Adams Stop Plan to Privatize Their Medicare

Photos and Video from Rally Here 

NEW YORK- Scores of NYC retirees from diverse municipal unions of teachers, plumbers, sanitation workers, hospital workers, school staff, firefighters and others gathered at City Hall with New York City elected officials to deliver a letter to the mayor telling him to stop the “ bait and switch” with Medicare benefits – by pushing them into a for-profit Medicare Advantage plan that is more costly and more likely to delay and deny them care. 

The former city workers, members of the Cross-union Retirees Organizing Committee (CROC), shared their grave concerns about what the switch to “Medicare DisAdvantage” will have on their health as it cuts the quality of their care as private insurance companies skim off profits from the plan. 

“I have atrial fibrillation, which carries a high risk of stroke or worse. I’ve reached the limits of surgery, and the usual drugs prescribed for afib would probably kill me. I sometimes need cardioversions to stop the afib – nothing else works. My doctor, one of the top doctors in the field, knows all this. With Medicare Advantage, my fear is that decisions about my health would be made by a stranger, someone who is not an expert in the field, who doesn’t know my history, and whose main concern is cutting costs. This is genuinely life-threatening for me," said Martha Cameron, who gets Medicare through her husband, a retired computer programmer for the City for 25 years.

Retirees delivered an open letter to Mayor Adams, signed by two dozen city and state elected officials calling on him to drop his appeal in a lawsuit seeking to force the 250,000 retirees into Medicare Advantage or pay a fee to keep their traditional Medicare. 

City Council members Alexa Avilés, Christopher Marte and Kristin Richardson Jordan and Assembly members Robert C. Carroll, Harvey Epstein and Joanne Simon joined the rally with seniors to demand Mayor Adams end his court battle against the workers who had served the city for decades.

“As Medicare Advantage plans face increased scrutiny over fraudulent billing and coverage denials, now is not the time for New York City to force retirees into these privatized plans,” said Council Member Alexa Avilés. “The City is shirking their responsibility to retirees who have served it honorably and now want to live out with a sense of security and dignity.  Retirees rightfully earned their benefits through years of dedicated service. We should deliver for them, not private companies that we know put profits over people.”

In place of their trusted and excellent traditional Medicare with premium-free supplement, the mayor now wants to force them to pay $2300/year to keep the excellent Medicare they have always had and were always promised.

“Our City’s municipal retirees should not be forced onto private Medicare Advantage plans. It won’t improve their healthcare and won’t save the City money.  New York City should not be undermining Medicare and must keep its promise to City workers that they retire with dignity and security,” said Assemblymember Robert Carroll. 

“No one should have to choose between affording groceries, rent, other necessities,  or medical care but for thousands of workers, that is exactly the choice the City is forcing as it continues to pursue this bait and switch plan. After serving our City, municipal retirees deserve better,” said Assemblymember Harvey Epstein. 

“We should be expanding healthcare for New Yorkers, not making it harder to use and more expensive. Municipal retirees devoted their lives to running this city and planned on getting the Medicare plans they earned, not the inadequate substitutes that are being foisted on them,” said Assemblymember Jo Anne Simon. “I stand with the city's retirees and urge the Mayor to reject plans that provide less care but cost taxpayers more than traditional Medicare. Insurance companies siphoning off fees - money that should be used to provide care – to increase their profits is wrong-headed and just plain wrong.”

“Switching to the Medicare Advantage plan would leave our retirees overburdened and under-covered. They have spoken clearly against this change, the courts have supported them, and the Mayor ought to honor their request by dropping the appeal,” said Assemblymember Yuh-Line Niou. “Municipal retirees dedicated their lives to supporting this city, it is our duty to provide them the health care that they were promised.“

The retirees are fighting against the City’s plan to change their health benefits after years of service and dedication to this city. They say their traditional Medicare plan is much better.

“In May-- in ONE MONTH-- I had two emergency room visits and three CAT scans.  I am jumping for joy that all is well, and that I did not have to pay one cent for fantastic, immediate healthcare. WHY?  Because I have Medicare and a great supplement from the City of New York. I needed no prior authorizations and have no debt for incredibly expensive procedures.  I am lucky---but I'm here because I believe everyone should have this kind of care,” said Julie Schwartzberg, a retired staff trainer at the Health Department.

The for-profit Medicare Advantage plan is inferior, requires co-pays and dozens of prior authorizations and has a limited network of quality nationwide providers. It is also unfair to lower paid retirees with lower pensions– primarily women and retirees of color– who cannot afford to pay to keep their traditional Medicare.

Dana Simon, a retired librarian who is also visually and hearing impaired spoke of her nightmarish experience with a managed care insurance company in 2006 when her doctor recommended a 2nd cochlear implant surgery.

"The insurance company denied my surgery for almost 3 months. We had to appeal all the way to the NYS insurance commission, where three doctors finally ruled that my cochlear implant surgery was indeed necessary. But the whole ordeal took a real toll on me going through so many months of stress and heartache fighting for the medical care that I really needed. I'm afraid of the high rates of delays and denials these Medicare Advantage plans have. I don’t want to go through that again!” Simon said. 

Medicare Advantage plans are also a bad deal for taxpayers– as the profits private insurance companies siphon off raise their price tag tens of billions of dollars higher than traditional Medicare. Mayor Adams and Mayor DeBlasio before him have claimed the switch to Medicare Advantage is a cost saving measure for NYC, but the switch to a Medicare for All program like the New York Health Act would save the state billions of dollars, according to a 2018 study by the Rand Corp.

A recent federal study found that Medicare Advantage plans routinely delay or deny medically necessary care.

William Shenton, who retired from the New York City Housing Authority over 20 years ago, spoke of the ordeals he and his wife, Susan, have had with their drug coverage. 

“Susan has an incurable autoimmune disease. She purchased a private Medicare Part D drug plan for medication to treat her condition. This medication costs more than $12,000 for a 30-day supply.  Her monthly premium is about $30 and her copay is about $630 after more than $3,000 in January to get out of the “donut hole”. The NYC Medicare Advantage plan does not allow Susan to purchase a private part D drug plan. We are facing untenable expenses we hadn’t anticipated when I retired.”

The City’s plan, Medicare Advantage Plus, is administered by a consortium called the Alliance. This is made up of GHI, Emblem Blue Cross, and a national company called Anthem. Historically, Medicare Advantage corporations deny about 1 in 5 medical procedures. Anthem’s denial rate is twice the national average. 

Doctors and public health experts have raised serious concerns about the switch.

“This plan will reduce by nearly 25% the amount of money available to provide healthcare for City retirees. The City claims that the federal government will make up for what the City is not spending. That claim is false. Retirees will suffer under the City's Medicare Advantage plan,” said Leonard Rodberg, Research Director of the NY Metro Chapter of Physicians for a National Health Plan.

“Medicare (dis)Advantage places a middleman (a private health insurance company) between Medicare and the patient/doctor, resulting in denying or delaying needed health care through pre-authorization requirements” said Oliver Fein, Board Chair of Physicians for a National Health Program, New York Metro-chapter. “NYC retirees should not be forced into such an inferior plan.” 

The City Hall rally was the latest in the retirees’ campaign to stop the City from forcing them into costly lower-quality Medicare DisAdvantage.

The plan, originally approved by Mayor de Blasio, was scheduled to go into effect in phases starting in October 2021. Retirees from across the City came together to fight back and took the City to court. 

In March, a New York Supreme Court judge ruled that the City could not take away the retirees’ current traditional Medicare benefits.

Mayor Adams has taken over the push from his predecessor and is proceeding with an appeal, scheduled to be heard in the Appellate Court in September. 

###

Organizers: Cross-union Retiree Organizing Committee (CROC)

 

Hi all.

 

Sharing an op-ed from today’s NY Daily News that I authored in support of the tens of thousands of retired NYC municipal workers who are opposing a NYC-mandated effort to downgrade their medical coverage from traditional Medicare to for-profit Medicare Advantage.

 

Written in collaboration with Physicians for a National Health Program, NY Metro Chapter. PNHP is a single-issue organization that advocates for a universal, comprehensive single-payer national health program.

 

Written in memory of my life partner Ellen Bilofsky, to carry on her work.

 

 

 

---

 

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-cruelty-medicare-advantage-20220616-dzlccpynvbhl3mofkprbsm3kza-story.html

 

OPINION

Reject the cruelty of Medicare Advantage, NYC

By David M. Newman

 

New York Daily News, Jun 16, 2022 at 5:00 am

 

When my wife, Ellen Bilofsky, was diagnosed in 2021 with grade 4 glioblastoma, an inoperable form of brain cancer, we understood that our remaining time together was limited. We hoped to spend it with family and friends, sharing joyful memories and making Ellen as comfortable as possible. We did not anticipate that the last six months of her life would be consumed by constant battling with our medical insurer to obtain the care that Ellen needed and deserved. This happened largely because our excellent union-negotiated, employer-provided retiree health care coverage had been downgraded from traditional public Medicare to a for-profit Medicare Advantage plan.

In one instance, Ellen’s hospital-based medical team prescribed in-patient acute rehab, and, although the rehab facility approved her admission, our Medicare Advantage Plan determined these decisions to be “medically unjustified” and denied coverage. The denial was eventually overturned — but only after significant delay and interruption in treatment, and significant effort on our part to overturn the denial.

In a second instance, as Ellen’s life neared its end, her medical and rehab teams jointly determined that therapeutic and rehab treatment were no longer effective and prescribed palliative in-patient acute hospice care. The hospice facility approved her admission, but our Medicare Advantage plan again denied coverage, claiming Ellen was not ill enough to warrant in-patient hospice care and directing that she be discharged to home. We again appealed but this time we lost and Ellen returned home, presumably to die there. Only after direct intervention by a member of Congress did the plan agree to cover in-patient acute care hospice, to which she was clearly entitled per both Medicare and Medicare Advantage guidelines. Ellen passed away a few short weeks later in August 2021, after receiving excellent care at the hospice facility.

I am sharing these examples of the pain and suffering our Medicare Advantage plan caused our family because today 250,000 New York City municipal retirees are in court fighting to protect their quality health care from a similar switch from Medicare to Medicare Advantage. I urge Mayor Adams to withdraw his court appeal and cease efforts to force this switch.

Ellen was a strong and tenacious woman and, ironically, she had been advocating for years for universal single-payer health care as a social and racial justice issue. She was a tireless advocate for Medicare for All and the New York Health Act, which guarantees health care as a human right, and which would have provided the care she needed according to her medical team’s recommendations, without interference from insurance administrators. I remind the mayor that in his previous position as Brooklyn borough president, he hosted an informational forum on the New York Health Act — a forum that, incidentally, Ellen was instrumental in helping to organize and which highlighted many of the harms caused by privatized health care.

In April, an investigation by the Office of the Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services confirmed that Medicare Advantage plans “sometimes delayed or denied…beneficiaries’ access to services, even though the requests met Medicare coverage rules.” It also noted that “denying requests that meet Medicare coverage rules may prevent or delay beneficiaries from receiving medically necessary care.”

Given Ellen’s experience and these findings, the city’s municipal retirees are right to be concerned that, under a Medicare Advantage regimen, they may suffer denied and delayed medical care. We were fortunate that a high-ranking elected official was able to secure in-patient acute hospice care for Ellen. However, it should not require congressional intervention for insurers to cover medically necessary treatment to which patients are clearly entitled.

The purported rationale for moving from traditional Medicare to Medicare Advantage is cost savings for the employer. In my case, that was a large telecommunications corporation. With regard to municipal retirees, that is the City of New York. However, recent research indicates that switching seniors to Medicare Advantage plans between 2010 and 2019 has cost Medicare in excess of $100 billion more than keeping them in original Medicare would have been. A better way to cut costs — while actually providing comprehensive coverage — would be to pass and implement the New York Health Act, which, according to one recent analysis, would save New York State $16.8 billion annually.

On Thursday, June 16, retired NYC municipal workers will join with councilmembers at City Hall to urge the mayor and city to protect retirees, retain traditional public Medicare coverage, and cancel the switch to Medicare Advantage.

Mayor Adams should stand up for quality public health care for all, and for the employees who served our city for decades. He should drop the city’s appeal to their lawsuit, restore their access to traditional Medicare, and work with New Yorkers to lower healthcare costs, remove barriers to treatment and raise the standard of care.

Newman is a resident of Flatbush, Brooklyn.

Coalitions, The Left Doesn't want to win - The Implosion of Progressive Organizing - Ryan Grim - The Intercept on Call Out Culture on the Left

Stop hiring activists - Bernie Sanders -
During the 2020 presidential campaign, as entry-level staffers for [Bernie] Sanders repeatedly agitated over internal dynamics, despite having already formed a staff union, the senator issued a directive to his campaign leadership: ‘Stop hiring activists.’ Instead, Sanders implored, according to multiple campaign sources, the campaign should focus on bringing on people interested first and foremost in doing the job they’re hired to do.”

If you don’t have a coalition, you don’t have power...these groups being in Overton mode, when there are actual wins on the table to possibly be had, his argument, and I heard this from a lot of people as well, is that there’s something about the left, and its hostility or its skepticism of coercion, that just makes it allergic to power, that it just doesn’t want to be in power. As one person said: If you’re not uncomfortable all of the time, then you’re not in a coalition. Because being in a coalition means that you are in coalition with people who disagree with you on some things, because if they didn’t disagree with you on some things — NR: They would be in the same group. RG: [Laughs.] They would be in your group! Right! And so if you’re never feeling discomfort, you don’t have a coalition. ... The Intercept

These comments are so apt considering the recent United for Change coalition, where various stands from the center left to the far left came together for UFT elections. [Note stories from France where the always divided left - Socialists, Communists and Green - came together.] Has "the left" learned a lesson? Note the UFT election debacle of 2019 with three groups running and losing badly as a key lesson. But Bernie's comment, explained in detail below, about activists, recalls some stories I was told during the election about "activists" and the different concepts of activism - some unresolved issues in many groups.

Mike Antonucci chimes in on the Grim piece:

“Progressive organizations are run like shit,” said one of Grim’s sources, and it’s a sentiment I’ve heard before. But teachers unions have an asset that most progressive organizations don’t: a huge, automatic cash flow. It’s used to placate the staff while keeping control of the agenda in the hands of management. So while there may be similar schisms within NEA and AFT, they will not rise to a level of outright rebellion… at least, as long as the money holds out.

Also check out his piece from a couple of years ago on what it's like to work for Randi's AFT:  

“Favoritism is rampant. Office politics are sometimes terrible.” “The headquarters has an often toxic culture of petty jealousies and long-simmering grievances.”

Ya think?

But - 

The seizing of a trifecta in Washington by Democrats has coincided with a mass social movement demobilization. Those activated by Trump have stepped back. Democratic leaders spent more energy attacking the phrase “defund the police” than they invested in police reform, 

Is there a parallel in the UFT Oppo movement with a lack of post-election activity by United for Change? Has UFC demobilized? There has not been an internal crisis as chronicled in groups below - just apathy. But it's' only a month and Retiree Advocate is as active as ever. [Retirees - Rally June 16 noon: Tell Mayor Adams to Stop the Switch to Medicare Advantage - Rally Also June 15 at 4:30 PM].

Many progressive groups seem to be suffering from internal crises.

....at the height of the negotiations last summer over Build Back Better, that the Sierra Club vanished from the private and public conversation, because they were so caught up in turmoil that the entire institution’s energy was all being directed inward. And this is at a time where the climate movement is saying we have 10 years left to turn this thing around. And we might have just a couple months left on a Democratic trifecta. And they’re all just utterly consumed by these internal debates....

after 1968, after Richard Nixon was elected president, you had this kind of collapse and demobilization of the left. There was still a war to protest. But the demonstrations against the war never reached their peak, which they hit around 1965 or so.

The Intercept

For me this article is not an abstract concept. I've been involved in various versions of left politics for over 50 years and have seen some of the issues raised up close and personal. I was once called out - by a white guy - for using the expression about some clueless people as "just off the boat," which he said was an attack on immigrants. He practically leaped across the table in anger. Who knew? So this article and podcast resonated with me. Here is an interesting excerpt:

 

An anecdote from the 2020 Bernie Sanders campaign: 

Ahead of the Iowa caucus... there was a kind of staff uprising there over all sorts of different issuese. And the uprising ended up being squashed by other workers. And partly because the workers had a union. The people leading the uprising had to get a majority vote; they didn’t have a majority. The majority of the workers in Iowa said: No, our purpose here is to win the Iowa caucuses. Like, the future of the world depends on this. What are you doing? And, also, by the way, this job ends — we know when this job ends. After the caucus. And so why are you going to throw away the chance to change the future of the world over the next several weeks of working conditions?

And so when Bernie Sanders got wind of this uprising, which was not the first of the uprisings, he relayed to his leadership staff, he said, “Stop hiring activists.”

NR: It’s so funny.

RG: And that’s from Bernie Sanders. And he said: Just hire people that want to do the job. We pay well. We treat people well. It’s a good cause. Get people who want to do the job. Stop hiring activists.

 Here is the podcast followed by Grim's long article.

The Implosion of Progressive Organizing

Play • 38 min - with a transcript:
https://theintercept.com/2022/06/14/deconstructed-podcast-progressive-organizing-callout-culture/

In the Biden era, progressive groups in Washington have increasingly found themselves paralyzed by internal tumult at the very moment when their efforts are needed to push the more ambitious elements of the president’s agenda through Congress. Behind the scenes, the leaders of these groups express frustration with the organizational culture wrought by their younger employees and fear of becoming embroiled in a “callout” scandal. Ryan Grim talks with The Intercept’s Nausicaa Renner about his new story on the subject.

An interesting story on The Sunrise movement and I get the point about lobbying for what is the possible - but also don't see a point when the possible is severly limited to moving deck chairs on the Titanic - ie - witness the glorious new gun legislation.

a progressive congressional staffer, who said: “I’ve noticed a real erosion of the number of groups who are effective at leveraging progressive power in Congress. Some of that is these groups have these organizational culture things that are affecting them. Because of the organizational culture of some of the real movement groups that have lots of chapters, what they’re lobbying on isn’t relevant to the actual fights in Congress. Some of these groups are in Overton mode when we have a trifecta.” And then they go on to pull out Sunrise, which is doing a Green New Deal pledge. And the aid says: The climate bill is still on the table. What are you doing? You should be lobbying around that, basically.

Ryan Grim of The Intercept takes a deep dive into issues that have arisen as a result of covid and the George Floyd protests, which occurred concurrently. It's the kind of journalism, even if you don't agree, that we should support: https://join.theintercept.com/donate/now

 

 Here is the very long article with more details:

 

 

 

 

https://theintercept.com/2022/06/13/progressive-organizing-infighting-callout-culture/

Changes coming to working UFTers, Noon Rally Today, June 16, for Retirees and Supporters - Broadway btw. Murray St. & Park Pl. in front of City Hall Park

Look beyond retirees for coming changes to healthcare for working UFT members:

City Employee Health Plan Could Switch to Lower-Cost Company Under New Proposal - New York Focus - see below for article -- https://www.nysfocus.com/2022/06/15/city-cost-cutting-health-plan/

Greetings,

We really hope you can attend a very important Press Conference and Rally happening this Thursday, June 16th at 12noon.  The larger the crowd, the stronger our message will be.  It is being organized by CROC (Cross-union Retirees Organizing Comm) of which Retiree Advocate is a member.

We will present an Open Letter to Mayor Adams signed by City Council and State Assembly members, telling the Mayor to allow all NYC Municipal Retirees to maintain our traditional Medicare and Medicare supplement. Some of the elected officials who signed the letter will speak at this event.  

Despite the fact that  we have won all the lawsuits, Mayor Adams is proceeding with a legal appeal to switch 250,000  municipal retirees' Medicare benefits to an inferior  privatized Medicare  Advantage Plan.

We will continue to fight and make it clear that we do not want the Mayor to put our health and well-being in jeopardy by taking away the benefits we were promised as city employees.

WHY: Tell Mayor Adams to Stop the Switch to Medicare Advantage

DATE: Thursday June 16th 12 noon

PLACE: Broadway btw. Murray St. & Park Pl. in front of City Hall Park

CROSS-UNION RETIREES ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

Open Letter to Mayor Eric Adams Regarding Municipal Retirees’ Healthcare Coverage

We are calling on Mayor Eric Adams to cancel the proposed Medicare Advantage Plus plan and continue to support the current Medicare/Senior Care health insurance coverage for municipal retirees.

As elected officials, as public servants, as fellow New Yorkers, we share your concern about the relentless rise in health costs. It is both an individual burden and a millstone for the city.

But we will not solve the city’s problem by slashing access to care for older New Yorkers or by privatizing public goods. For New York City to shift municipal retirees from public Medicare insurance to a private, for-profit Medicare Advantage Plus plan makes no economic sense and is bad public policy.

We estimate that the new Medicare Advantage Plus plan will spend $3,400 less caring for each person than is now being spent through Medicare and Senior Care. The City’s retirees deserve better than this cut-rate health care.

Furthermore, the new plan is inequitable. The current Medicare plan is available to all. Under the new plan, higher income retirees will be able to opt out, pay the $2,300 annual premium for the new Senior Care, and stay on Medicare. Those with lower incomes, most particularly retirees who are women and those who are black and brown, will have to accept this inferior private plan.

People will die so that the City can save money short-term, so for-profit insurers like Empire can enjoy a windfall, and so leaders of “non-profits” can award themselves exorbitant salaries.

Those who have served New York City deserve better. Thanks to an influx of federal money, the City does not have to eliminate its support for its retirees’ care. There is no excuse for this attack on the wellbeing of retirees.

The City can find other ways to save money on health care. A number of them, including self-insurance by the City for coverage of its current employees, were identified in the 2018 agreement between the City and the Municipal Labor Committee and could save even more for the City than this damaging move.

Instead of going backwards to privatize retiree health care, the City should continue to support Senior Care as the Medicare supplement so its retirees can remain on public Medicare, which works for all of them.

crocnyc22@gmail.com

 https://www.nysfocus.com/2022/06/15/city-cost-cutting-health-plan/

City Employee Health Plan Could Switch to Lower-Cost Company Under New Proposal

Sam Mellins / June 15, 2022

Hundreds of thousands of city workers and their dependents could have their healthcare shifted to a cheaper plan by 2024, documents show.

This article was published in partnership with THE CITY.

New York City is seeking to replace the main health insurance plan that it provides to its employees with a new, lower-cost option, documents obtained by New York Focus reveal. The shift is currently only a possibility under consideration, but if it goes through, roughly 750,000 employees, retirees and dependents will have their current insurance switched to an as-yet undetermined plan.

One goal of the potential replacement is to cut costs “by at least 10%” without compromising the quality of care or forcing city workers to pay more out of pocket, the documents say.

The plan that currently covers most city employees and their dependents, GHI Emblem Health, began covering municipal workers under the administration of Mayor Fiorello LaGuardia in the 1940s.

On Thursday, the city’s Office of Labor Relations will begin accepting submissions from health insurance companies outlining plans to replace GHI EmblemHealth. The “target effective date” of a new plan is Jan. 1, 2024.

The Municipal Labor Committee, a group representing most of the city’s local government unions, is supporting the move. In an email to union leaders reviewed by New York Focus, Ellen Medwid, executive secretary of the Municipal Labor Committee, said that the city’s request for information from insurance companies “will allow both the MLC and the City to become better educated as to possibilities to ensure quality care at a hopefully reduced cost.”

In the email, Medwid noted that the request for information “does not obligate any action” by the city or the unions, which could choose to simply continue with GHI EmblemHealth if they decide none of the proposals would be an improvement.

Medwid did not respond to a request for comment from New York Focus.

According to the documents, the city is seeking to “redesign” the plan to “provide a state of the art, cost-effective, member-focused program.” GHI Emblem health currently provides premium-free coverage for most public employees, younger retirees, and their dependents, with a zero dollar deductible and a yearly out-of-pocket maximum of $4,550 for in-network care for one individual.

Some health care experts doubt that cutting costs for the city by a tenth without raising costs for workers, while preserving the plan’s quality, would be possible. 

“They’re clearly trying to cut the benefits, or the value of the health care benefits,” said Naomi Zewde, professor of health policy and management at the City University of New York. “People should stay aware of what might happen.” 

How the switch would affect workers largely depends on the details of a potential future plan. “I’m not sure if we can tell from this document what the risks might be to enrollees,” said David Meyers, a professor of public health at Brown. “It just depends on how they all come together in a new benefit package.”

The switch would also affect at least some retired city workers. Retirees who are younger than 65 and therefore not yet eligible for Medicare are generally still covered by GHI EmblemHealth. 

It’s not immediately clear whether the proposed plan redesign would affect retirees over 65, most of whom are covered through a different but related plan called Senior Care. 

“On the face of it it looks like they’re two separate plans,” said John Murphy, the former executive director of the New York City Employees’ Retirement System, the city’s largest pension fund. 

But Murphy added that the proposed switch could affect retirees covered by Senior Care “depending upon how they have them interconnected.”

For over a year, as part of a deal with the MLC tied to pay raises, the city has been attempting to save millions by switching roughly 250,000 retired employees from their current Medicare plans with free supplemental coverage to privately run “Medicare Advantage” plans that retirees say could cost more and cover less care. That initiative has been on ice since March, when a State Supreme Court judge ruled that city law barred the Adams administration from charging retirees for the coverage that they currently get for free.

A spokesperson for the city Office of Labor Relations did not respond to inquiries on whether Senior Care enrollees would be affected by the shift or to other questions about the potential change. A spokesperson for Mayor Eric Adams did not respond to a request for comment.

Marianne Pizzitola, president of the New York Organization of Public Service Retirees, the group that sued to stop the retiree health care switch, said that she understands the city’s desire to save money, but that it shouldn’t come at the expense of workers’ healthcare.

“You want to support them doing things that are fiscally sound,” she said. “I’m not saying that they should give me some crazy-ass Cadillac plan, but at the same time, don’t diminish what I already have.”

MulgrewCare Update: Biden Hikes Medicare Prices and Funnels Profits to Private Insurers - Connecting the dots to UFT policy

If they were actually interested in winning they wouldn't be doing things that materially make the lives of millions of seniors worse..... for the past 50 years we've seen this creeping privatization of Medicare (supported by both Dems and Rep).

.....The Lever reporter Matthew Cunningham Cook on Breaking Points. https://www.levernews.com/

Let's be clear - the UFT/AFT is tied at the hip to the center-right anti-progressive wing of the Dem Party --- they are fundamental neo-liberals who believe in the market. Cook says -- maybe private insurers can do a better job of keeping costs down. Maybe they think grandma was going to the doctor too often and private insurers help solve that problem.

Of course. Impose an extra barrier between patient and doctor. 

Note: You will not be reading this story in the mainstream media which is why you should support independent media like The Lever. https://www.levernews.com/

Krystal Ball asks The Lever reporter Matthew Cunningham Cook why the move to MedAdv from Medicare. He responds that the idea of Medicare was to get private insurance out of the way between patient and doctor and MedAdv goal is to bring private insurers back as an intermediary. 

In the midst of all this you see an 8.5% increase in payments to privatized insurance. Doctors can barely make ends meet due to Medicare payments.

If you think that wasn't the real cost saving reasons for MulgrewCare, you need to buy another bridge. 

He also gets into the FDA approval of the Alzeimer's drug over the recommendations of a panel -- you think some level of corruption? That was the ostensible reason for the $20 a month increase. But when the approval was withdrawn, the 20 bucks remained. A 14.5% increase -- another Putin inflation?

 

Krystal asks WHY raise the premium for seniors with midterms approaching.
Cook: I often say the Democrats have a kink for losing.

He goes further by ointing to the very people in the Dem Party who make these decisions always flip back and forth between public and private. They are there to help the private industry make money so they will be hired when the Dems lose.

 

Progressives are a bigger threat than the Republican right.

WTF: With mid-term elections coming, Biden raises Medicare premiums by $20 a month - which will cost me and my wife an extra $500 a year.  And also hands private insurance companies an 8% raise. Tell me Democrats don't want to lose. Actually, since they are incompetent at governing, maybe that's the goal. Lose the midterms so badly, Biden can then claim nothing gets done due to Republican opposition. That way they can remain a permanent minority party, but still keep control of the infrastructure. That's their definition of winning -- what they get personally.

It explains how much a threat to them the Bernie wing of the party is -- that threatens their lucrative deals if they lose control of the party.

Top Biden Admin officials are more interested in their next job

Cook says they are thinking of how they can get a bigger pool at their house.

The Breaking Points story and video affirms my understanding of the reason Mulgrew and the UFT/Unity machine support privatized Medicare Advantage over the public traditional Medicare. It explains the seeming illogic behind funneling money to private insurance companies.

But it doesn't explain: What Mulgrew and the UFT are getting out of supporting private insurgence. 

Maybe it's time to start asking those questions.

Biden HIKES Medicare Prices, Insurers Reap Profits | Breaking Points

https://youtu.be/Q8L2zBCbmCY

 

   

Krystal talks with The Lever journalist Matthew Cunningham Cook about the Biden administration's Medicare price hike that will boost the profits of private insurers To become a Breaking Points Premium Member and watch/listen to the show uncut and 1 hour early visit: https://breakingpoints.supercast.com/ To listen to Breaking Points as a podcast, check them out on Apple and Spotify Apple: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast... Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4Kbsy61... 

The Cheat Goes On - UFT Democracy/Election Outrages - D 75 Teachers Classified as Functional and buried by retiree vote

1. The UFT has not established bylaws, in violation of the LMRDA:
   
   The federal regulations set forth in Title II (29 U.S.C. 431) Section 201. (a) of the LMRDA state, “Every labor organization shall adopt a constitution and bylaws and shall file a copy thereof with the Secretary [of the U. S. Department of Labor] ...” According to the U. S. Department of Labor, the UFT does not have any bylaws filed, violating federal labor law in this way.
   
   According to an e-mail sent by UFT Secretary/UFT Staff Director/Unity caucus candidate LeRoy Barr to a UFC candidate on March 7, “There is no similar election guide for officer elections. Officers elections are referenced in the constitution, chapter leader elections are not. The [2015 Chapter Election Guide and By-Laws] bylaws clarify the chapter leader elections.”....

By all accounts, the UFT is in violation of the provisions regulating establishing and filing bylaws as set forth in the LMRDA..... Election Violations by Unity/UFT -

There are 19 functional Ex Bd seats up for grabs in UFT elections  and the retiree functional chapter overwhelms the division and guarantees Unity will win them.

 

Where does the rule live that decides a that an elementary D75 teacher is not elementary school but rather functional? The same for middle and high school teachers? D75 functional was decided many years ago, probably by exec bd. But let's dig down and find out and make the case for changes. Use our winning Ex Bd people to force Unity to justify this decision.

And guess what? Go find the illusive bylaws for the UFT.  The ruling is not codified in any bylaws. And it’s supposed to be. Thus there is a case for moving the D 75 people into one of the teaching divisions.

United for Change raised this issue in the 70 page complaint submitted to the UFT on June 6. (UFT Elections 2022: United for Change Files 71 pages of Election Violations by Unity/UFT - Select Morsels).

 

In retrospect we should have emphasized this point in greater detail.

Key takeaway: 

D 75 teachers don't get to vote in the actual divisions where they teach - the divisions where retirees don't get to vote. Thus, their votes are almost irrelevant when buried in the functional division because they -and other functional units get buried by the overwhelming retiree vote.

So let's think about the numbers in the recent election and if D 75 teacher votes were counted in the divisions. Were there enough for United for Change to win the middle schools and get closer in the elementary schools? I can't say but United for Change has a lot of people.

We were affected by this rule in that at the last minute, we had to pull one of our key elementary school EB candidates who was D. 75 and move him to functional EB where we didn't have a chance. We also almost lost our Elem VP officer who was also D 75 but one on appeal on a technicality.

 

So, as we were preparing our complaint -- we began to ask ourselves WHY? Where did this decision to make D 75 functional and not divisional, a clear advantage to Unity, get made?

When the oppo was buried when Unity got 85% of the vote it didn't seem to make sense to bring all this up. But once they slipped into the 60s and the oppo reached a third, the potential to actually win seats in not retiree divisions becomes possible. It D 75 was moved to divisions

 

After note:

Much thanks to Christina Gavin for waking us all up to the shady processes that we have taken for granted for decades -- it takes a new set of eyes. During the election, Christina argued hard for UFC to play more attention to D. 75 but some of us argued that since they were functional and buried by the retiree vote, it would not be a fruitful use of time -- but she raised our attention to the D 75 issue. She went against the grain of the experienced people and was right on many issues. I wanted to be on the UFT election committee to be more aggressive and not play the "we are all pals" game. I could have been tougher. Christina pushed we old experienced hands. I wish she was around from the very beginning of the election process - we could have raised many issues back in the fall before the election even began. She woke many of us up.

 

Upcoming: Delving into other issues of how Unity cheats -- why are all functional chapters buried in the same division as retirees? They should be separated out into their own division as their overwhelming vote makes the 19 functional Ex Bd seats impossible for the oppo to win.