A Couple of Thoughts from Yesterday’s UFT Retired Teachers Chapter Meeting

The United Federation of Teachers Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC) met yesterday. Chapter Leader Bennett Fischer chaired.

Just things that I noticed, or stood out to me. This is not minutes. This is not a full report. And the notes are not necessarily in order.

Retirees and Teachers Retirement System of New York City Elections

Bennett Fischer spoke about the unfairness of retirees being excluded from the TRSNYC Board elections. This is a problem with the NYC Administrative Code (I think) and Bennett or the RTC Exec Board (I’m part of it. I’m the Assistant Secretary. But these are not minutes!) will initiate a process to see if we can get that amended, and end this unfairness.

Endorsement?

Last week Mulgrew announced in a statement that the UFT was supporting Brad Lander’s opponent in the race for Congress in NY-10. Trouble was, the AFT and NYSUT did not endorse in NY-10. And the Delegate Assembly had not voted.

Bennett spoke about this. It is a problem. Our (UFT) endorsement process is well-established. This was out-of-process.

The reaction was strange. Unity loyalists claimed that NYSUT endorsed Goldman at the Representative Assembly. Not true. One claimed NYSUT had endorsed Goldman earlier in the cycle. Not true. And that one is so specific, it sure looks like intentional disinformation. Someone else said NYSUT endorsed Monday – which was irrelevant, since Mulgrew’s statement was from four days earlier, and also untrue.

People in the hall tried Google. They found an endorsement for Goldman – from 2024. AI guessed that an endorsement might have happened – without evidence. But anyone who went to the NYSUT website learned the truth. And anyone who put a NY-10 address into NYSUT’s endorsement look up found what we knew – no endorsement.

So what happened? There was no NYSUT endorsement. The UFT had a DA planned for May 13, but that was delayed because of the TRSNYC election. My guess? Mulgrew planned to get a Goldman endorsement at the DA. Staff had prepared his statement in advance (really crummy practice – unless you want to display disrespect for the Delegate Assembly and our democratic practice), and forgot to wait for the vote to happen, or just thoughtlessly released it. To be clear, the responsibility is Mulgrew’s – that’s his name on the statement.

We have a Delegate Assembly later today. Let’s see how Mulgrew addresses his fuck up. But an out-of-process endorsement is not ok. And I’m not sure how he can appear to run a neutral after his public statement.

The Housing Resolution

There was one resolution on the agenda, Housing, followed by any other motions members wanted to bring (but we ran out of time). The housing resolution and the discussion and vote were the least satisfying parts of the meeting.

The Housing Resolution has a genesis that is worth noting. A month or two ago a retiree who is active with Unity brought a resolution on housing, and was not able to raise it (time). I suggested he send it to the RTC Executive Board, and they could put it on the next agenda. He did send it to the Executive Board, but we did not vote to put it on the agenda. Instead, we chose to write our own housing resolution (which we did) and then invite the Unity supporter to work to meld the two resolutions. He refused.

So the RTC Executive Board had been open to collaborating on a joint resolution, but the Unity supporter did not want this. His call. But we (RTC Exec) put the RTC resolution on the agenda. The resolution itself was ok, 30% affordable housing is low, and could have been higher. 100% union labor was absolutely correct. And calling for neighborhood-AMI or borough-AMI addresses affordability head on. And affordability links labor and retirees with community in an incredibly important way. So while the Unity guy still was holding a resolution (which had never been introduced), this was the RTC Exec Board’s, and it was on the agenda. Michael Shulman introduced it.

But two things went wrong.

Norm Scott rose to amend. He wanted a new resolved “To increase retirees’ ability to afford housing eliminate copays.” The RTC already has a copay resolution. That already passed the RTC chapter meeting. Passing it again added nothing. And the copay resolution has been blocked from the UFT as a whole at the Delegate Assembly by Mulgrew. Adding copays to this resolution did not make it one bit more likely to become UFT policy. But you know what adding it did? It took this not too bad housing resolution, and took its small chance of coming before the membership and left it with no chance of ever coming up. This amendment effectively blocked the housing resolution from ever moving forward. It was a poison pill. What a shame. I heard a small group of retirees cheering when it passed – not sure if it was because they falsely believed that somehow they had struck a blow against copays, or because they enjoyed spoiling the hard work of Bennett and the RTC Executive Board.

One more note – this is not the first time I have questioned Norman’s actions. This was poor judgment. But it is possible to criticize his actions while sympathizing with the difficult health issues he is facing. We can do both things at once, We should all wish Norm the best.

So back to the other housing resolution. The one that the Unity supporter brought. The one that the RTC Executive Board wanted to reconcile with our own, but the Unity person did want to do. The one that had never been introduced. Well the author was in the hall, with his hand up. Bennett called on Norm first. And the next person Bennett called on, they called the question. I do not think it was fair to end debate before debate had happened. I suggested that we ask the indulgence of the body and allow speakers for and against first. But honestly, it was hard to focus. Half a dozen Unity voices were calling for Points of Order and Points of Information. Bennett took several (without getting to the maker of the motion, who had his hand up). He said that the points were becoming dilatory, and moved to a vote. The amendment passed. The resolution as amended passed.

I believe that fairness should have trumped procedure, and that Bennett should have allowed a speaker for and a speaker against. I got no pleasure out of seeing frantic Unity supporters, infuriated that their voices were silenced. That’s what it feels like to oppose Unity in a Delegate Assembly – and I wish that on nobody. And then even if we were moving straight to calling the question, I do believe the point of order from the author of the (unintroduced) resolution should have been allowed. Out of fairness.

We have done, Bennett has done, a good job in making our Retired Teachers Chapter meetings much livelier, much fairer, much more democratic. This debate was not up to those standards. We must do better.

Immigration Support

I spoke. ICE is in New York City, harming our neighbors. It’s not the scale of LA, or Detroit, or Minneapolis. But they are here, doing damage. Some students have been detained, their families have been detained, but to this point ICE has not entered our schools.

In the meantime, there is lots of support activity going on. And many retirees have become involved. Space there is merchant support, know your rights, community aid, rapid response, neighborhood watch. There is court watch, and accompaniment. There is some support for schools.

But most school-based commitees are in formation. Most are not there yet. But we see signs that some schools may want retiree volunteers soon, and I was soliciting some interest There is a union based committee working actively on this. I hope we are able to utilize more retirees to support schools soon.

I also showed off some of my buttons and whistles, and taught a little bit, very little, about some of the support work that I do.

Someone in the Q&A tried to point out that Brad Lander has been very supportive of immigrants in 26 federal Plaza. That point was true. Very true. And I don’t support Dan Goldman. But it was necessary to point out that Goldman has played an active role in pulling immigrants out of detention, by utilizing his office’s resources to file rapid writs of habeus corpus. Credit where due.

And then there were a few more questions and announcements and appeals. People from three different clauses and one person who is independent spoke. Everyone was possible. Everyone wanted to contribute. That part felt good.