A Couple of Thoughts from Wednesday’s Delegate Assembly

The United Federation of Teachers Delegate Assembly met Wednesday. I wrote earlier that day about the Tuesday Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC) meeting… Woohoo! Two meetings in a week. Here’s a few moments from the DA.

Tier VI

From Mulgrew’s report – the Tier VI negotiations. He made it clear we won something, and that age was the priority for teachers, and that we were not done, but would need to come back and fight for more. This is complicated. I think he was right, that for teachers age at this point was the bigger issue, but both age and contributions (the amount, and for how long) are huge issues. And I do not think we got the best deal we could. The issues of pension and Tier VI deserve a whole separate post.

Don’t vote on issues where my side will lose

From the Motions Directed to the Agenda – the resolution on maintaining focus on core union priorities – this was the freaked out Zionist response to the Resolution to Stop the Sale of Bombs and Bulldozers to Israel being placed on the agenda the previous month (with a 54% – 46% vote). Mulgrew made a point of calling on the maker of the motion – but Unity had signaled they were neutral. Michael Shulman gave a strong speech against. It failed by about 3% (I need to check numbers, but 51.4 – 48.6 or thereabouts). I wonder who voted for it… not just a right wing + Zionist vote, but aren’t there people who support sucking up to the prejudices and backwardness of some teachers?

Out-of-process endorsement against Brad Lander

At the close of the Motions Directed to the Agenda – I attempted to bring a point of order (it may not have been a point of order). NYSUT and the AFT, neither endorsed in CD-10, Lander vs Goldman. So that race goes back to the UFT to decide. But within the UFT, we have process – endorsements go to our highest body – the Delegate Assembly. But this one didn’t. Mulgrew publicly announced the UFT was supporting Goldman (the AIPAC candidate). I tried a point of order, Mulgrew accused me of engaging in debate, and I tried to appeal the ruling of the chair and he ran over me. At that point, fight or sit down? I’d made my point, and was not going to win the appeal. I sat down.

On the merits though, endorsements are by NYSUT, AFT or UFT. And UFT endorsements go through the DA. Mulgrew was wrong. What happened? Guess 1 – the DA was scheduled a week earlier. They were going to endorse Goldman, but delays happen. Only Communications did not know, or didn’t think, and put out the statement they had prepared anyhow. And Mulgrew doesn’t admit error, or at least not often. Guess 2 – Unity was afraid that they would lose a vote on Goldman. Lander is the far more popular candidate among our members.

In either case, we now know clearly that NYSUT did not endorse (from Mulgrew). Which sends me back to the RTC one day earlier. When the out-of-process endorsement came up, many people Googled (and found a Goldman endorsement – from 2024). But two people in the zoom Q&A shared very specific specific information – they included THAT NYSUT endorsed Goldman (false) and they also included WHEN NYSUT endorsed Goldman (impossible, since NYSUT did not endorse him). It is highly unlikely that Patti or Rodney would offer that level of detail – when there was no supporting fact – without knowing what they were writing was untrue. I believe that most Unity members would not brazenly lie to win an argument. Most. But not all.

Defend Social Security

After months the Defend Social Security (and medicare and Medicaid) resolution finally cam up. This is an attempt to create a pool of mostly electoral/lobbying activists in the UFT, roughly parallel to the AFTerburners. It would be an improvement.

It was eventually approved by a wide margin. But before we got there, Bruce Markens stood up to remove the first whereas:

WHEREAS the election of UFT endorsed Zohran Mamdani as Mayor of New York City has definitively ended the immediate danger that UFT and other NYC municipal retirees would lose our traditional Medicare and be transferred into a Medicare Advantage plan against our will, as Mamdani has unequivocally committed himself to the UFT’s position in support of maintaining traditional Medicare,

Bruce’s motivation went long. He veered into 1096. Mulgrew engaged in debate (without being recognized) over 1096. Janella Hinds rose to defend this whereas. And then we voted, and the whereas was removed.

First of all, someone should have proofread this point. The language needs clean up.

But next, was Bruce’s point that the UFT was not threatening Medicare for now, or might in the future? Or that Mamdani is a threat to Medicare?

The blanket deletion of the point leaves it unclear if Bruce was attacking Michael or Zohran. And that may have been the point. There are retirees who don’t trust Mulgrew on Medicare (with good reason. Though I do trust that Unity loves power, and hates that they lost the RTC over Medicare, and so I trust them not to repeat that mistake, out of their love of power). But there are also members who are not retirees who hate Zohran. They would have rathered have Cuomo. Or Sliwa. And when I heard Bruce’s amendment, that’s what I heard. And I voted no. And I think that’s what others heard, and voted yes. And I think Bruce’s amendments carried on the votes of anti-Zohran delegates. And I don’t think that’s a good thing.