Quiz: Health care cuts? or Health care savings?
New copay
You go to your doctor. There’s a $15 copay. Last year, there was no copay. Cost or Savings?
If you said “that’s a cut” you are like most of us, a real person. You are picking up $15, and the city is no longer paying that part of the cost.
If you said “that’s a savings” you might be Michael Mulgrew, Harry Nespoli, Eric Adams, or some corporate lawyer or manager or executive officer for Emblem or another big insurance company. That’s money you get to keep
Avoid a copay
You are experiencing pain, and think about going to the emergency room, but think about the cost (copay jumped several years ago from $50 to $150) and decide that it’s probably not serious, and take tylenol instead. Cost or Savings?
You are getting less health care than you would have. The cost scared you away. That is a cut, right? Less care?
But you might have said that’s a savings: if you are Mulgrew, Nespoli, Adams, or an Insurance Executive. That’s an emergency room visit that you might have had to pay for, and now you didn’t. High fives for jacking up copays!
(I was in this situation, but I went to the ER. That triple-digit copay was a cost to me, a savings to Mulgrew.)
Approval for a procedure that should not need approval
Because of a family history of cancer, you need a special diagnostic procedure every year. But this year a guy who works for an insurance company calls to say that your procedure has been approved. Cost or Savings?
If you are a regular person, neither. You need the test, you will get it.
But if you are Michael, Harry, Eric or a stockholder in Emblem or Aetna or Alliance of whatever monster insurance company is involved, that’s a savings. Sure, the guy on the phone did not stop you from getting your test. But he’s sitting there, drawing a salary. And he’s earning his keep (or the insurance company would not otherwise employ him). How does he earn his keep? He’s denying procedures. You were lucky. Some other schlubs are getting denied. And when that guy called you, he was normalizing the process where non-doctors decide whether or not you get the healthcare you need.
Denied care, but get approved on appeal
You move from Medicare to Medicare Advantage, and are denied a preauthorization, but appeal, and get the necessary care approved. Cost or Savings?
If that’s you, and there was no rush, that’s pretty neutral, although annoying. But if you had the same pancreatic issue as this guy, that requires almost immediate diagnosis, that is a horrible, potentially deadly, cut.
For Mulgrew, Nespoli, Adams, this is a savings. Delaying health care will discourage many (but not you!) from using the service they need. Less health care for many means savings for the leadership of the UFT and MLC, and for Mayor Adams. But they even save on you – delaying your care means they hold the money longer. How much could that be? Well, how many retirees can they delay?
Denied care, lose your appeal
Denied care, lose your appeal?
You lose.
Mulgrew/UFT leadership/Nespoli/Adams save.
Stay with a convenient radiologist
Get your CT scan in the hospital connected to your GP? And pay $100 copay?
You lose.
MLC and crew save.
No copay. But a surprise bill
Go for a doctor’s visit. Covered. No copay. But then get billed $19.61 or $23.58 or something that feels suspiciously like a copay?
You lose.
Mulgrew saves.
Adjusting our Language
So here’s the deal. If you are a leech (insurance company), inhuman (financial overseers of NYC), or a labor leader more concerned with power and patronage than with protecting your members, go ahead, call all of these savings.
But what are they calling savings?
- Less healthcare for you and me
- Longer waits for you and me
- Bigger copays for you and me
- Procedures denied for you and me
- More bureaucratic hoops to get procedures approved
- Extra bills for you and me
So for the rest of us, and I assume you are more like me than like Mulgrew, let’s stop saying “cost savings” when we are talking about health care. These are cuts. They are trying to give us less health care, and charge us more for it.
Administrative Code 12-126
The City – Renee Campion from the Office of Labor Relations signed the letter, but it’s for Adams and the financial overlords – also Nespoli for the MLC and DC37, and Mulgrew and Unity leadership want to amend 12-126. Why? To make changes so they can institute health care savings.
If you followed closely, you get it. “Health Care Savings” is what they say when they mean “Health Care Cuts.” Mulgrew et al want to charge you more for health care, and give you less of it.
Say no. Do not allow them to amend 12-126. Tell your city council member – “I like my health care. I love my family. Do not amend 12-126.”
UFT still hasn’t told members about October 1 copay increases
October 1 Emblem added copays for Montefiore, no longer considered a “preferred provider.” And on November 1 Emblem copays for MRIs and CTs will double from $50 to $100, except for three providers.
Emblem (which used to be GHI) wrote to us, and told us. The letter was dated Thursday a week and a half ago. Some of us got it Friday, I got mine Saturday, some people got it on Monday.
But none of us got anything from the UFT, which is unusual. The UFT always (well, clearly not always) sends out some sort of announcement about a change, kind of reminding us that no matter the result, they negotiated it, they are in charge. Imagine the message “We were able to preserve the same copay, as long as you use RadNet instead of the imaging center in your hospital’s network” or something like that.
But nope. No word from the UFT. Not before October 1, the effective date. Not before October 20, when Emblem sent out notice. And not even by the end of October. It’s November, and Mulgrew’s people are staying mum on these new and higher copays.
At a UFT meeting last Tuesday a member asked about these copays. There were two officers there. Neither had heard of the fees. Neither had seen the letter.
You might wonder…
Is it legal for Emblem to raise fees October 1, and not tell people it covers until October 20 (really October 21, 22, or 24, because, you know, mail…)?
How had officers not seen the Emblem letter? Do officers get different health insurance from regular UFT members?
And why is the UFT leadership slow to send out information about copay increases? Did they forget? Or are they trying not to share additional bad health care news the same week they are threatening members with huge premiums?
And if the UFT leadership hasn’t been forthcoming about new copays and copay increases, wouldn’t that make people wonder about what they say about other health care issues?
ABCs of Mulgrew vs. Retirees’ health care
- Forced by Mulgrew (and the Municipal Labor Committee, and Mayor Adams) to choose MAP (for free) or Real Medicare (for $191/month, or roughly $2300/year) – thousands of our retirees chose to pay extra to stay off Medicare Advantage. Smart.
- Preauthorizations are the Achilles Heel of insurance plans. Real Medicare hardly has any. Medicare Advantage has LOTS OF PREAUTHORIZATIONS.
- Medicare Advantage plans engage in systematic fraud. This New York Times Medicare Advantage / Fraud article is tough on them. And if they rob big organizations they work with, what do you think they do the little guy?
- Sneaking around. The whole Medicare vs Medicare Advantage thing – it blew up in April of 2021. Why? Because we found out about it. The Professional Staff Congress (CUNY professors union) told its members. You know who didn’t tell us about it? Mulgrew, who was negotiating it. The MLC, which was in on it.
- Who cares what you think? That’s easy. Not Mulgrew. Mulgrew doesn’t care what you think. See how in contract negotiations they do surveys? For mayoral endorsements they do focus groups? Even for selection DRs they create panels? Now, a lot of this “asking for input” is kind of bull – but they do ask. For the switch from Real Medicare to Medicare Advantage? Mulgrew, MLC, the City, no one asked any of us.
- Shifting stories. Mulgrew blamed the City, the “poor roll out,” misinformed retirees, misguided retirees. At his first retiree call (May 4, 2021) he yelled at and spoke down at retirees (the audio was posted, and then removed). He said not to opt out, and then not to opt out yet, and then that there was no need to opt out.
- Retirees. There is a coalition of retirees from many municipal unions. There is our own Retiree Advocate within the United Federation of Teachers.
- Retirees have been telling the truth to other retirees about what’s going on.
- Retirees went to court and blocked the City, the MLC, and Mulgrew from forcing retirees out of Real Medicare and into Medicare Advantage. The judge’s decision rested on something called “12-126” which protects our health care.
D. Mulgrew/MLC/City are getting desperate. They may have more at stake than they are letting on.
- Mulgrew trying to sneak this past us
- Mulgrew yelling at retirees.
But now they seem even more desperate
- Mulgrew and the MLC were campaigning to change “12-126” so they would have an easier time getting retirees off of Real Medicare and bringing in Medicare Advantage. But the deeper that campaign went, the clearer it was that City Council members were listening more to their retirees than to Mulgrew and the MLC
- Running a full hour “infomercial” at the last UFT Delegate Assembly
- Banning questions at the UFT Executive Board (more precisely, limiting questions to 15 minutes, which they intend to eat up with long answers, an effective ban. They were getting testy about the pointed questions about Real Medicare vs Medicare Advantage)
E. And that letter, and email
- Look, I will write more about the letter from Office of Labor Relations (OLR), and Mulgrew’s response. But from here, it looks like the OLR says “change the law, or else we will hurt retirees’s health care! Or hurt in-service members’ health care!” And Mulgrew answers “Let’s change the law, blah blah blah”
- But we know that the OLR and Mulgrew agree about changing the law. Because that’s how they intend to force retirees out of Real Medicare and into Medicare Advantage.
- And retirees don’t want to change the law, because changing 12-126 will screw with their health care. And in-service members should not want to change 12-126, which protects our health care.
- By the way, DC37’s Nespoli wrote pretty much the same letter to his members.
- So this OLR letter combined with the Mulgrew and Nespoli response, it looks like a three-way bum’s rush on retirees and in-service members, trying to get us to give in on 12-126.
·
·
·
·
·
The Old Woman and Her Pig
This story reminds me of Mulgrew and Medicare Advantage. She keeps failing, and keeps trying. She wants that pig home, just like Unity wants our retirees forced off Medicare, onto Medicare Advantage.
Mulgrew is trying to get the inservice members to lean on the city council to change the law to get the judge to force the retirees…
Let’s work so that Mulgrew is less successful than this old woman:
An old woman was sweeping her house, and she found a little crooked sixpence. “What,” said she, “shall I do with this little sixpence? I will go to market, and buy a little pig.”
As she was coming home, she came to a stile. But the piggy wouldn’t go over the stile.
She went a little further, and she met a dog. So she said to him, “Dog! Dog! Bite pig. Piggy won’t go over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the dog wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met a stick. So she said, “Stick! Stick! Beat dog! Dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the stick wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met a fire. So she said, “Fire! Fire! Burn stick. Stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the fire wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met some water. So she said, “Water! Water! Quench fire. Fire won’t burn stick; stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the water wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met an ox. So she said, “Ox! Ox! Drink water. Water won’t quench fire; fire won’t burn stick; stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the ox wouldn’t. She went a little further and she met a butcher. So she said, “Butcher! Butcher! Kill ox. Ox won’t drink water; water won’t quench fire; fire won’t burn stick; stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the butcher wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met a rope. So she said, “Rope! Rope! Hang butcher. Butcher won’t kill ox; ox won’t drink water; water won’t quench fire; fire won’t burn stick; stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the rope wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met a rat. So she said, “Rat! Rat! Gnaw rope. Rope won’t hang butcher, butcher won’t kill ox; ox won’t drink water; water won’t quench fire; fire won’t burn stick; stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.” But the rat wouldn’t.
She went a little further, and she met a cat. So she said, “Cat! Cat! Kill rat. Rat won’t gnaw rope; rope won’t hang butcher; butcher won’t kill ox; ox won’t drink water; water won’t quench fire; fire won’t burn stick; stick won’t beat dog; dog won’t bite pig; piggy won’t get over the stile; and I shan’t get home tonight.”
But the cat said to her, “If you will go to yonder cow, and fetch me a saucer of milk, I will kill the rat.” So away went the old woman to the cow.
But the cow said to her, “If you will go to yonder haystack, and fetch me a handful of hay, I’ll give you the milk.” So away went the old woman to the hay-stack; and she brought the hay to the cow.
As soon as the cow had eaten the hay, she gave the old woman the milk; and away she went with it in a saucer to the cat.
As soon as the cat had lapped up the milk, the cat began to kill the rat; the rat began to gnaw the rope; the rope began to hang the butcher; the butcher began to kill the ox; the ox began to drink the water; the water began to quench the fire; the fire began to burn the stick; the stick began to beat the dog; the dog began to bite the pig; the little pig in a fright jumped over the stile; and so the old woman got home that night.
Recent Reads
I stopped reading. I wrote about it during the week. I mean, I CAN read – I haven’t forgotten my letters. I just haven’t been losing myself in pages… And I haven’t been casually picking up books, starting them, and finishing them. It’s been years.
So I tried just picking up books and diving in. It’s not like riding a bike. I would put the book down, and not return to it. That didn’t work.
My next strategy has been to open up a few books, and bounce between them. It’s not very efficient, but it seems to be working. Simultaneously, I have been opening up my magazines (The New Yorker, The Economist, and Scientific American) and working through articles here and there.
Some readers (ha ha!) were horrified by this strategy, and offered alternatives – as if what I am doing is wrong and must not be working. Nancy sent me to this adorable self-help “become a reader again since you were before” video. Others had suggestions for books to get me back in the habit, or specific magazines. But no, I must not have made it clear – my strategy is, slowly, working. I am finishing books.
Finished
Mind you, my progress is slow. But before, my progress was “no.” So, four titles that I have finished:
- Metabolical: The Lure and the Lies of Processed Food, Nutrition, and Modern Medicine, by Jack Lustig.
- Last Witnesses: An Oral History of the Children of World War II, by Svetlana Alexievich.
- Draft No. 4, by John McPhee.
- The History of Mathematics: A Very Short Introduction, by Jacqueline Stedall.
I have this strange, hopeful feeling that I’ve forgotten something. But I don’t think so. And even if this is only four titles, that’s four. In a couple of months. And picking up steam. I don’ think I read four books in all of 2021. And, yes, they are all non-fiction. But I would offer that they are quite a variety of non-fiction
And these have been worthwhile. I think I will come back and say something about Stedall, maybe something about each one of these. And by the time I have four posts, one for each of these, I bet I will have a few more completed books to write about.
Now Reading
I stopped reading. I wrote about it yesterday.
I still was reading on line. And I can read – you know – sound out the words, figure out what the author was writing. But I want to get back into “get lost in the pages” kind of reading. And I tried to jump straight in, and well, I am trying something else.
Magazines
The New Yorker, print, comes each week. I skim the cartoons. If I laugh at any of the lame jokes, I have the sense not to share that. And I read the opinion piece at the start of the Talk of the Town. I find it pretty New York liberal (not a great compliment) without being The New York Times New York Corporate Liberal (which I despise). And I am pretty good at reading more of the short pieces. I do not read something more substantial each week, but getting there. And their reviews (art, books, at the back) are not for me. Nor is their fiction. But the writing I do read, I like the voices in The New Yorker, and the quality of the writing is very very high.
The Economist, print, comes each week. Look, it’s kind of cheating to go for a pile of short articles, but that’s what I am doing here. I rarely read their full briefings or intelligence reports. The Economist represents a very definite point of view – I like to call it “City of London” – the financial center of what is no longer the most powerful economic power in the world. Because it is well-written, and has a really bad sense of humor, and because it doesn’t hide its pov, it is kind of an enjoyable read. And I definitely learn stuff – The Economist does not treat regions of the world as unworthy of coverage.
Scientific American. Print. I so want to get through every one of these. And I don’t. But I absolutely AM READING parts of each issue now, and this was just not the case half a year ago. It’s good science, pretty current. It’s written simple enough for me, but even then I find parts challenging. And what I read, I learn from. It’s only once a month, and I guess it represents a place I want to get to, while I know full well I am not there yet.
Books
My first strategy – just open something and read – didn’t turn out too well. So I pulled a group of three books, and rotated reading from each. Three became four, became five. While I was in Maine, I read a little from each each day. Today I am more likely to pull from two on any given day, sometimes one, rarely three.
And what is in progress?
The Counter-Revolution of 1776, Slave Resistance and the Origins of the United States of America. Gerald Horne. Completely different take on 1776, the motivations of the actors, and the centrality of slavery to the revolt of the colonists. I’m about 45% of the way in. It’s a slow slog. Horne’s writing is academic, with lots of footnotes. And the organization is partially thematic, overlain with chronology – but it is NOT chronological, which I find super-challenging.
Math Girls. Hiroshi Yuki. My only fiction, and it is loaded with math! Real math. Strange, I think it is YA, young adult, but the romantic story lines eat up maybe 10-15% percent. The school story line is maybe 5-10%. And 75-85% is math, which you would think makes this comfortable for me. That’s not entirely correct. Some of the math is different from math I’ve worked on, and some is presented in idiosyncratic ways. I was going faster, but slowed down. I’m about 40% done.
Child Prisoner in American Concentration Camps – A Memoir, Mako Nakagawa. I’ve already finished a book from a child’s viewpoint, and this is my second. I have more to come. I’ve just started this, not 5% of the way, but it will go very fast.
The Battle Nearer to Home: The Persistence of School Segregation in New York City. Christopher Bonastia. Mostly focused on the 50s and 60s, right through Ocean Hill – Brownsville (the 1968 strike against community control), and then jumps forward to more recent struggles. I’m about 75% done, and I’ve gotten past the strike (I know, none of us really have). The writing is well-footnoted, but the style is accessible. I should write more about this book. Maybe I will. I might recommend it. Bonastia is at Lehman College, but I never met him, never encountered him until recently on a social media platform.
The Hidden Half of Nature: The Microbial Roots of Life and Health. David Montgomery and Anne Biklé. I read Montgomery’s Dirt: The Erosion of Civilizations years ago. I think I bought copies as gifts for friends and relatives. I was a fan. One day in IFC I saw a documentary, DamNation, about removing dams from rivers in the Pacific Northwest, and what a positive effect dam removal had on the ecosystem, in some cases along First Peoples to return to or restore cultural practices. And Montgomery was a talking head in that film. I wiggled my toes with delight when I realized who it was (silently, of course, so as not to disturb the seven other guests in that theater). I’ve just started. But I already know. Hmm. Montgomery:Scientist::Social Historian:Historian. And that’s cool
And straight up math?
I’d like to get some collaborative reading going – but haven’t found my text and partners yet. For now I am just going through a couple of things I read with kids, but now super slowly and carefully.
Numbers and Curves by Franz Lemmermeyer. It’s really an on-line number theory text. But we used the first chapter to construct the naturals from Peano’s Postulates. Progress is very slow, but quite satisfying. This does not feel easy. But it’s a different sort of reading.
An Introduction to Elementary Set Theory. Guram Bezhanishvili and Eachan Landreth. MAA put this out as a pdf – it’s a historical survey, with little bits of Cantor and Dedekind interspersed with some basics. I always enjoyed using this, and I’m just close reading to make certain there are not details I’d manage to overlook. I’m also assembling notes on what I added to this – certainly my students loved the mysterious notation. Cool, but that makes this reading even more divergent. That’s ok. I like this too.
Returning to Reading
I stopped reading. It’s been a long time since I’ve routinely opened a magazine, or regularly opened a book, and just read.
Not completely. I subscribe to two weekly magazines, and one monthly, and from time to time I would look at the cartoons. Or even read an article, or two. And I occasionally read a chapter from a book. Even less often, a whole book. A whole book – that had become very very infrequent.
I still scanned the screen of my laptop, desktop, or phone. But I don’t think that should count.
By “reading” I do not mean just the process of translate the pixels into the letters, letters into words, words into sentences, and sentences into ideas. I mean picking up the reading material, sitting down, falling into the story, getting absorbed. I mean turning the page, dog-earing the page, rereading a passage. I mean what I used to do, and what I have more or less stopped doing.
And so, since the end of June, I’ve been trying to address that, to get back to reading. I had the summer – but I have always had summers. This one was different – I passed the programming responsibilities to someone else. I came in July 7, and then once more to clear out my stuff. I answered a few emails. But my summer was mine. I also did not have planning. I am on “terminal leave” – likely retiring in the coming weeks or months, and I am not currently working. The summer was really mine.
I hardly remember what it was like to read. To really read. To read every day. We lost newspapers – barely reading, but a daily habit. On-line isn’t the same. What is it like to find a quiet spot, a sunbeam, and lean back… What is like to pore over a piece of non-fiction, grappling with a new or difficult concept? I last really read non-fiction, not just a book here or there, but regularly, about a decade ago. The feel is faded, but not altogether forgotten. But fiction? Having a story come to life in my hands, slowly unfold. Meeting characters, and learning about them, and feeling hope or worry or joy for them… I don’t remember this. It has been too long.
This is bad. It is embarrassing. So what to do? Obviously, start reading. But it was not as easy for me as it sounds. I had lost the habit.
So I began with magazines. Magazine articles are generally shorter. Of my weeklies, the Economist is easier. In these seventeen weeks I have not read every issue, but I’ve read most of most of them. They are not very satisfying. But I am rebuilding a habit. The New Yorker is tougher. I usually get through the Talk of the Town, or choose which don’t look interesting to skip. But the feature articles? Sometimes. Am I up to at least one longer article in every issue? Nope. Every other issue? Maybe I’m getting close. Oh, and fiction? Even when I was a reader, I rarely read The New Yorker’s fiction. Maybe one day, but not soon. Scientific American is one a month, and the articles are challenging. I have had greater difficulty even opening them up (though unlike the other two, I do not discard SciAm, even when it is old). But Tuesday I read a chunk of the current issue, including a fascinating story about the structure (and possible demise) of the Thwaites Glacier in West Antarctica – bad news for sea level. (Thwaites I mean to look up – it’s also the name of a teensy street in the Bronx. In my fourth year teaching I had a student, Masha with red hair whose last name I remember but won’t write, lived on Thwaites Place. It was a Course II section for kids whose first language was not English, and it was in Room 450, she sat left of center, I think second row.) OK, so magazine progress – real, but not too impressive.
The real challenge has been books. I tried. I opened a volume at home, on a train, on a plane, and quickly lost focus. I tried a few times. Same result. But this is important. Through early July, nothing. And then I went away on a big trip. That’s where I had the plane and train rides. And I got sick. (not from reading. There’s a pandemic.) And in the rest of the August I didn’t get much done.
So I thought it over, and I came up with a plan. If I couldn’t sit the way I used to, if I couldn’t get sucked into hours of reading, then I would need to adjust how I was trying to read.
I chose a group of books. Mostly non-fiction. Some history. Some education. Some math. Other stuff. And a read a few pages from one, put it down. And then I pick up or don’t pick up) another. I have been keeping four or five in play at a time. And know what? I am slowly, steadily, making progress. From early September I have completed several books, and am making progress on others. And it is gradually becoming, once again, an every day activity, one that I look forward to.
Baby steps. I’ll write more about reading. I should say a couple of words about what I have finished, and what I am working. And I need to confirm that this “return to reading” has stuck.
Did the UFT make an announcement about copay increases?
Maybe I missed it? I have been writing about the increase in GHI (now Emblem) copays, for Montefiore, and for MRIs, CTs, and other scans.
I have pointed out that the notice from Emblem came AFTER the changes went into effect. I have also pointed out that the notice from the UFT NEVER CAME. I searched my mail. I searched my email. Could I have missed it? Please readers, tell me if I have. But I don’t think so.
Tuesday at a UFT meeting two UFT officers indicated this was the first they had heard of it, and that they had not seen it in writing. This is a change to copays for the insurance (Emblem, used to be GHI) that most high school teachers have.
Yesterday I got an email over Mulgrew’s name about healthcare – I read carefully to see if they snuck in a mention of the new copays. Nope.
By the way, since I know you are reading this, the testimonial probably should have been from a “Department of Education employee” or a “UFT member” – not from a “UFT employee.” An editor would help.
In any case, the UFT leadership knows how to put out an email about health care. And I dutifully save the emails. Unless I missed something, Mulgrew and friends just decided not to tell us about the new copays. Let Emblem do it. Or let the members find out when they get a surprise charge at the doctors office.
This, by the way, is tried and true Unity strategy. When they have bad news, hide it. It’s what they did, ironically, during the election – kept Mulgrew from talking, kept him out of sight. When they have a problem their first line of defense is to keep quiet and hope no one notices.
Health care has become tricky. Unity got caught trying to sneak in a huge change to retiree health care. Retirees are anxious and angry. It’s been all over the news. Unity has been forced to address it (largely with misinformation, but that’s not for this post). Unity cannot just stay silent about their Medicare Advantage plan.
But anything else healthcare? Anything besides pushing retirees out of Medicare? Look at that email. If they have good news, they will trumpet it. Put Mulgrew’s name on it, try to shore up his lousy favorability ratings (it won’t work). If they have bad news, don’t say anything, hope members don’t notice.
Let’s make sure we notice.
More on the New Emblem (GHI) Copays
Yesterday I wrote about the new copays. A couple more details today.
Advanced Imaging
We are talking MRIs, CAT scans, PET scans, NMR, and other stuff. Copays in network were $50. But the City and the MLC and Mulgrew and the Insurance companies found a cost savings. (Cost savings mean you get less medical care, or you have a harder time accessing medical care, or you have to pay more out of pocket for medical care. “Cost Savings” is short for “Cost Savings for them, at our expense”)
In any case, the way they are going to charge us more is by declaring everyone to be out of network, with double the copay ($100 instead of $50).
Me? In a dozen years I’ve had six “advanced images” – an emergency CT for what turned out to be kidney stones (twice). One almost needed surgery. Two MRIs for a large tumor, which turned out to be benign (they weren’t sure until they removed it. A CT looking for a foreign object I swallowed. And an MRI looking at a possible issue with my pancreas (false alarm). And every one of those images was done either in the emergency department, because, well fuck. Or in the imaging department of the hospital that my doctor is part of. I have never gone to a third party for a CT, and would never think of doing so.
But this cost savings says that copays double except for preferred providers. And who are those? Sloan Kettering. Hospital for Special Surgery. And RadNet.
Sloan Kettering? That’s Manhattan, with satellites in White Plains, and Long Island?
Hospital for Special Surgery? That’s Manhattan? With one site each in Brooklyn, Queens, and White Plains? And a few on Long Island?
RadNet? What’s RadNet? It appears to be, in the NYC area, Lenox Hill Radiology. 17 sites in Queens. 12 in Manhattan. 17 in Brooklyn. 3 on Staten Island (smallest borough). And 3 in the Bronx.
The Bronx is getting screwed, again, by Emblem and Unity. First, all of our Montefiore copays went up October 1. And then we get disproportionately the fewest “preferred” radiology sites. No Sloan Kettering. No Hospital for Special Surgery. And only three “RadNet” storefront sites.
And what do the Bronx sites look like?
I’m really supposed to get to one of these (at least Little Caesars has parking) rather than use the center associated with my doctor?
Notification?
I got a letter from Emblem on Saturday October 22 informing me of the change. The letter was dated October 20. But I got nothing from the UFT. And the Montefiore changes (which affect me) were effective October 1. Hmm. They billed me the copay on October 17. That’s kind of dicey – before they notified. But they also billed me on September 26, 5 days before the change was supposed to be effective. That’s even dicier. I contacted the Welfare Fund – maybe they can address this positively.
Mulgrew raises copays; Bronx gets hit
UFTers were just notified. I got a letter from Emblem this weekend. It says they are raising copays. I didn’t get a note from the UFT.
Emblem is what I call GHI. New name. But it’s what most of us (UFT teachers) have.
Montefiore used to have services without copays. They took those away. Montefiore is huge in the Bronx. It’s bigger than what most people think – up by Gun Hill, but also over by White Plains Road (Misercordia), huge complex on Eastchester (Einstein) and at Westchester Square (I think that’s new stuff), and on the old Mercy Campus (Waters Place, two towers). That’s a lot of Bronx health care service for UFTers, in September without copays, in October with copays.
Also, they doubled copays for CAT scans and MRIs, except at Sloan Kettering, Hospital for Special Surgery, and something called RadNet. I’ll talk about this more, later. (spoiler alert, we all get screwed, but Bronx teachers get screwed the most).
Do you know what health care savings are? They (insurance companies, Michael Mulgrew, the New York Times) call it savings when 1) you think about going to the doctor, and decide not to and 2) when you pay more (and they pay less) for your visits.
So what do they call it when your copay goes from $50 to $100? Or from $0 to $30? That’s right – the MLC and the UFT leadership call that SAVINGS. Doesn’t feel like savings when it costs me more. How about you?
Last month, we told you of several changes that would impact City of New York GHI CBP Plan members. There have been some minor changes since then. Here is the current guidance:
On Oct. 1, 2022, the following went into effect:
- All Montefiore providers will have a $15 primary care provider (PCP) copay or a $30 specialist copay.
- ProHEALTH Urgent Care centers will have a $100 copay. All other participating urgent care centers will continue to have a $50 copay.
Beginning Nov. 1, 2022, all high-tech radiology imaging procedures received at participating RadNet facilities, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Hospital for Special Surgery will continue to have a $50 copay. All high-tech radiology services received at other participating facilities in New York State will have a $100 copay. Services include, but are not limited to: 3DI, CT Scan, MRA, MRI, Nuclear Medicine, and PET Scan.
https://www.emblemhealth.com/providers/news/cny-benefit-updates-202210
While we are trying to stop the insurance companies, Unity/Mulgrew, and Adams from pushing our retirees into an inferior system (or ransoming us $2300/year to stay in REAL MEDICARE) – don’t forget they can squeeze us in other ways. They can raise copays (this is not the first time), limit access to doctors, limit access to plans. $15, $20, $30, $50, $100, $150. This is not nickel and dime. They are looking to take real money out of your pocket.
Prior Authorization: Who saves? Who loses?
Who saves?
- The City
- The Stabilization Fund
- Michael Mulgrew
- The Insurance Companies
Who pays?
- Soon? Retirees. (unless we stop them)
- Eventually? All of us.
- (and the federal government)
What is the savings?
- To the City? They pay less for our insurance
- To the Stabilization Fund? Less money for us, means more for patronage
- To Mulgrew? The patronage, of course. Plus the powerful politicians and insurance companies pat him on the head.
- To the Insurance Companies? Huge, huge profits. Windfall. And they are clearly LESS efficient than REAL MEDICARE
What is the cost?
- To retirees: Fewer doctors (but Mulgrew says this is false)
- To the Feds? About an extra $320 per senior. This is a straight up subsidy to the parasitic insurance companies.
- To retirees: LESS MEDICAL CARE – that is why they add pre-authorizations – to deny care. (see this story)
Preauthorizations – a cautionary tale
Does Medicare Advantage really hurt? Are preauthorizations really that bad? Read on:
Barry, a recently retired software executive, tells a cautionary tale.
When a gastric issue led the 65-year-old (his name has been changed to protect his privacy) to the hospital this summer, a CT and biopsy revealed pancreatic cancer. His oncologist came to his bedside to discuss next steps.
“We’ll need to do a PET scan to see if the tumor is localized, and that will determine whether we should do chemo or surgery,” he was told. With pancreatic cancer, the oncologist said, “the faster we move, the better.”
But the oncologist frowned. Unfortunately, the scan couldn’t be scheduled for 3 or 4 weeks.
“You’re the Cleveland Clinic,” Barry responded.
“We’re not the problem,” the oncologist replied. “We have to get approval from your insurance. We’ll submit it, they’ll reject it. There’s a lot of back and forth.”
Barry was puzzled. …
“Just to be clear,” he said, “I’m not in Medicare Advantage. I have regular Medicare with a supplemental.”
The oncologist’s “whole demeanor changed.” … The frown became a smile.
“Well then, we can go a lot faster,” he was told.
He got his PET study 3 days later. Barry said a 4-week wait would be intolerable. More importantly, he said, “The sooner I could begin, the less chance the tumor would have to grow or spread elsewhere and become much more difficult to treat.”
MedPageToday https://www.medpagetoday.com/special-reports/exclusives/101213
In other words, health care delayed is health care denied.
This story is from MedPageToday (no paywall, but registration required) – not a hotbed of radicalism. But you don’t have to be radical to be 65 or over. And if that’s you, or if that’s about to be you, the idea of getting blocked from care is frightening.
Thank yous
Robert Jackson’s email said “Thank you, thank you, thank you!” and that made me think back to a blog post from over seven years ago…
After an election politicians address supporters and thank them, no matter the outcome. But now they also send out thank you emails.
Each has a clear thank you:
We knew it was going to be a close election, and while we wait for the final numbers to come in, I want to thank this amazing grassroots team for everything you’ve done. I couldn’t be here without you!
YLN
I look forward to thanking people in person when I get back, but want you to know today that I am so deeply grateful to you for your faith in me and support of my campaign. This is a victory for us all to savor together.
GR
We won our State Senate Re-election Primary, and it was a true team effort. It was your volunteering, your donations, your commitment and your vote that made it happen. I can’t thank you enough.
RJ
And each message carries a tone, or a hint of what comes next:
We’re going to keep working until every single vote is counted and we’ll keep you posted with updates along the way.
YLN. Recount? Run WFP in the general?
… a coalition of concerned neighbors, labor unions, volunteers, and elected and community leaders that successfully stood strong against a deluge of outside spending to make it clear that the Bronx values effective progressive leadership.
GR. Sigh of relief, and a commitment to fight (for progressive issues, sure. But…
Over a million dollars from charter school backers, real estate developers and conservative Republicans was not enough to silence our voice.
Is Gustavo committing to take them on? I hope so!
The special interests can spend all they want against us, but I will never stop fighting for you.
RJ. This is easy. He will stay the course. He has the same commitment today he did two decades ago.
Subject Lines
Let me get to it, why I found one subject line in particular interesting.
I bet on people
Yuh-Line Niou
We Did It Together!
Gustavo Rivera
Thank you, thank you, thank you!
Robert Jackson
So let’s go back.
Robert Jackson co-founded the Campaign for Fiscal Equity. His activism (and a famous walk to Albany) helped secure significantly more funding for NYC schools, in the name of equity. He became a city council person, and then ran unsuccessfully for State Senate, and for Manhattan Borough President. In that State Senate run, 2014, NYSUT (really the UFT) shamefully endorsed his opponent
NYSUT and UFT endorsements recently have been horrid – they neither pick winners, nor people who have our interests at heart. If a NYC writer was going to create a parody of a hapless PAC, they would model it on us. Dumb, and Lousy. But back in 2014 the UFT was better at picking winners… even when they didn’t represent our interests. It was a different sort of bad endorsement policy. Smart and Bad. Robert Jackson was not the only bad endorsement that year. They also went with Andrew Cuomo over Zephyr Teachout.
And how bad was Cuomo? Just a few months later the UFT was building a rally – against Cuomo personally.
I went to that rally. UFT-endorsed Cuomo was the villain. Adriano Espaillat, who the UFT endorsed against Robert Jackson, was a no-show. But I saw a student of mine, an Alum, Audrey Bleier – I said thank you. Zephyr Teachout, not really the UFT’s style, but who would have been better for our interests, obviously, then scumbag Cuomo, was there. I said thank you. And Robert Jackson, who the UFT abandoned, who the UFT helped defeat despite everything he had done for education, he was there. He was there for the schools and the kids and for his principles, despite the UFT organizers’ very poor manners. And I thanked him.
And then I wrote about it. And when I saw Robert’s email on Wednesday, celebrating his victory and acknowledging his volunteers, “Thank you, thank you, thank you!” I thought about seeing him on that cold March day in 2015, which I wrote about with those very words: “Thank you, thank you, thank you.”
Anti-progressives in today’s NY primaries
The New York Times. Centrists. Mainstream Democrats. Moderates. Those with their hands out for big real estate donations, and with their back pockets stuffed by insurance companies. The Anti-Progressives.
They took it on the chin in 2018 – with a wave of progressives winning office. In the NY State Senate the “IDC” – Democrats who kept the Republicans in control – were mostly swept away. In the Bronx, Jeff Klein. In Manhattan, Marisol Alcantara. Tony Avella in Queens. Jesse Hamilton and Jose Peralta in Brooklyn. The newcomers – Alessandra Biaggi, Robert Jackson, John Liu, Zelnor Myrie, and Jessica Ramos – made a dramatic change in how the State Senate did business. In congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez won, followed two years later by Jamaal Bowman.
Of course the biggest kick in the teeth came when they lost their governor. Andrew Cuomo had worked diligently to stop progressive legislation for years, making sleazy deals with the republicans and their IDC allies. He got away with killing old people during the pandemic, and stealing from the taxpayers to write his book – book when sexual harassment and assault charges came out, he was through.
The New York Times, Big Real Estate and the Centrists – the Anti-Progressives – were not happy. And today they are trying to take back some ground. They have poured money and endorsements into several races, to stop progressive candidates from being on November’s ballot. Here are four races I am watching, four progressives the swamp is trying to bring down:
Robert Jackson
Jackson has been one of the fiercest advocates for public education in New York City since his famed 150 mile walk on Albany in 2003 for the Campaign for Fiscal Equity. He has remained an amazing advocate, and marched on Albany a second time. A Lion for Education – I think I called him that, and I meant it. His commitment never wavered, even when the UFT screwed him over, screwed all NYers over, by supporting the IDC against him.
This election the IDC, risen from the grave, is supporting Angel Vasquez, a former aide to an IDC State Senator. Vasquez’s endorsements come along two vectors 1) identity politics (he’s Dominican) and 2) IDC supporters, such as Jeffrey Dinowitz’s son.
Jackson has support of progressive organizations, including the Working Families Party and some politicians. Importantly, the unions, including the UFT, stayed with him. He is the favorite – but this is a low turnout election – please go out and cast your vote for Robert Jackson!
Gustavo Rivera
Gustavo was already a state senator when the IDC got smashed up – but he was on the right side. He is the sponsor of single payer health care in New York State. There is no doubt that he counts as “progressive.” With late redistricting came some surprises – the biggest was that most of Gustavo’s current district was being connected to the Riverdale district (that was Guy Vellela’s, then Jeff Klein’s, now Alessandra Biaggi’s). And Gustavo’s house falls a couple blocks from the border. With Biaggi off running for congress, Gustavo decided to run to continue to represent most of his constituents. But the Bronx machine, including former supporters of Klein and the IDC, saw an opportunity. They put up one of their own, Miguelina Camilo, to oppose Rivera.
The endorsements are split. Dark money is heading to Camilo. The UFT is sticking with Gustavo. In a regular election I’d make him the favorite. But in a low turnout election, where will the vote turn out? The Dinowitzes think they can turn out Riverdale against Gustavo. Can they? It will be close, Gustavo’s internals have him with better than a 10 point lead, but the real numbers are probably much closer, and it could come down to a very tight margin.
Please go out and cast your vote for Gustavo Rivera!
Alessandra Biaggi
Alessandra slew the disgusting dragon. She took Jeff Klein’s seat. And not only did she fight for and win legislation related to women’s issues, she became a true progressive champion, on health care, on taxes, on corruption, on fairness. And then she led the charge against a bigger, even more corrupt sleaze: Andrew Cuomo.
And with original redistricting she was drawn out of her State Senate District, and into a weird 3rd CD North Shore of Long Island + City Island and a few Westchester Shore Towns congressional district, which the incumbent, Tom Suozzi, was vacating, and she decided to go for it. And then when there was re-redistricting, and CD3 no longer had any Westchester, and she looked north.
Now, this part is not IDC. There are two districts, side by side, running north of the city. Mondaire Jones, progressive, has one, and Sean Maloney, anti-progressive, has the other. 17 and 18. And with redistricting, 17 was going to be safe, and 18 was going to be a fight. And Maloney put himself ahead of party, and with strong anti-progressive backing, decided to run in 17, where Jones was living and serving. Wonder why the NY Times didn’t question Maloney essentially handing over the 18th? Yeah, we don’t ask that question. Maloney is powerful within the House leadership, and Jones, quite cowardly, backed down in the face of the bully.
Biaggi saw her spot. She has already slain a disgusting dragon. She led the charge against a second. She is not a coward. She is challenging Maloney. This one is a longer shot. But she needs your support.
Yuh-Line Niou
In a crowded field, the clear progressive. And so dark money and mainstream anti-progressives have been claiming that all of the candidates are the same. And they have been openly backing the most centrist, gazillionaire Dan Goldman. Goldman happens to be friends with the family of the publishers of the NY Times.
And they have been quietly propping up the mainstream/liberals to better divide the vote. They are hoping a three-way divide of the progressive vote will allow Goldman to “win” with under 30%.
There is no question that Yuh-Line is the clear progressive, a clear leader, the clear choice. She has a strong record as a city council person. She has the WFP endorsement. She has been a clear voice for immigrants. And I’ve seen her up here in the Bronx.
In the 10th congressional district primary, every vote will count. Please cast your vote for Yuh-Line Niou.
The Garden in Photos
My school has a small garden. Had. One of our teachers, Tony, now retired, made it a project, starting in 2006. He, or the horticulture club, or the environmental club, planted it and tended it. There were at various times vegetables, and flowers. There was a lot of ground cover. They were looking for biodiversity. There was a butterfly bush dedicated to Yvonne Fiorello, our first Biology teacher. There is a tree dedicated to the principal’s late father. There are raspberry and blackberry bushes, that, at least until a week ago, yielded quite nicely. There is a bench dedicated to Angelina Wills, 2008. Sadly, we dedicated another to Steven Nuñez, 2015. There were ferns, and trees and flowers. Flagstones, benches, a birdhouse… Each year, or so it seemed, Tony pushed the borders of the garden further and further. Things grew in the garden, but the garden itself was growing. Was.
The garden was beautiful, and relaxing, an oasis. It was lush. I hope that someone finds a way to restore it, to reverse the damage the Department of Education did.
Planting, 2008
Graduation, 2022
Some shots from during the pandemic
And today
Subbing
It was 1996. I was finishing the last bit of my degree. After a checkered college career I was earning a BA in Geology. And I didn’t know what to do next. My current job, a “research cartographer” at Hagstrom was interesting and fun and there were good people, but the pay? Couldn’t stay.
My uncle was still in Brooklyn. “What are you going to do?” “I don’t know.” “Why don’t you teach?” “I don’t want to teach.” “What other prospects do you have? You might as well try.”
My degree was done January 1997. I told Terri, my supervisor at Hagstrom that I was leaving. She asked for a letter. I wrote a full heading, and closing – but the text was “I resign effective February 1.” Not quite “The Bronx / No thonks” but pretty short.
I finished my licensing to become a PPT (don’t remember the details, but they were all at Court Street, mostly in the big waiting room to the left as we walked in, and the exciting stuff was in the dark cubicles behind the “information/don’t pass this point” desk), and then…
I wrote to schools, about a dozen I recall, inquiring about mid year openings, or openings for next year. Some academic comprehensive high schools near me. Also one in Manhattan. And some alternative schools. I liked the “idea” of alternative schools, without knowing a thing about them. And some schools with specialties that were not math.
I had an interesting conversation with an AP or the principal at a portfolio school in Manhattan – but that conversation went nowhere. I visited MLK in Manhattan and spent some time with the math AP, talking, observing classes. He showed me an orderly boring class. And he showed me a chaotic class, but where the chaos was kids running around doing math. It was a test. I passed. But there was no opening. I got an interview at Lehman HS. Long story short, math AP seemed to like me, Leder looked at me for about 90 seconds and walked out.
And I got a job at Sylvan Learning Center. Tutoring was something like teaching, right? Well, it turns out, just sort of. But for about-to-be-a-teacher me it felt like the right direction. I was employee of the month one month, and I used that mug until it cracked a few years later.
And I guess when I wrote to schools about jobs I also offered to sub. But I need to step back, just a second. To be able to sub, I needed to be nominated. No problem – that uncle? He had a friend who had been a Bronx alternative school principal, and whose husband was an AP at an alternative school in Manhattan. He was actually sitting in the first building I worked in for the Department of Transportation. And he signed my nomination. So when I contacted schools about jobs, I also must have told them I could sub. And the system always needs subs. The schools needed subs. The calls started.
The first call came from DeWitt Clinton HS. Walking distance. I don’t remember much more than being intimidated by the massive building and throngs of students. I got sent to the math department, where I got a piece of paper with a list of classes, and not much else. Was the woman’s name Mary? I don’t remember. But my first class! It was a computer science class, and they didn’t want a sub with the computers, so I was to meet the students in front of the locked classroom in the “Tower” and escort them to the balcony of the auditorium. There were only ten students there. A boy approached, offered to guide me to the balcony. The hallway was so crowded! But we reached the balcony, and I looked around – the other nine students, I’d lost them! “What happened?” “They left. And me too, I’m going now, mister.” If that scene is the blur, the rest of the day is a blur of a blur. I don’t remember leaving.
The next call was from Christopher Columbus. Actually, that’s walking distance, too, but I hadn’t figured that out yet. Columbus was huge compared to the high school where I had been a student, but much smaller than Clinton. At Columbus they saw I was interested in Science or Math, and pretty exclusively put me in those classes. For a few weeks I would wait each morning – call from Columbus, or a call from Clinton. One snowy day I had an assignment at Columbus and three more schools called.
And then all my assignments started to be at Columbus. The sub coordinator, Tony Brito, started calling me very early. I had made my way up to #2 on the list. Why? Not sure. Young, presentable, showed up? The woman from Clinton called another morning, and I explained that Columbus was calling early…
By the way, going from unemployed to a job with lousy pay, to over $100/day for subbing? I was liking that part, a lot. I started to catch up on my bills.
Most days at Columbus I had math or science classes, but when there wasn’t one of those to cover, they would use me somewhere. But I wasn’t the #1 sub. There was no doubt who the #1 was – a retired cop named Werdann. I can still see his face. Tall, or at least much taller than me. Family of officers. A PS/MS around the corner from me is named after his brother, George, who was killed in the line of duty. One day down at Foley Square there was some odd activity, and I stopped to ask a court office what was going on. I noticed the name below his badge. Werdann. Another brother it turned out.
Most of my work consisted of giving out worksheets, taking attendance, and trying to use my physical presence as a deterrent to mayhem. But the building? There was a “tone” that made things tough. Kids lied about their names, cut when a sub showed. The hallways had lots of kids wandering, at lots of times. But there were also classes with math or science things that I could help with, or at least talk about. A few kids started saying hi – or remembered me from previous coverages. That made me feel good.
One day the APO called the math coordinator – there was a math teacher out on suspension – the coordinator had not thought of me, but the APO had – and they arranged for me to cover his program. A Sequential I (or Course 1) class (NY State’s integrated course with mostly algebra, at the time) for kids close to being on grade level. Another Course 1, – a late in the day class. Most of those kids were taking it for the second or third time. Actually, most never came to class. I remember some of those faces, and the afternoon light in the room. Maybe it was 437 or 439? The students who came kept coming – it actually was a chill room, where it felt like we didn’t get much done, but what we got done was actual progress. Who knows. I remember looking at the sheets that showed up in my mail box – some of those kids were born in the late 70s…
At that time Columbus (and probably most of the Bronx) was starting some freshmen in Course 1, but was starting others in “Presequential” – essentially pre-algebra. The book had gold and white stripes. And the schools were deciding that starting in Presequential put kids at a disadvantage. My last two classes were also Course 1s, for freshmen who might have been on the Course 1/Presequential bubble. They met, between them, three periods a day, 7 or 8 periods a week each. These rooms were wild, out of control.
Think about it. Taking students who struggled with math, trying to advance them – noble, right? But Columbus was running multiple massive sorting operations. And the strongest teachers in the department, and the most challenging classes – they never got near each other. Things got sorted out. Separated. If you know what I mean. So not a great situation? Add to that that they had already had subs for a while. Just imagine. These classes took up 60% of my day, and 90% of my energy. And stress.
These were freshmen, who had not learned that Columbus (wink wink) did not do anything about cutting. So they were there. Most days. I mean there was high absenteeism. But there was relatively high attendance. I did try to teach. I did try to follow some sort of curriculum that had been handed to me. But I had no experience. I did not have classroom presence. Sometimes I raised my voice, which was effectively an admission of failure for that day. I didn’t know what I was doing.
Three girls in particular, they saw how easy it was to push my buttons, and made it their mission. They drove me nuts. Let’s start with them trading names, so I never knew who was who. They were loud, they interrupted, they tried to rev the other kids up. One day I made a cutting comment, not with raised voice, that was very effective. Except, that’s not what a teacher should do. I was an adult, and I think I hurt one of them. That was terrible. Years later I met that student again. She was an adult. I apologized, but she laughed it off, “crazy class.” I met another one of the three – but the story is embarrassing (for her), so not telling. And never encountered the third again.
This haunts me, though. I want to remember things I did, and there’s lots that is interesting or creative or kind or fun, but I can’t forget. I certainly wasn’t the nicest, not all the time, but actually mean? This time. And there was one more time, years later. I do know how to find that student. But I don’t know what to say. Those are the two that stay with me.
I kept covering “my” program for weeks and weeks. Once the coordinator called me in – I had to keep a better eye on the room. It was 448 he was talking about. There were piles of red Course 1 softcovers in the courtyard – he thought students in my class had gingerly slipped them out the window. I don’t know – I didn’t see it – but I didn’t see much. It was probably my class. But mostly things went okay. I tried to teach math, and I wasn’t very good, but I wasn’t horrible.
And then the teacher came back. He marched into the room where I was preparing to take attendance and said “this is my class” and motioned for me to leave. And I did. Gerri told me later that she wanted to let me finish the class, so she could tell me. But that’s not what happened. She did tell me to come back every morning, no need for a call. And I did.
I kept coming to Columbus, every day, for the rest of the spring. I worked through Regents. I met department members. I approached the Chapter Leader, signed a card, and joined COPE. He was surprised, but pleased, and it made an impression. (My uncle, himself a three-term chapter leader, complained that Chapter Leaders have to hunt down members who haven’t joined, so I should make their life easy and just sign up.) When it was time for chapter elections, I helped the election guy, Larry Pendergast, with some of the mechanics. He was one of the younger history teachers – all in their uniforms of white shirts, tie, and slacks. I’ve run into him since, many times, as he rose through the ranks. AP. Principal. Some other stuff. He was in my school this spring for something, and I was so delighted to see him. People don’t rise through the ranks that way anymore, not many, not enough. In my mind he’s still a teacher, still one of us…
The year drew to a close. The Principal, Gerry Garfin, told me he did not have a math opening at that point, but there was a good chance for the fall. “Thank you!” But, he suggested, he could land me a job at a middle school, and that school would release me if Columbus had an opening. “No, not a middle school.” Even the idea of middle school terrified me.
And so I was off for the summer. No summer pay. No job (at some point in the spring I had quit Sylvan). But a strange 40 or 50 or 60 or so days of “teaching” experience, and a foot in the door of a local high school.
How Many Union Offices?
How many union positions have I held?
I was a delegate from Columbus High School. That was maybe from 1998 – 2002? I was a consultation committee member there at the same time. I was deputy chapter leader from 2000-2002.
In 2002 I moved to American Studies (that’s when it opened) and I became Chapter Leader. In 2008 I was added to the UFT Executive Board, and then I was reelected in 2010, 2013, and 2016. I was not reelected in 2019.
And today? How many union offices do I hold today?
High School Vice President
High School teachers chose me to be their Vice President in May. I got most of their votes. But I did not win. Let me explain.
This Spring I ran in the United Federation of Teachers election. I ran for High School Vice President. I lost. The Unity Candidate, Janella Hinds, received 66%. I got 34%. That’s a little less than two-to-one. Actually, it’s a pretty good result for a non-Unity candidate, perhaps the best… since… hmm.
So you can see the numbers. I see the numbers. How can I claim I got more votes? Actually, I don’t claim I got more votes. I claim I got more high school votes. I did.
In 1985 Michael Shulman of New Action beat the Unity candidate, George Altomare, for High School Vice President. When Unity took the seat back they started playing with the constitution. And eventually what they came up with was what you see above – we do not run for “HS Vice President” but for “Vice President At-Large/High School (Academic)”. That “At-Large” business is so that elementary teachers participate in the selection of the HS Vice President. Elementary supports Unity. (or at least it has, up to now). High School does not support Unity.
So among all voters – mostly not high school voters, I received 34%. But in the high schools?
There were 2,508 slate votes for United for Change in the high schools. Most of those are academic high schools. And most of those votes are mine. Unity had 1,981. Most of those are Janella’s. There were perhaps a total of 200-250 non-slate votes. Those would not have made a difference. I got more high school votes. I got around 56% of the high school vote, and lost to someone who got about 44%.
I’m not challenging the election results. I knew what the rules were going in. Unity followed correct procedures in transforming the VPs from representing a division, to being “at large.” But I am challenging Unity’s moral compass. This is one of many seats they control. But because they might lose it in a fair election, they made the rules unfair so they can continue to control it.
If this were a borough-wide election, and the Bronx was going the “wrong way,” would Mulgrew try to change the rules to get Manhattanites to participate in Bronx elections? Because that’s kind of what he does when he has elementary teachers vote for the HS VP.
This is a naked power grab. They know the rules are anti-democratic. They know this is essentially the same garbage the republicans pull all over the country. It is an internal union equivalent of voter suppression. Taking what is not yours because you can and no one can stop you – no need to characterize that.
So yup, I got the most high school votes in the race for High School Vice President. But winning more votes is not enough. I do not hold that office.
Chapter Leader
This one neither.
I served on the consultation committee, as deputy chapter leader, and as delegate at Christopher Columbus HS in the Bronx. That was from 1997 – 2002. And then I transferred to a new school in September 2002. I became Chapter Leader. And I held that position, twenty full years, until today.
Twenty years, by the way, is a good chunk of time. I was the longest-serving high school chapter leader in the city. I have no idea who the new longest-serving hs chapter leader will be – but I’m willing to bet they have about half my years.
And Chapter Leadering is hard, without compensation. It’s just something those of us who do it, do.
I announced my resignation to my members two weeks ago. And it was going to be effective Thursday, but I made it at the end of the day today. Here’s the letter I typed (and yes, that is my lousy typing):
How Many?
So how many union offices do I hold today? Not Chapter Leader. Not HS VP.
Zero.
The Day They Applauded
Every teacher should have one of these. I wrote this eleven and a half years ago:
This year I teach calculus. For the first time. Never wanted it – less challenging since the kids can already do math. Ugly pressure from yet another standardized test (Advanced Placement). And I kind of liked the electives, and liked the challenge of the younger kids.
But here I am, knee-deep in dy and dx and all that fancy sort of stuff. Since I’m teaching AP, I must be smart? Not particularly. But it is the last math course in my school, the only one I haven’t taught.
About three weeks ago a moment had arrived. We had played with finding the slope of a tangent line to a curve at a point. And with limits. And with all the other little pieces. We were ready to find the derivative of a function, using the definition. More than ready. I had delayed them two or three days.
So there we were, with ten minutes left in a class, finding for the first time the slope of the tangent line not at a particular point, but at any point. I made them give me each step. “Oh, no!” I panicked, each time we hit an obstacle, “We’re stuck!” and each time someone in the class would point out that we had already resolved that situation in a previous lesson, and told me what to do.
“Oh no, there’s only five minutes left!” “Oh no, we’re not close enough to x!” “Oh no! Oh no! Oh no!”
As I pushed faster and further, I got more panicky. “Oh no!” I shouted, again and again. “Oh no! Zero over zero, we’re stuck!” “You can factor” a chorus responded. And as I panicked they found the value of the limit, and an expression popped out. And I rapidly exclaimed: Now we know the slope of the tangent, not at one specific point, but at any point on the graph!
It was a speed drill, with the kids playing along 100%. A clear derivation sat on the board. “Ladies and gentlemen” I gasped “the period is not quite done, but I am” I leaned on the table in front of me, and caught my breath.
And then I heard a sound, something hitting something else. And it repeated, and multiplied.
Better teachers than me have gone through whole careers without getting applause for a lesson. It took me two days to wipe the grin off my face.
Graduation 2007
This is a reprise of a 15 year old post. We (HSAS, my school) graduated our 17th class today. When this post was written, I had just spoken to our second class of graduates.
This year I was asked by the senior class to give the keynote address. Here is the prepared text (though I deviated from it quite a bit)
Class of 2007, as I look out at your faces, at your caps and gowns, I see before me doctors and lawyers, architects and engineers, teachers and businesspeople.
But that’s not enough.
(much more below the fold —>) Read more…
The beginning
In 1994 work was ok – it was interesting, flexible, I liked the people. I liked my supervisor, Pat. Rich and Elliot were friendly and funny. Seth was smart. Stuey, too. Smart. And funny. There were others, lots of characters. And I liked the office – primo view of Brooklyn Heights, with the Coast Guard ferry blaring its horn every so often. I want to say every 20 minutes, but it wasn’t THAT often.
I didn’t have a degree, and wasn’t in school. I’d left my most recent college after the fall of 1991. I kind of knew what I was doing at work – but I either was making it up, or asking others. There was a lot of math. And spreadsheets. Though I don’t think Excel existed yet. I was pretty good at Minesweeper.
I’d gotten the job 8 years earlier. Late Spring, 1986. My uncle talked to me then. I was new to New York. And like many who’ve adopted the city as their own, I fell in love with it. Or parts of it. And in particular, though I was a young man, I was still a boy, and the trains held great attraction. I went everywhere on them. So my uncle helped get me a job. He had a connection. I went to work for the New York City Department of Transportation. It wasn’t the trains, but it was cool. My first real NYC summer job. And then it was the fall, and they asked if I would work the same hours in the fall. It wasn’t a summer job.
Another tangent – the particular agency within NYCDOT was new. It was 1986, and there had been quite a bit of angst over the Koch scandals, which hit DOT hard. Remember Wedtech? And the Parking Ticket computers? Well, there was more than that. Tony Amoruso, the recently ex Commissioner, was out on his ass, due to another scandal, involving private ferries and land for a parking lot, and perjury. And clusters of friends were being shuffled across the five boroughs. So I was walking into a new office, at a time when it was not just me and the office that were new. Reorganization. Shift the deck chairs. My chair was at 51 Chambers. I liked that chair.
Fast forward. It’s now 1994 and I’m doing ok. And having some fun. Still liked the people. But the pay wasn’t great. My projects weren’t going anywhere. I wasn’t all that attached. In more ways than one. I was relatively newly single again.
And it’s 1994, and Giuliani is in office. And my uncle’s connection had moved to another, cleaner metropolis. And the people I knew who could protect me – not any more. And I didn’t know what reorganization or shuffling would come, and if I was safe. Plus, no degree. Being cute (if I was) wasn’t going to save me.
So when Giuliani’s people offered a buyout for a few grand, I thought it over, and said yes. Looking back, it was peanuts. But we don’t get to look back and change our past mind. I took the buyout. It came with 9 months or a year unemployment. I went back to school. And then the unemployment ran out, and I picked up a shitty receptionist job in SoHo. And I quit that, and got a job making maps. Hagstrom. Cool work. But the pay. Ouch.
And now it was 1996 and I was finishing the last bit of my degree. Math? Nope. In my checkered college career I had been a math major. And physics. And Русский язык и Русская литература. But fourth time’s the charm – I was finishing up with a BA in Geology. With Honors.
My uncle was still in Brooklyn. “What are you going to do?” “I don’t know.” I was good with the maps, but I had taken a pretty big pay cut. Started maybe at $18k. Now at $21k, or $22k? I forget, but it wasn’t enough, despite how awesomely cool it is to make up my own streets and put them onto maps.
“What are you going to do?” “I don’t know.” “Why don’t you teach?” My uncle had been at a middle school in Brownsville. And at Jefferson. He transferred to Murrow in the second year of that school’s existence, and loved it and taught interesting things and was even chapter leader for a few terms. Now he was retired, but still teaching literature classes for senior citizens.
“Why don’t you teach?” “I don’t want to teach.” “Do you have any other prospects?”
And so it began. February 1997.
The Retiree Vote
The May results from the United Federation of Teachers elections seem clear:
- Unity won overall, but with a lower percent than in the past
- The united opposition won the high schools (not a big surprise) and came fairly close in the middle schools (not a big surprise for me, but it may have been for others).
Analysis of in-service vote totals also seems clear:
- Unity lost votes. This continues a clear and dramatic two decade trend
- The united opposition did almost, but not quite as well as MORE and New Action did two elections previous.
- Unity and the opposition do not directly compete for votes. Rather, each side struggles to engage their own potential voters.
Retirees
But I have intentionally set aside the retiree vote. It is more complicated in 2022. There’s a few structural reasons:
- Retirees are not involved in day to day union decisions. They are not (for the most part) in schools or classrooms. Arguments about MOSL or mayoral control are, for the most part, do not move retirees.
- Retirees (I strongly believe) continue to vote or not vote, according to whether they voted or did not vote in the last election before they retired. (Turnout among retirees is inelastic.)
- Retirees who vote continue to vote for the same group they voted for before they retired. (Preference among retirees is not elastic.)
- The retiree voting pool shifts differently than in-service members. I will in the near future retire. I will join the Retired Teachers Chapter (RTC). I will start voting in UFT elections, probably as I have voted in past elections. And at some point, I hope several decades in the future, I will pass on.
There’s also more data:
- There are retiree-wide elections in addition to the UFT’s general elections – the Retired Teacher Chapter (RTC) holds a full slate vote the spring before. I have data from 2018 and 2021.
And there’s something new for 2021-2022, the eight-hundred pound gorilla that Unity let into the room:
- Medicare. Medicare Advantage. Medicare Advantage Plus. Mulgrewcare. For the first time – perhaps ever – there was an issue on the table that moved retirees.
The Data
A note: Retiree votes are “capped” by the UFT Constitution. It is weird (it is) that members who are not in-service have such a large say over what happens to members in service. Conversely, when there are big retiree issues – which are rare – but Medicare! – that’s when retirees should have much more of a say. In any case, even the writers of the UFT constitution (Unity) know it would look weird for retirees to dominate the voting. So they created a “cap.” Up through 2010, if retiree votes exceeded 18,000, then they would be scaled down to 18,000. Unity, which we think of as having a “lock” on retiree votes, raised the cap to 23,500 for the 2013 election.
For 2004 and 2007 I have the vote totals after the cap was applied. That means that the percentages are correct, but the raw numbers were proportionately a bit higher.
Here’s the percents:
Here’s the numbers (remember 2004 and 2007 I have scaled, no actual)
And here are the RTC 2018 and 2021 numbers and percents:
The graph initially looks a bit of a jumble:
By combining all non-Unity votes, things smooth out. We have 6 stable cycles.
Including the RTC numbers makes it look like there are jumps – but really it’s just that turnout is a bit lower for RTC elections. (although not that much lower)
Since there is overall stability, looking at percents is not misleading.
In fact now we see what we thought: Unity has won 82% – 89% of the retiree vote, until now. And they have usually been in the upper half of that range. They fell to 70-71 when the Medicare Advantage Plan was announced. They lost votes in the RTC election that Spring. Retiree Advocate members said that word had barely gotten out, and expected another jump this election. That didn’t happen. News about Medicare had an immediate impact on retirees who heard about it, and we seem to have seen most of that shift immediately, in the RTC 2021 election.
A little refinement: Since we have two RTC elections’ worth of data, can that be analyzed? It’s not really enough for deep analysis. But after the 2018 RTC, Unity vote rose 34% and after 2021 it only rose 19%. That’s about 2500 missing votes. So there is some additional underperformance on the Unity side in 2022 that this chart does not capture.
Some Guesses
What does it mean? I see Unity having “lost” 2600 votes in the RTC election in 2021, and another 1000 in this Spring’s election. United for Change/Retiree Advocate seems to have picked up about 3000 votes in the 2021 RTC election, and another 1000 or so this Spring.
Unlike the other divisions, there were a significant number of retirees who switched sides. There are also Unity voters who chose not to vote. And there were first time voters who voted for Retiree Advocate or UfC (and against Unity). I do not think there is enough evidence in the numbers to know how many Unity voters sat it out, how many switched sides, and how many votes RA/UfC picked up that were new voters, and how many we captured from Unity.
As a guess? Retiree Advocate and United for Change may have pulled in 2000 new votes, and taken 2000 votes from former Unity voters. Unity may have had about 1600 who did not send in ballots. Or it could be 1000 new and 3000 switches, with 600 Unity voters not voting. It’s hard to know without more data. Anecdotally, I know a significant number of first time voters voting for United for Change, and I know over a dozen former Unity voters who first time voted against Unity. I only know 2 Unity voters who did not vote. But my sample? These are people I know. Not a random sample.
Medicare Advantage – Lasting Impact?
More data, which will come with future elections, may reveal more of the picture. Future elections will also help us understand how permanent these changes are. Will retirees drift back to Unity? Or has their faith in the leadership been not only shaken, but broken?
For over a generation UFT retirees have not been strongly motivated to vote. What Bloomberg did to the schools did not affect retirees. Those with a strong political agenda – perhaps aligned with New Action, voted that way. Those with connections – perhaps a current or former job, or deep friendships and relationships within Unity, voted that way. But the understanding, the deal – retirees did not have to worry because the union would forever protect their pensions and their healthcare – that deal seems to have been broken.
Can Unity drop Medicare Advantage Plus, and convince retirees that this was all a misunderstanding? Can Unity force Medicare Advantage through, and will retirees find that the cuts are not so bad? (I can’t see that happening). Is there a way for Unity to win back the trust they violated? Those questions remain open.
Why Give Regents Exams?
Set US Regents aside. Here’s a better question: Why give Regents at all?
The US History Regents – a New York State graduation requirement, was cancelled last week. It had to do with a problematic question. Here’s Chancellor Betty Rosa’s official explanation. As I explained, the explanation falls way short.
But why any Regents. This could just be a question about your attitude to tests. I don’t like tests. That guy there likes them. We disagree. And I don’t like them, in general. But that’s a facile response. Let’s ask a real question.
Why give a test? Why take a test?
Each test we give, or we take, there is some reason.
We take driving tests so we can have a license. We take the SATs (or we used to) so we can submit scores to colleges, who consider them (or used to). We take AP exams (or we used to) to earn college credit (not it appears that most students take them without hope of earning credit, but in order to impress colleges that they took a hard course).
Teachers give quizzes to watch for progress on specific skills. We give unit tests to assess mastery of a unit of study. (Don’t get me started on pre-tests. No teacher who is not brain-washed would ever voluntarily waste children’s time and cause such angst if it were up to us). And we give final exams to measure cumulative knowledge of a course of study.
Students do not say “I’d rather not learn today. Can we have a test?” And teachers do not easily give up class time for teaching and learning. Teachers generally have a specific goal in mind when we give tests (did they learn the difference of perfect squares) or objective (have they gotten more familiar with regents-type questions). No teacher I have ever met has said “I don’t feel like teaching today. Let me give a test” or “reason? no reason. I just felt like giving it to them.”
But this “why are you giving this test?” question, the Regents fails that test.
It was different before. Regents exams were required for a subset of New York State students who were earning an academic diploma – many students were earning other types of diplomas – mostly “local.” The Regents exams were course completion exams – a way of norming the more academic courses across the state. The Regents measured your cumulative knowledge of a coherent course of study.
Regents for all? – gonna need new tests
When New York State made Regents Diplomas the only option for the vast majority of New York State students – that changed. Pouring students who a few years earlier would not have been looking for Regents diplomas into Regents track changed the world. Either many of those students would have great difficulty succeeding, or the tests would have to become easier to pass. Which would mean that the tests would need to change.
New York State claimed they were changing how teachers taught – but in the spirit of “watch what they do, not what they say” – they made the claim while they were replacing the old tests with new tests that more students would pass.
New York State rapidly moved to standards-based testing – and wherever you stand on standards-based testing – that doesn’t matter for this conversation. New York State went to standards-based testing because it reduced the content knowledge required to pass each test.
The three math exams had already been going through a strange transformation, as algebra, geometry and trig were replaced with integrated courses: Course I, Course II, and Course III, none of which presented students with a full-year coherent course of study. Integrated math was almost two decades old when everyone was pushed to get Regents diplomas.
The two “advanced” math exams and the advanced science exams (chemistry and physics) changed the least. These (esp physics and chem) are still somewhat culminating exams from a full year coherent course of study – and they may play something like the role that Regents used to play in general.
Commencement Level
But five exams are now “commencement level” exams – that is, graduation requirements: Algebra, one Science (usually Earth Science or Living Environment), Global History, US History, and English.
These are gate-keepers – they measure whether or not the student should be granted a high school diploma. But wait, isn’t each exam tied to a course? So each exam measures learning from a coherent full year (or 2-year, in the case of Global) course of study. But no – Algebra is no longer a coherent course. And English is not tied to a course. So these measure readiness to graduate?
Let’s think, for a moment, the math we would expect a high school graduate to be able to do. Almost none of it is on the Algebra Regents. So – “commencement level” – nah, just doesn’t make sense. And it is not anchored in a coherent course. The Algebra regents does not measure mastery of Algebra – So what is the exam? And if we do not know what it is – is it a commencement level measure of knowing enough math to function in society – nope – it is course end exam to measure mastery of algebra – nope – So if we do not know what it is, why give it?
That’s the easiest. But there is no evidence that ANY of these five exams measure what we should expect of a high school graduate. Nor do any (except perhaps Living Environment) measure mastery of the material from a coherent course.
Why give Regents?
If we do not know what we are trying to measure, then why give the test?
If we want “commencement level” exams, then let’s decide what students should know, as a minimum, when they graduate – and build assessments – tests if they have to be – that measure those skills and that knowledge. If we want course mastery exams, then let’s replace what New York State currently mandates with coherent courses.
My first guess? Right where we started – I don’t think New York State should be in the business of making and administering these exams. They are lousy at it. And they cannot answer “why do we give these?”
If we give them, and they measure readiness to graduate…
By my second take – if these are “commencement level” exams, then let’s treat them as if they measure whether a student is ready graduate – and grade them more appropriately: Yes or No. Ready to graduate, or not ready. Take away all the stress over what the score is – it doesn’t matter anyhow.
Seriously. Colleges don’t use the grades (except some CUNYs or SUNYs, and only to avoid remedial placement, and they could figure that out with some other assessment). It would simplify grading (and end most disputes over single points). It would reduce test prep in some classrooms, and return hours of instruction (that teacher would rather be doing, and that students benefit more from). Win, win, win…
Get rid of the Regents. But if we can’t dump them, at least change them into Pass / Not Yet Passing.
Was Buffalo “unexpected context”?
The US History Regents – a New York State graduation requirement, was cancelled this week. A question was somehow likely to upset students just confronted with the white supremacist massacre in Buffalo. The New York State Education Department wrote “the tragedy in Buffalo has created an unexpected and unintended context” as they announced the cancellation. They are also starting the process to exempt students who would have taken this exam from this graduation requirement.
The exam was written two years ago, and shelved during the pandemic. There was apparently a question which invoked, in part, the Second Amendment.
Challenge: The New York State Education Department, in the person of Commissioner Betty Rosa, wrote that Buffalo created an “unexpected… context.” I am calling out their questionable honesty. Mass shootings are not an “unexpected context” in the United States, not anymore.
Challenge: The New York State Education Department, in the person of Commissioner Betty Rosa, wrote that Buffalo created an “unexpected… context.” I am calling out their questionable honesty. White supremacist violence against others is not an “unexpected context” in the United States. It has, tragically and sadly and infuriatingly never been unexpected here.
All history is the story of struggle and conflict. But unlike whatever was wrong in Ancient Rome or the Indus Valley, US History is with us today. The Ottoman Empire kidnapped children to become janissaries which was awful, but the practice, and then the Empire, ended. This is history. But discrimination, loss of freedom, and violence are realities that many Black people and other groups face on an ongoing basis in the United States today.
United States History is not traumatizing because someone was going to ask a bad question. It is traumatizing, for many, because someone asked a good question.
And the only way to make the study of United States history not be traumatizing is to teach the next generation not just what happened in the past, but how to change it in the future.
But how do we teach young people to change history, if we have been lousy at changing it ourselves? I’m a step ahead. The beginning is to recognize that the – we can’t call it “unexpected context” – the beginning is to recognize that the “uncomfortable context” is United States history, current politics, and conditions, themselves.
Protect our health care?
I like emails that open with “Protect our health care.” Retirees have recently engaged in a massive struggle to protect their health care – all of our future health care. They fought against New York City, the Municipal Labor Coalition, predatory insurance companies, and Michael Mulgrew.
So I liked this morning’s email from NYSUT
But NYSUT? Andy Pallotta? Works with Mulgrew and the UFT? What do they mean by “Protecting Retiree Health Insurance?
Well, the note says
“a recent court decision potentially limits unions’ ability to protect access to health care for retired public employees across the state.”
Now, if he is referring to the recent decision that made it harder for Mulgrew to force retirees off of Medicare… But is he?
Is there another case that NYSUT is asking us to lobby to fix? Or is NYSUT asking us to lobby on behalf of the MLC, the insurance companies, and Michael Mulgrew?
Protecting Retiree Health Insurance
Unions have — for decades — fought for retiree health coverage in our courts. However, a recent court decision potentially limits unions’ ability to protect access to health care for retired public employees across the state. Our retirees need a legislative fix.
We’re simply asking for the return of the same level playing field that existed prior to this court ruling. Both unions and employers must retain their right to argue their positions around a retiree health care dispute before a court. Our state legislators can guarantee this right and reduce the risk of unnecessary disputes over retiree health insurance benefits. Everyone wins.
Our retirees depend on unions’ ability to fight for them in court. Protecting retirees means protecting this ability.
Take action now!
In solidarity,
I am suspicious – but I do not know. This could be unrelated to our struggle to protect Medicare from Mulgrew.
Can we dig up some details?
JD2718 