MORE’S HEALTH JUSTICE WORKING GROUP RESPONDS TO UFT LEADERSHIP’S CONCERNS ABOUT THE NEW YORK HEALTH ACT

UFT leadership must be terrified of actually doing the work and conducting contract negotiations without using healthcare as a bargaining chip. They must be terrified that if they can’t dangle (ever-diminishing) healthcare benefits in front of members, they will lose membership. All evidence points to these reasons as to why they are dishonest with members about healthcare. Let us explain.

On March 15th, 2024 our Health Justice Working Group of the Movement for Rank and File Educators (MORE-UFT) sat down with UFT leadership and State Senator Gustavo Rivera, the current sponsor of the New York Health Act (NYHA), to discuss the bill. Senator Rivera outlined how NYHA would deliver comprehensive healthcare benefits to every New Yorker without co-pays, deductibles and prior authorizations while saving New York State billions. He emphasized how public sector employees would have additional perks under NYHA, making it a better plan for the rank-and-file. In-state retirees would gain long-term care, and out-of-state retirees would remain on their current plan that they fought so hard to keep. He stated his willingness to work with the UFT to address their concerns and gain their support for the legislation. Since that March meeting, the UFT has published an article on their website explaining their concerns about the NYHA bill. See our responses below:

UFT’s Concerns	Debunked!
The projected costs needed to create a New York State health care system for all are very high and much of the money will be sourced from tax increases. The impact of the cost burden on New Yorkers has not been properly assessed in the plan.	The city would still contribute 100% for Public service workers (us) exempting us from the payroll tax, It is anticipated that 90-98% of all New Yorkers will pay less than their current health care costs. See stats here: Rand report, UMASS report. Internationally, countries that have universal health care spend LESS than countries with a privatized model and they have better health outcomes.
The UFT has many members who live out of state, and the plan does not properly say when or how any out-of-state employees or retirees will be covered. We have no way of knowing what that coverage or the out-of-state network would look like for those members.	NOTHING changes for members that move out of state. The bill states: “For every retiree, while he or she is not a resident of New York state, the appropriate public employee retiree health benefit program shall maintain the retiree public employee retiree health benefit as if this article had not been enacted.”
The NYHA will be controlled by a panel of 31 appointed members. Only three of those seats will provide union voice in decision making. We are concerned that unions will not have a say in the type of coverage or benefits that city employees will get.	Right now UFT and DC37 have complete control over MLC which negotiates our current health plan, and with this power they have pushed retirees toward a widely unpopular Medicare Advantage plan, only backing down after losing the Retired Teacher Chapter Election. The remaining non-labor board appointees would not be greedy insurance companies, but advocates for low income families and individuals, people with disabilities, representatives of community health centers, home care providers, professional organizations representing physicians, general (including public) hospitals, and appointees of the governor. Service provider representatives would include those that have demonstrated expertise in health care finance, organized labor, and employers who pay the payroll tax.

We believe UFT leadership’s real concerns run deeper than those provided in their article/FAQs. Fighting for a NYHA plan would mean shifting their contract bargaining strategy away from making concessionary deals to mobilizing the rank and file and harnessing the original and true power of the union: to fight for the common good. In the MLC letter dated May 5th, 2021 to State Senate Majority Leader Andrea Stewart-Cousins they describe their resistance to NYHA, their willingness to exclude UFT members from a statewide healthcare bill, and admit to this concessionary style:

Over these years we have also sacrificed wage increases to advance quality care and maintain the current cost structure. Workers have already “paid” for their benefits. Indeed, because of this economic tradeoff, we previously suggested that MLC-member workforces be carved out of the statewide bill. Unfortunately, that suggestion has not been included in the current bill.

With rising copays, ER visits, and major providers such as CityMD, Montefiore, and almost all radiology centers no longer considered ‘preferred,’ our costs continue to rise for what we have already paid for. What more do we have to give up?

Let's compare and contrast some of the recent contracts negotiated in Massachusetts with New York’s latest contract. Keep in mind: both MA and NY have laws prohibiting striking by public sector workers.

Massasschusetts	New York
Somerville, MA won a 75% pay increase for paraprofessionals over 2 years, and 12 weeks of paid parental leave	UFT gave paras a handbook, continued poverty-level wages, and told paras they can't negotiate anything that would cost money
In Andover, MA, (“illegally”) striking teachers won paid family medical leave, an extra personal day, fewer staff meetings, and the extension of lunch and recess times for elementary students.	In the UFT’s latest contract, we continue to have only 6 weeks parental leave, after which members face a Byzantine web of trying to navigate back into payroll, which almost always results in gaps in pay. UFT members also lose their healthcare (and that of their baby) if they take any longer than 12 weeks of leave. UFT officers regularly carve out exceptions from NYS laws and mandates– the NYS law for paid parental leave provides 2 months of paid leave, which is more than what the UFT has negotiated! Why would a unionized worker have LESS paid parental leave than a non-unionized worker?
Teachers in Newton, MA went on strike and won better pay, lower student to staff ratios, and lower student to social worker ratios.	In our last contract, UFT officers got us a below-inflation wage increase, refused to tie the NYS class size law into our contract, and have not put a social worker in each school, despite record mental health crises in young people across the city.

After (and during!) a pandemic that saw hundreds of thousands of people die in NYC alone, what better time will there be to advocate for universal health coverage? Has it ever been more clear that school workers' health and community members' health is bound together? Instead of continuing discussions to support and craft a bill that would address their concerns, UFT leadership is publicly lamenting their stuck points.

We have seen the retirees successfully resist and reject the effort to trade away their healthcare through the courts-- so far, 9 separate times, the court has upheld their right to premium free healthcare. For the safety and health of all workers, their families, and students, we demand healthcare for all. The time is now. Our union’s power lies in wielding and withholding our labor, not in negotiating away our healthcare benefits.

We need leaders with strong negotiation skills to represent us at the bargaining table. Leaders who open the bargaining process and do not have members of the negotiation committee sign NDAs, who are willing to activate membership to support these bargaining negotiations beyond impotent CAT teams, but a strike-ready, force-to-be-reckoned-with, union. We don’t want to pay the salary of over $300,000 for a president to facilitate a transactional, backdoor dealing, concessionary approach to something as fundamental as our lives. We demand better for our colleagues, students, and communities. UFT needs to sit down with Senator Rivera and hash out the details so that all New Yorkers can have the healthcare they need.

Do you like this post?

Reactions

Sign in with

Facebook

Lisa Levesque commented 2024-07-16 12:38:51 -0400
Thank you for this post! I particularly appreciate the “UFT Concerns-Debunked!” and the “MA-NY” comparisons because they helped me better understand the NYHA, and remind me of how important striking can be as a tactic to get what we deserve, respectively.