Unity Caucus Newsletter

May 31, 2024 - The pitfalls of comparing union benefits | DOEs Draft Class Size Reduction Plan Falls Short | In the News: Overheated Classrooms + Learning the Right Lessons From the UAW Loss in AL

May 31, 2024

Welcome!

Welcome to the inaugural edition of our Unity Caucus Newsletter! As education workers and unionists, we dedicate this space to sharing ideas, information, and connecting with each other as we fight for the schools our kids deserve!

Stay informed and connected—subscribe today!

In Unity!

Breaking Down the Numbers: Why Comparing Union Benefits Isn't Always Apples to Apples

By Geof Sorkin

The following is the report Geof Sorkin, the Executive Director of the UFT Welfare Fund, gave at the executive board and delegate assembly

I understand that there was lively discussion at the last DA and that people would like to see enhancements with our dental benefit. It is something we have been working on given the complexity of dental health care in an unregulated market. Small enhancements come with big increases in cost.

Changes need to be done right, involving multi year projections to ensure costs can be sustainable. An unexpected spike in costs could impact our ability to pay for our other benefits. When the next life-saving miracle drug comes out, we want our members to have access to it.

It’s misleading that some keep comparing our benefits with other NYC unions. You cannot compare the dental benefits of one union to another without looking at both Fund’s full benefit package. Every union has different priorities and our Welfare Fund (WF) trustees have prioritized prescription benefits.

There are some within the UFT that hold another union as the gold standard for dental care. It may be that their reimbursement to dentists is higher than ours; but I don’t want to be the organization spending the most per reimbursement, I want to use our large size to get more bang for the buck.

I don’t like it when union Funds are compared as each union makes their own unique decisions In WF benefits; When you look at our benefit package, our trustees have rightly prioritized prescription drug coverage. That is our Fund’s biggest expense with dental right behind it. We have protected guardrails limiting how much an in-network dentist can charge; the union we are compared to does not have those protections, whether in or out of network dentists there can charge whatever they want.

Our robust prescription drug benefit features low copays. A 30-day supply of drugs will either cost you $5, $15, or $35. Those low copayments are something we should be proud of. The other union that we keep getting compared to has a percentage cost share. That means that depending upon where their members fill a drug, they pay out of pocket between 20% to 35% of the cost of that drug. Drugs are expensive! It is common to take medications that cost several hundred, if not several thousand dollars. Once the other union pays $10,000 on behalf of a member, the member’s cost share jumps to 50%. When the other union pays $15,000 on a member’s behalf, their cost share jumps to 80%!

Eliquis is a common medication used to treat and prevent blood clots. When filled under UFT Welfare Fund coverage, a 30-day supply costs $15. Without any insurance, a 30-day supply costs about $500. When filled under the other union’s 20% cost share it costs $100.

Nurtec is a common medication used to treat migraines. When filled under UFT WF coverage, a 30-day supply costs $15. Without any insurance, a 30-day supply costs either $1,000 or $2,000 dollars (it depends on the quantity needed). When filled under the other union’s 20% cost share it costs $200-$400.

The UFT Welfare Fund has an extensive formulary of medication that we cover. We are proud to provide access and to cover medication that others will not.

Three specialty medications we cover include:

Mavenclad is used to treat Multiple Sclerosis. Once approved under UFT WF coverage, a 30-day supply costs a member $35. Without any insurance, it costs about $1.2 million dollars annually. When filled under the other union’s coverage, a member’s 80% cost share is $931 thousand dollars.

Orenitram is used to treat Pulmonary Hypertension. Once approved under UFT WF coverage, a 30-day supply costs a member $35. Without any insurance, it costs about $1.6 million dollars annually. When filled under the other union’s coverage, a member’s 80% cost share is $1.3 million dollars.

Those two examples are the second and third most expensive medications currently covered by the UFT Welfare Fund. The most expensive, Isturisa, is used to treat endocrine disorders. Once approved under UFT WF coverage, a 30-day supply costs a member $35. Without any insurance, it costs about $2.4 million dollars annually. When filled under the other union’s coverage, a member’s 80% cost share is $1.9 million dollars. I don’t know any municipal workers that can afford that cost. Is it fair to say a drug is covered when no one can afford the copayment?

UFT WF also does not cap prescription costs. It does however cap the out-of-pocket copays a family in the plan has annually at $1,000. Once reached there will be no further copays for generic or preferred brand drugs. I don't see that comparison being made. Why? Because to do so would not serve those who would mislead, or misdirect membership to undermine the superior benefits we enjoy as UFT WF members.

Don't be misled into comparing benefits of one union to others. We work hard to present a strong benefits package! We will continue to do so!

DOE’s Draft Class Size Reduction Plan earns an Incomplete

Every year the DOE is required to submit a plan to the state that that explains how the city will maintain compliance with the class size reduction laws phase in requirements (20% per year until full implementation). As part of this process their is a public comment period for the city’s draft plan. Public comment hearings were held in each borough between May 22nd and 30th. At these hearings educators, advocates and parents spoke out on the inadequacies of the city’s draft plan. The vast majority of speakers pointed out that the city’s draft was both vague and lacked ambition. Speakers called on the city to develop and implement a multi-year plan that includes how schools will receive funding to hire and/or retain the needed staff to comply with the class size law. Many also pointed out how the draft plan fails to include details on how schools in need of space will achieve compliance. A number of educators stated that if this was their classroom they would return the draft to the city marked “Incomplete”.

Day 1, Period 1

The following testimony was delivered by Unity Caucus member Vinny Corletta at the Queens C4E hearing on May 29th, 2024. Vinny teaches Middle School in Queens and also serves as the UFT Chapter Leader at his school.

“I am so excited for this law. I think this is a chance to have an immediate impact- day 1 period 1.

I’m here to talk about the future. Because this class size law is not only about the here and now but also the future. Years ahead when this law reaches its final stages, when it makes the city make plans to actually focus on building schools and places for students. The plan set forth is not adequate enough for a year let alone the future.

This law gives students and educators have the chance to form deep connections, deeper learning.

Where are the moves to put this law into action- I am an educator - I get rated on planning. If the doe would have spent energy to start on this plan when the law was signed instead of pushing back we would be in better shape.

Our education system has turned so hostile to the citizens of the classroom

That students don’t even know that educator to student is so powerful. I see fair student funding but I see no plans I see no path.

All the funding and space issues derive from the DOE.

I see smaller classes in a microscopic and massive perspective. I see 23 students in my class where we learn why poetry is in our blood. Where civics is our duty. Where every student has that chance to make that one connection that can change a generation, and we talk about money and space? We speak about the doe pushing back back against this even though improving literacy can actually happen. Not by a curriculum but by the people in the room.

I am concerned about this plan. Because it doesn’t seem like a plan at all. This wouldn’t even be an ineffective on Danielson this would be a not observed.

I remember a few years ago a man from Queens was saying if we do not educate we will incarcerate. I haven’t heard him say that in a long time. I say there aren’t many times where a law can make an immediate impact, but this one can. Day 1, period 1 this law gives us the future we all want.”