News From OSA - April, 2022

Many of our mailings start off by discussing progress on negotiations.

NEGOTIATIONS... Even though our main unit contract ended in September of 2021, we will not be resuming bargaining immediately on our next contract.

We do have a variety of other contracts to complete, all of which will follow the pattern of the 2017 to 2021 contract. Currently outstanding are our Transit Authority contract, our Department of Education contract, and the contract for our uniformed forces within the Police Department.

The Housing Authority has made a practice of not concluding a new contract for non-monetary issues with any union for the past quarter century. We will ask again but, meanwhile, they did accept the monetary terms of our main unit contract.

The three contracts that we expect to conclude are being handled by a collective bargaining team headed by Adam Orgel, our Grievance Chairperson. All negotiations seem to be going well so far.

Members have asked when OSA will begin our next main unit contract talks. We cannot know when, but we do know the factors that may determine when.

First, members should understand that negotiating before a contract runs out is uncommon with New York City. The City does not wish to negotiate, seriously, in advance and has not done so for most City unions for over a half century and more.

A candidate for Mayor, Abraham Beame, once explained why the City chose to drag its feet in negotiations. Since he was already Comptroller for New York City, he had reason to know.

The City, he explained, was never sure of its income far in advance. The City had excellent estimates and predictions but, in fact, did not really know. Thus, by delaying contract negotiations, the City was assured that they would not be contractually bound to pay raises the City could not afford.

When Abraham Beame was finally elected to be Mayor, he proved that his answer was pretty accurate. The banks (City & Chase) pulled the rug out from under municipal finances by refusing to "roll over" debts, thus causing the great fiscal crisis of 1974 and '75. There were fifty thousand layoffs and the unions voluntarily agreed to suspend raises due under contract until we were out from under the threat of bankruptcy.

So, the first reason why Mayor Adams is not racing to the bargaining table is that the City is unsure how we will be doing fiscally.

A second reason relates to the first. We are all aware that in 2020 the Republican leader of the Senate was urging Congress to let the "blue" states go bankrupt rather than provide fiscal aid. If that same person is again leader of a Republican majority in the Senate in 2023, that could be a problem.

The third reason, of course, is COVID. We do not yet know how much this virus has distorted our economy nor what damage it will continue to do.

There are still other issues, Ukraine being only one of them, but they add up to the City being cautious about seeking to set a financial pattern of raises.

In spite of all the reasons why the City would want to delay negotiations, we, the workforce, will want those negotiations to start as soon as possible. Thus, it is very possible that DC37 or the UFT will pressure the City into at least opening negotiations within a few months.

We are unsure if negotiations will lead to a settled pattern before the close of 2022, but if this does occur, our union will then solicit demands from the members. We will seek to negotiate our own local unit contract as soon as possible.

MEDICARE ADVANTAGE... Over a year ago, our general membership mailing warned of a major change that could be coming to the health benefits provided for our Medicare-eligible retirees.

One year later, the situation is a mess.

Our most common health programs for Medicare-eligibles are a combination of Medicare plus a Medigap insurance policy designed to cover the 20% of costs not covered by Medicare. The proposed new plan would be a Medicare Advantage plan.

Our retirees are very conservative, (and for good reason), when it comes to their health care. The currently most used program, GHI Senior Care, is quite popular and satisfactory for most retirees. So, why the change?

The answer given, as to why there was a need for change, was that Congress had offered money to subsidize the Medicare Advantage plan.

So, why would Congress do that? We were told that Congress, on a bipartisan basis had chosen to subsidize Medicare Advantage plans because such managed health plans would save money and keep us healthier in the long run.

How would they both save money and keep us healthier?

Well, for example, many Americans resist getting a colon exam. Yet, such exams catch cancer at an early stage and not only save lives but also save the very expensive treatment needed if the cancer takes hold. The Medicare Advantage plans promise to counsel, advise, and even nudge those enrolled in their plans to get exams that will catch diseases at an early stage. There are many such tests and types of monitoring that clearly can extend our lives if used, and they may even save money.

Less persuasive by far is the claim that "wellness" advocacy will change our behavior so we will abandon obesity and excess alcohol usage, embrace exercise and, in general, become neat and clean and well advised. All of this somehow leads to "free" programs like Silver Sneakers and hot meals delivered to your home in certain circumstances.

But, and this is a very big but, Congress is subsidizing the Medicare Advantage plans.

So long as Congress is offering a $600 million dollar a year subsidy to New York City for converting to a Medicare Advantage plan, it is hard to turn down.

We (the City and the unions) did not turn the offer down, but it has become clear that many retirees are turning it down.

As far back as March of last year, our retirees began to respond to the news of a probable change in their health benefits. Their primary initial concerns were four. Would I keep my doctors? Would I have a problem with approvals for tests? Would I keep my specialty hospital? Could I keep GHI Senior Care, even if I had to pay something for it?

By July, all of these issues seemed to have been answered favorably.

The Medicare Advantage plan (MA) being selected was "The Alliance," a partnership of GHI and Blue Cross/Blue Shield. So, we would keep our doctors and, since it was the same company, probably not have problems for approval for tests or specialty hospitals and, yes we could keep GHI Senior Care, if we so chose.

By September, everything had gone wrong.

It turned out that our new MA plan company had not informed the doctors of the changes nor had gotten their agreement. Memorial Sloan Kettering, New York City's main cancer hospital's billing department flat out said they did not take MA plans.

Our retirees, who had trusted GHI based on their experience with GHI Senior Care, now faced an MA company that terrified them with its incompetence.

Moreover, while they were allowed to keep their GHI Senior Care if they so chose, the cost turned out to be over $2300 per year plus an increase in copays of maybe $1000 a year (more or less) and twice as much if a couple were involved.

All of this led to a court case brought by a retiree group that sprang up in response to the proposed changes. The court case went in favor of the retirees to the extent that implementation of the new health program was delayed from January 1, 2022 until April 1, 2022 and now indefinitely.

Wow.

Prior to the court decision, tens of thousands of retirees opted to pay the thousands of dollars a year extra needed to stay in GHI Senior Care. Probably more still would have so chosen if they could have afforded the price.

This is now a major issue because the most recent court decision prohibits the City from charging for GHI Senior Care. If there is no charge for GHI Senior Care, many more will refuse to change to the MA plan and there will be little or no savings for the City.

The City wants the $600 million saving per year. If there is no saving, some of the monies scheduled to go to the unions through our health savings negotiations will be endangered.

There are two potential repercussions. The first is one that would not immediately impact OSA. Our Welfare Fund would lose $65 per member per year currently paid into it from the Health Stabilization Fund plus a further $100 scheduled to be added per member from the same source. Since our fund has reserves, there would be no loss of existing benefits. This may not be true for some other union welfare funds.

A second problem would be the inability to fund the PICA program. PICA, funded out of the Health Stabilization Fund, currently pays for injectable and chemotherapeutic drugs. As a result, a heavy cost burden is lifted from other unions' drug plans and also the drug riders our own members pay. If the PICA program was set to expire, drug costs to members would rise sharply.

Neither one of these possibilities is attractive. There will have to be some better alternatives found, but at present all we know is that the City has appealed the decision by the judge that prohibits charging for GHI Senior Care.

So, what started off as primarily a concern for our Medicare-eligible retirees has now, a year later, come to potentially affect us all.

Stay tuned as this matter develops. We have always been very proud that municipal workers were not charged a basic premium for our health insurance. Hopefully, we will find a way to continue that tradition.

HAIL TO THE CHIEF... Since 2018, the union has been making available free "E-Chief" subscriptions to interested dues-paying active members and retirees. The Chief, appearing weekly in print, and online at www.thechiefleader.com, is a key resource for public sector workers. At our December Holiday Party, we honored the Prial family, who published The Chief for more than a century. The Prials have now turned over the reigns of the newspaper to a new publisher.

With the new leadership has come a number of changes - a revamped design and a promise of expanded coverage of union and labor issues, but also the elimination of the E-Chief as a stand-alone subscription option. Going forward, subscribers will have access to the digital version of The Chief on their website, as well as a facsimile version of the newspaper, quite similar to the present E-Chief. This involves a new vendor for them and migration of subscriptions to a new platform.

As a result, we are temporarily suspending the free subscription as of May 1st. We ask that those of you who wish to continue (or start) to receive access to the newspaper "re-subscribe" by completing the linked subscripton form that appears here:

Chief Subscription Form

Please complete the form, download it to your hard drive, then submit it by attaching the completed form to an email to osachiefoffer@osaunion.org. We encourage you to do this as soon as possible, so that the interruption in your subscription will be as short as possible.

TENTATIVE GENERAL MEMBERSHIP MEETING... Our next general membership meeting is set for Thursday, May 19th. It will be held at the union office at 220 East 23rd Street on the seventh floor. It will start at 6 P.M. and should conclude by 7:30 P.M. There will be light refreshments served after the membership meeting and we would hope that Delegate Training would proceed from 8 P.M. until 9 P.M.

If you are a delegate-in-training or would like to be, please call John LaGuardia at the union office before the meeting date at 212-686-1229. John will register your interest and prepare any needed materials.

CAVEAT COVID... Our long-awaited return to normal union meetings is and must remain tentative until May. We do not know if there will be a new surge or new variant and we will only find out as time passes.

It is most desirable for us to meet together in person but, obviously, not if it endangers the members attending.

top
top
top
top