Below is a review of OSA's experience with affiliation. As you will learn upon reading, our organization has never been opposed to affiliation with a larger labor group. At the same time, please note that sometimes we benefitted and at other times, not so much.

Why are we considering it now? Actually, we have considered affiliation often over the years and, accept or reject, it is always worth considering.

Also described below is a new optional service offered by our Welfare Fund. Information on the medical alert system appears further down on this page and please note the LifeStation flyer you can download from the link in that section.

Finally, voting in the New York City Primary occurs on June 22nd and early voting has already started. We have a last minute endorsement for Briget Rein, running for City Council in Brooklyn's District 39.

Briget has been endorsed by us in the past and has now been endorsed by nearly every City workers union as well. We like it when a candidate cares enough to seek union endorsement and we like Briget.

We are also endorsing Kathryn Garcia as our third choice for Mayor. We do get up to five choices in ranked choice voting and Harry Nespoli, head of the Municipal Labor Committee, strongly favors her.

Thus our endorsements for Mayor (in reverse alphabetical order) are Scott Stringer, Kathryn Garcia and Eric Adams. You can vote for all three and even two more, but the ranking (#1, #2, #3, etc.) is up to you.

Also, we like Dan Quart for Manhattan District Attorney, Ben Kallos for Manhattan Borough President, Christopher Chin for Civil Court Judge, 2nd District, New York County, Steve Behar for City Council, 23rd District Queens, and Brandon Stradford for Staten Island Borough President.

As always, vote. It is a hard won and important privilege.

TO AFFILIATE OR NOT TO AFFILATE: A 43-YEAR-LONG STORY. The history of the Organization of Staff Analysts is, among other things, a story of many attempts at affiliation with a larger labor organization. One of the early predecessors to our current organization actually was briefly a part of AFSCME DC37, but that ended when the affiliation did not aid in union recognition for Personnel Examiners.

We have even better records starting in 1970 and, at that time, the Council of Personnel Examiners was an independent professional organization. The broadbanding of the Personnel Examiner title series, and many others, into the new Staff Analyst series led to a change in the name of the organization to OSA, as well as an increase in membership, since there were more Analysts.

By 1978, OSA had a membership of about 300. At that time, the leadership reached out to a number of established unions seeking their help in gaining collective bargaining status for Analysts.

Many unions were interested in the newly created Analyst title, but the ones that took an active interest were as follows.

CWA Local 1180 began to send lawyers to hearings at the Board of Collective Bargaining on the issue of the eligibility of Analysts for union coverage.

AFSCME DC37 had initiated those hearings and their Locals 375 (Architects and Engineers) and 1407 (Accountants) were very interested. In addition, Social Service Employees Union Local 371 was not only interested, but initiated an organizing drive to recruit Analysts to sign union designation cards.

OSA, meanwhile, had chosen to affiliate with Local 237 of the Teamsters.

The effect, for OSA, of all this activity, was beneficial. The Teamsters provided office and meeting space, printing and postage, plus the help of Bert Rose, an experienced labor organizer.

Yet, at the same time, SSEU Local 371's efforts were also helping OSA. Local 371, at one point, had a ten person team working on organizing the title series. Aside from collecting union designation cards for itself, its policy was to encourage the most pro-union activists to join OSA and to treat the Teamsters affiliation as a "correctable error."

Both the Local 237 and 371 efforts, although opposed to each other, helped to build the strength of OSA. There were educational courses to prepare for promotional exams, committees to move stalled exam lists and a wide variety of services provided to Analysts at little or no cost.

The City Office of Labor Relations was strongly opposed to allowing union status for the Analysts. As a result, the case before the Board of Collective Bargaining (BCB) dragged on for years and all the unions began to weary of an expensive effort that seemed to be going nowhere. By 1982, Local 371's efforts in support of organizing had been cut back from ten workers to two and, by 1983, DC37 and Locals 1407, 371, and 375 had signed an agreement with the City to abandon the organizing drive. They agreed to settle for 400 to 600 Analysts being changed in title to union-covered titles.

Analysts who were aware of this agreement quite properly felt it was a betrayal.

Soon thereafter, Local 237 Teamsters, for different reasons, also abandoned the effort to organize the Analysts. Bert Rose was helpful in finding office space at another Teamster local office and guiding OSA towards acting independently, obtaining their own union designation cards, and an experienced labor lawyer.

The Analysts who had supported each of the four unions that had now abandoned the organizing drives came together. By 1984, OSA had about 500 dues paying members and in a contested election for the leadership posts, over 400 members cast ballots by mail. In effect, OSA had become a union in fact, if not yet legally recognized.

This fact was made more clear in 1985.

In 1985, the newly elected leadership of OSA chose to follow the lead of the prior administration. Once in office, they learned that Susan Mullgrav, the prior OSA Chairperson, after Local 237 had ended its drive, had reached out to CWA's Region 1 for possible affiliation.

CWA Local 1180 had sent lawyers to the BCB hearings and sought to add Analysts to their bargaining certificates, but no serious effort to organize them had ever occurred.

Susan, and the OSA Executive Board, had felt a need for help to continue the fight for collective bargaining, but they wanted to be their own CWA local, not lost within the far larger Local 1180. CWA Region 1 was willing.

Susan's slate did very well in the December 1984 election, but her opponent did even better and, in January, the new officers took over. They, too, felt that help from an established labor union was needed, so talks were reopened with CWA Region 1. By April, agreement was reached between the leadership of OSA and CWA Region 1. All that was left was a membership vote at the May meeting to confirm the agreement.

However, prior to OSA again being affiliated, a collective bargaining election was scheduled at the Board of Education by the New York State Public Employment Relations Board. A small unit of 38 Staff and Associate Staff Analysts would be allowed to vote to choose or reject collective bargaining.

CWA Region 1 had their legal counsel call the OSA Chairperson to notify him that they would be supporting CWA 1180 in the vote at the Board of Education, not OSA. That ended that near-affiliation. OSA, which had been organizing from 1978 through 1985, easily won the election. The vote was OSA - 20, CWA Local 1180 - 0, No Union - 7.

Even so, a union of 38 members (soon shrinking to 25 members as Management changed the titles of those who were promoted or who just asked to leave the union) would normally have been too small to be viable. OSA, however, now split into OSA (the union of 25 members at the Board of Education) and OSART (the professional organization of not-yet-unionized City Analysts). Since, by 1985, OSART had over 600 dues-paying members, the tiny union could draw upon the larger group for resources.

Both OSA and OSART proceeded to seek union status for un-unionized Analysts. By 1987, another 650 Analysts had been allowed to vote for or against the union.

The City had attempted to slant that election by excluding 301 OSART members and adding 301 Analysts who had not sought unionization. This worked out badly for the City as the Analysts voted 3 to 1 for the union. Thus, OSA now added 650 new dues payers, but OSART kept the loyalty and support of 301 Analysts still-not-unionized.

The Office of Labor Relations now insisted that the 650 newly unionized Analysts leave the Management Benefits Fund even before OSA had negotiated a contract that would enable the union to establish a Welfare Fund to handle dental and optical and other benefits.

The leadership of OSA returned to CWA Region 1 to ask for a $475,000 loan to cover the cost of a year's Welfare Fund in return for affiliation. Terms were worked out and then brought to Victor Gotbaum of DC37 who offered the same terms and a bit more.

Victor, however, was retiring and insisted we speak to his successor, Stan Hill.

The DC37 affiliation discussion went wrong quickly as Stan Hill included the leadership of Locals 1407, 375 and 371 in the discussion. Local 371 insisted that OSA's membership be broken up and distributed, with 200 going to OSA and the rest to the other three locals. The OSA leadership did not argue, but just left the discussion. The CWA offer was better.

As it worked out, OSA's leadership did not have to return to CWA Region 1 to accept their offer. One of OSA's friends at the City Council was able to intimidate the City Office of Labor Relations into agreeing to keep the 650 newly unionized Analysts in the Management Benefits Fund until OSA had a contract and the funds to create its own Welfare Fund.

Around this time, John Harper brought us to the attention of a Transport Workers Union organizer. He, in turn, took us to meet John Lawe, President of Local 100. Mr. Lawe was extremely pleased to hear OSA's story and was charmed by the fact that its leadership had been inspired by Michael Quill, the famous leader of that union.

Due to the truly warm welcome extended to OSA because of that connection, an affiliation with the Transport Workers Union became quite likely. It did not happen, due to the early death of President Lawe and subsequent difficulties within the TWU. The possibility faded.

One bit of guidance from President Lawe was most helpful. OSA was then seeking to determine a fair dues rate. We would have new legal obligations as a union and expenses to match. President Lawe warned us to avoid going too low, as it could strangle the union through lack of resources. There was no need to go too high either as that could lead to waste. Our current rate of .007, unless and until we affiliate, became that compromise.

The leadership of OSA remained open to affiliation in the years that followed, but by 1990 it was clear that we could function well as an independent union.

Early on, DC37 sought to go after a new title OSA believed was appropriately ours. We responded by going after a larger one of theirs. We might have won on both, but agreed to settle for the first group and ceased organizing the second. There was no further "raiding" by either side.

We discussed affiliation with SEIU, the UAW, the United Steel Workers, the Public Employees Federation, the Office and Professional Employees International Union and others.

The most tempting offer, by far, came in 1994, from DC37. By that time, OSA represented over 3,000 Analysts and had begun to organize Analysts in HHC. We did agree to enter serious talks, but if, and only if, DC37 returned to organizing. This pressure on OSA's part worked out well and we were preparing a final joint campaign, alongside Local 375 at the Transit Authority, when DC37 became mired in scandal and was placed into trusteeship by AFSCME.

Around this time, our union had become strong enough to assist other unions. We started by helping the Sanitation Chiefs form their union by providing access to membership in our Welfare Fund. Later came the Emergency Medical Service Chiefs and members of the Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association. OSA, which had itself started in need of help, could now in turn help other unions.

The next time OSA's leadership sought to affiliate was in 2008. Having despaired of affiliating with a number of the local internationals, we now applied to become a directly affiliated local union of the national labor federation, the AFL-CIO.

In turn, the AFL-CIO insisted we talk to the United Federation of Teachers and the Office and Professional Employees International Union first. Both Randi Weingarten and Michael Goodwin wanted us to join but, again, we insisted that they prove their value by unionizing some not-yet-unionized Analysts with our help.

Both unions did make the effort.

The one that worked out best was the UFT. Their staff, plus our own active retirees, Michael Daflos and Michael Falzarano, with some help by John Harper, were able to add 600 Education Analysts and Ed Officers to the UFT ranks.

OPEIU also tried hard, but lost the vote to another union. So long as the Analysts ended up with a union of their choice, OSA gave full credit to OPEIU for their efforts.

During the time that the UFT and OPEIU were organizing Analysts, CWA Local 1180 and OSA jointly sought to unionize the Assistant and Associate Directors of Hospitals. That effort took ten years and more. All such campaigns take many years, but we give CWA high points for our joint effort.

And now for the present.

The OSA leadership felt obliged, a few years back, to resume affiliation discussions with both OPEIU and the UFT, since they had made the effort to unionize Analysts. We added discussions with the Transport Workers Union because they actually beat us in a campaign to unionize some Analysts. We did not like losing but apparently they liked us, so they asked for talks.

We have also reached out to the AFL-CIO directly and will again be talking to CWA, DC37 and MEBA.

We don't have to affiliate, but the leadership of OSA, since at least 1978, has been open to the idea. The question is what terms and costs versus benefits.

Our union dues were set at .007 percent of salary about one third of a century ago, with the promise to keep them that low unless or until the membership voted to join a larger group and OSA needed to pay affiliation dues.

We would ask for approval of a dues increase as a part of any vote to affiliate.

Ideally, such a vote would occur at a time when a salary increase is also due, so that the relatively small dues increase is balanced by a large salary increase.

We are in negotiations for both affiliation and a salary increase at present, so members can expect reports on both.

NEW WELFARE FUND BENEFIT: LIFESTATION MEDICAL ALERT SYSTEM. Our Welfare Fund provides both automatic and optional benefits to our members. There is a $50,000 life insurance policy ($5,000 for retirees) provided at no cost to the member. However, we also offer optional life insurance through the union for those members who wish to buy extra coverage.

The optional benefits are a service by the union, since we can often get a better price by purchasing as a group than we could as individuals.

One such new service will now be available.

In 1990, OSA did not represent a single retiree. Today, the number has grown to about 3,000. Our retirees have many of the same needs as our active members, but also some special needs. One issue is the tendency, in old age, for our retirees to be living alone.

Living alone is more common today, due to changes in our national lifestyle. We no longer have large extended families and most older folks do not live with their children. This becomes a worry when the older person is now entirely alone due to the death of a partner.

Also, as we age, two more issues arise. Our balance gets much worse with age and we are more likely to fall. At the same time, our bones get more fragile and each fall becomes more likely to cause harm.

Modern technology has responded to this problem with remote devices that can enable us to call for help if we do fall, but the costs are not insignificant. Still, the reality of a single person, falling and unable to summon help is very scary and very real.

Since OSA now has both many retirees and also many elderly parents of active members in the situation of single living circumstances, Mike Schady, a Welfare Fund Trustee, researched the available products on the market. He then worked with Michael Goodwin to approach the chosen company and to get OSA a discount since we were a "group." The company is called "LifeStation."

I will quote from the American Federation of Teachers' letter to their members about a similar benefit that Mike Goodwin arranged for them. Loretta Johnson, AFT Secretary Treasurer, wrote, in part:

"This great offering comes to us from two people who understand union benefits. Michael Goodwin is the former president of the 105,000-member Office and Professional Employees International Union, AFL-CIO (1994-2015), and Robert J. Isacsen, a former OPEIU guild president. Working together, they formed Global Affinity Services, Inc. (GAS) to deliver group programs at wholesale rates. They learned that, by using the collective purchasing power of the membership, enormous savings can be achieved on many products that members buy every day."

There are four options available from the company. The least expensive is a medallion that works through your home phone. Of course, if you are able to get to your home phone, you will not need this help, but if you have fallen and cannot get to the home phone, pressing a button on a device can be a life saver.

The second option does not require you to have a land line, but costs more and also is limited to an area within a few hundred feet of your home.

The third option is clearly better in that you can be away from home and the device will notify help to arrive wherever you are.

We find that the company's last option (fall detection) might be of value in some cases, but also possibly a problem, depending on how sensitive it is. If it is too sensitive, you might be contacted when nothing has really happened. If it is not sensitive enough, it might not work when it should.

The third option, the mobile G.P.S. does seem to be likely to be of most benefit for those of our retirees who live alone or single family members, but any of the options are available to you.

One key issue for us is that there is no long contract that must be signed. You will be able to cancel at any time if the living situation changes and there is no further need or interest in the service.

The prices are as follows: