I wonder if Mulgrew and Unity's unilateral endorsement of Goldman had anything to do with Lander, in his last few months as NYC Comptroller, conducting and releasing an audit that showed Mulgrew and the other leaders of the Municipal Labor Committee (MLC) bankrupted our Health Stabilization Fund:
Thanks, Linda. UFT did not endorse in the NYC mayoral primary, and there was speculation Mulgrew and Unity leadership favored Cuomo but feared blowback from UFT membership after an internal UFT mayoral primary survey did not return Mulgrew's preferred result in favor of Cuomo. When the UFT Delegate Assembly finally endorsed Mamdani in the general election for mayor, it was done through a scripted debate and a rushed vote -- at an emergency Delegate Assembly session held in July, after the Delegate Assembly had already finished meeting for the school year and at a time when many UFT delegates were not available to attend. You can read more about that broken process here: https://abettercontract.org/p/the-ufts-endorsement-process-is-broken
I do not live in the district where this election occurred. However, I did want Mr. Goldman to win. This became more of an election about Israel and where people get their donations from than anything else. I feel that Mr. Goldman is very needed in Congress and it will be NY state’s and the U.S. loss. What Mr. Goldman went through was reprehensible along with Mr. Espillat. I ‘d like to know what Mr.Ladner has done for the union? Why should the union have endorsed him? Do you think the situation is better for UFT employees with Mamdani’s win? No politician is perfect , and I believe they all get money from dubious sources like CAIR. How about investigating that instead of focusing on AIPAC?
Hi Naomi, thanks for reading. As stated above in the article, this is not about A Better Contract preferring one candidate over another. Our issue is with Mulgrew and Unity’s broken system for political endorsements.
Goldman served the District honorably and with conviction. The Israel issue was a significant issue that the opposition played and distorted to excess, ignoring the other qualities of Goldman and what he stood for. Affordability should have been the main talking point but his opponent while focusing on affordability somewhat hammered and distorted the Israel issue. Where was her outrage against Hamas for executing and terrorizing those Palestinians who are afraid to speak out and wish them gone. Non existent is the answer. Also, according to your logic, the union should back only projected winners regardless of their experience level, qualifications and political and social views. I guess those are the principles ABC stands for instead of who the better candidate iA C falls back to blame the process over the possibility that the endorsed candidate is overwhelmingly more qualified in every respect than the eventual winner and that is what many of the delegates thought as well.
Hi Jack, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Two points in response to your post:
1. Goldman ran against and lost decisively (by over 30 percentage points) to Brad Lander, a candidate who served the district for years and who had the support of the large majority of primary voters. It’s unclear who you are referring to when you mention a female opponent.
2. Your claim is incorrect, we made no such statement that candidates should be endorsed solely on poll numbers. If you read the article above, you will see that we clearly advocate for a political endorsement process in which decisions are made directly by UFT members – with no unilateral decisions made by Mulgrew and Unity leadership. In an ABC-led UFT, members will have ample opportunity to discuss all sides of an issue before using a secure electronic voting platform to decide what direction the union takes, not unlike how we currently use ElectionBuddy to vote on SBOs. In such a process, a political candidate would need to have the strong support of UFT members in order to earn a UFT endorsement.
While I really hate Brad Lander for a number of reasons - his politics, his opportunism, and lack of moral clarity, I do agree with the bigger point being made here. The union should be responsible to its membership. Endorsements should come from the membership - not from our “leaders” (aka dictators.)
As the daughter of an amazing early childhood educator who is NYC DOE/UFT retiree, myself a NYC public school educated individual and a NYC public school parent, I totally agree.
I wonder if Mulgrew and Unity's unilateral endorsement of Goldman had anything to do with Lander, in his last few months as NYC Comptroller, conducting and releasing an audit that showed Mulgrew and the other leaders of the Municipal Labor Committee (MLC) bankrupted our Health Stabilization Fund:
https://abettercontract.org/p/an-easy-breakdown-of-the-comptrollers
Very good point!
The UFT has a track record of backing losers. The one exception is the current Mayor.
But the bigger question here is how these endorsements are being made, no input from membership, the DA itself it’s hardly democratic.
We need to bring the power back to the people back to members ,let us decide and have a say in how our money is being spent.
Thanks, Linda. UFT did not endorse in the NYC mayoral primary, and there was speculation Mulgrew and Unity leadership favored Cuomo but feared blowback from UFT membership after an internal UFT mayoral primary survey did not return Mulgrew's preferred result in favor of Cuomo. When the UFT Delegate Assembly finally endorsed Mamdani in the general election for mayor, it was done through a scripted debate and a rushed vote -- at an emergency Delegate Assembly session held in July, after the Delegate Assembly had already finished meeting for the school year and at a time when many UFT delegates were not available to attend. You can read more about that broken process here: https://abettercontract.org/p/the-ufts-endorsement-process-is-broken
I do not live in the district where this election occurred. However, I did want Mr. Goldman to win. This became more of an election about Israel and where people get their donations from than anything else. I feel that Mr. Goldman is very needed in Congress and it will be NY state’s and the U.S. loss. What Mr. Goldman went through was reprehensible along with Mr. Espillat. I ‘d like to know what Mr.Ladner has done for the union? Why should the union have endorsed him? Do you think the situation is better for UFT employees with Mamdani’s win? No politician is perfect , and I believe they all get money from dubious sources like CAIR. How about investigating that instead of focusing on AIPAC?
Hi Naomi, thanks for reading. As stated above in the article, this is not about A Better Contract preferring one candidate over another. Our issue is with Mulgrew and Unity’s broken system for political endorsements.
Goldman served the District honorably and with conviction. The Israel issue was a significant issue that the opposition played and distorted to excess, ignoring the other qualities of Goldman and what he stood for. Affordability should have been the main talking point but his opponent while focusing on affordability somewhat hammered and distorted the Israel issue. Where was her outrage against Hamas for executing and terrorizing those Palestinians who are afraid to speak out and wish them gone. Non existent is the answer. Also, according to your logic, the union should back only projected winners regardless of their experience level, qualifications and political and social views. I guess those are the principles ABC stands for instead of who the better candidate iA C falls back to blame the process over the possibility that the endorsed candidate is overwhelmingly more qualified in every respect than the eventual winner and that is what many of the delegates thought as well.
Hi Jack, thanks for sharing your thoughts. Two points in response to your post:
1. Goldman ran against and lost decisively (by over 30 percentage points) to Brad Lander, a candidate who served the district for years and who had the support of the large majority of primary voters. It’s unclear who you are referring to when you mention a female opponent.
2. Your claim is incorrect, we made no such statement that candidates should be endorsed solely on poll numbers. If you read the article above, you will see that we clearly advocate for a political endorsement process in which decisions are made directly by UFT members – with no unilateral decisions made by Mulgrew and Unity leadership. In an ABC-led UFT, members will have ample opportunity to discuss all sides of an issue before using a secure electronic voting platform to decide what direction the union takes, not unlike how we currently use ElectionBuddy to vote on SBOs. In such a process, a political candidate would need to have the strong support of UFT members in order to earn a UFT endorsement.
I am in ABSOLUTE agreement with this.
While I really hate Brad Lander for a number of reasons - his politics, his opportunism, and lack of moral clarity, I do agree with the bigger point being made here. The union should be responsible to its membership. Endorsements should come from the membership - not from our “leaders” (aka dictators.)
Kind of like when Randi endorsed Pataki over McCall
Perhaps, but that was before our time!
As the daughter of an amazing early childhood educator who is NYC DOE/UFT retiree, myself a NYC public school educated individual and a NYC public school parent, I totally agree.
Thanks, Elizabeth!