Council, not courts, can help us

To the editor:

(re: “City made a promise to our workers, and they must keep it,” Aug. 24)

City retirees appreciate that Councilman Eric Dinowitz recognizes we were promised the choice of traditional Medicare and a Medigap plan when we retired, and that he agrees the city should not force us into an inferior Medicare Advantage plan.

But Dinowitz errs when he states, “The courts are our best path forward to securing the Medigap coverage municipal employees were promised.”

We have brought three cases against the city in the last two years — and have won each time. But the city has appealed every win. Litigation is costly, and asking retirees on fixed incomes to use their savings to continue funding litigation is inhumane and violates Democratic Party principles.

Int. 1099-2023 protecting retirees — as the council has a long history of doing — is the easiest, cheapest, and most effective way to protect retirees. As Gary Altman, legislative counsel to four City Council Speakers, outlined in his op-ed in the Daily News recently — the council has often protected retirees by amending Administrative Code 12-126, including in 2001, overriding by veto Mayor Rudy Giuliani’s attempt to diminish the retirement benefits of municipal retirees.

This issue has always been within the City Council’s purview.

Some city unions claim the health care protection promised can only be brought about through collective bargaining between the mayor and the city’s unions. As Mr. Altman pointed out, he worked for the city for decades and was never in a union.

How can the city’s unions collectively bargain his retirement benefits when he was never part of a union?

In my almost 40 years as a full-time lawyer and manager for the city — which included drafting legislation and litigating cases on the city’s behalf — I, too, was never part of a union. From my years as a lawyer and then as a part-time administrative law judge when the United Federation of Teachers represented me — I know that legislation is far more protective of retirees than reliance on the courts.

A Daily News article recently reported that DC 37 had attacked xouncil members for sponsoring Int. 1099-2023, which protects municipal retirees. This legislation covers all retirees — those who were in a union and those who were not.

Councilman Dinowitz, we need your support for Int. 1099-2023, legislation that protects retirees from any unscrupulous behavior by the city or diminishment of our benefits, while offering us the health care choice we were promised. Now that Congressman Ritchie Torres — who represents many of your constituents — will be introducing federal legislation protecting traditional Medicare, why not you?

Sue Ellen Dodell