NY's largest health care workers union topples longtime prez
Members of New York's largest health care workers union just voted to topple their longtime president amid accusations of mismanagement and lavish spending.
Yvonne Armstrong, senior executive president of Service Employees International Union 1199 East, easily defeated George Gresham in a landslide vote of 26,623 to 11,722 in a sign of major discontent over the current leadership.
The results were announced by the union Sunday after an official count Saturday night.
3 Members of Service Employees International Union 1199 East voted out president George Gresham.
Christopher Sadowski
Gresham, who started out as a housekeeper at Presbyterian Hospital, had been president since 2007.
But he was dogged by accusations of using union-fund accounts as his personal 'piggy bank' to benefit himself, family and allies, according to a recent Politico investigation. He denied wrongdoing.
Gresham also is in poor health.
'Although this election did not go as I had hoped, I want to congratulate the candidates from both slates for their victories,' Gresham said in a statement released Sunday. 'No matter who you voted for, at the end of the day we are all part of our precious 1199 family, and I know that we share the same deep love for our union and the labor movement.
'It has been the honor of my lifetime to serve as your President for the past 17 years. I started my journey as a proud rank-and-file member in housekeeping at Presbyterian Hospital 50 years ago, full of the same passion and commitment that still drives me today to fight for the rights and dignity of all healthcare workers, our patients and communities.'
3 Gresham had been the head of the union since 2007.
X / @1199Prez
Gresham played a key role in winning increases in New York's minimum wage and expanding home-care services and Medicaid funding, which is the financial lifeblood for many hospitals that employ his members.
SEIU 1199 East is part of the largest health care workers union in the country, representing 450,000 total members throughout New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Maryland, Florida, and Washington, DC.
Gresham has urged union officials to keep their eye on the ball by fighting back against proposed federal cuts in Medicaid and to negotiate stronger labor contracts.
'Once my term ends in June, I look forward to a new role in our great union – [as] an active 1199 retiree,' Gresham said.
3 A recent Politico investigation accused Gresham of using union-fund accounts as his personal 'piggy bank.'
Christopher Sadowski
The development came as New York City United Federation of Teachers President Michael Mulgrew, who has been in power since 2009, is facing a tough re-election fight himself.
He's is battling a spirited challenge from Amy Arundell, the former Queens borough representative who has held key positions in the union. She previously served in Mulgrew's dominant unity faction in the union.
Mulgrew scored a big victory when he persuaded the state Legislature and Gov. Kathy Hochul to approve a class-size-reduction law in New York City classrooms.
But his unity caucus is facing growing discontent. Last year, challengers to his slate won seats in the retiree chapter and the unit representing paraprofessionals.
Retirees were particularly incensed over proposed changes in their Medicare coverage.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘I just had flashbacks': Portland looks to avoid repeat of 2020 protests
Before Los Angeles, there was Portland, Oregon. For more than 170 days in 2020, thousands of Portlanders gathered to protest police violence. They lay peacefully in the middle of the city's most iconic bridge and marched with a local NBA star — but also tore down statues and looted shops. Police launched tear gas canisters into crowds, while the 750 Department of Homeland Security agents President Donald Trump dispatched to the city without the approval of local or state officials grabbed protesters at night and loaded them into unmarked vehicles. As anti-Trump protests ramp up — with major rallies taking place across the country on Saturday — Portland officials are anxious to avoid a repeat of 2020. 'The Portland Police and then the feds overreacting in the way that they did, I think it brought even more people out because it was such injustice,' said Ali King, a veteran social organizer in Portland who worked for now-retired Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) at the time. 'When I saw the LA thing, I just had flashbacks. I did feel some PTSD.' The impact of those protests and riots on Portland was massive. Voters completely overhauled the city's government structure, the county elected a more tough-on-crime district attorney, and the police department reformed the way it deals with protesters. Five years later and 1000 miles away, President Trump again deployed federal officers into a city beset by protests against the will of state and local officials. Those recent events in Los Angeles have put Portland back on edge. Protests this week in the Rose City have been largely peaceful, but as tensions grow, officials hope policy changes will be enough to avoid a repeat of 2020's violence and prevent federal involvement. 'We've changed so much since 2020,' Mayor Keith Wilson, a trucking company owner and political outsider who was elected in 2024 on a progressive platform of fixing the city's homeless problem and improving public safety, told POLITICO earlier this week. 'But federal overreach is something we're concerned about, and we're prepared to sue.' A review conducted by an independent monitor after the 2020 protests found failings by the city and the police department ranging from poor communication with the public to inadequate training in deescalation tactics and insufficient guidance about when and how to use force. These problems, the review found, led to mistrust between the public and the police and escalated — rather than deescalated — the situation. In the wake of that review and a handful of lawsuits brought against the police department for actions taken during the 2020 protests, significant changes were made to the city's policing policies. Wilson and Portland Police Chief Bob Day told POLITICO those changes include reducing use of tear gas and militarized gear, overhauling the department's rapid response team and establishing liaison officers to build relationships with community organizers. Members of the department also attended training in Cincinnati and London to learn from experts in deescalation and crowd control, Day added. 'We're looking at large-scale events much differently than we've done in the past,' said Day, a former deputy chief who was called out of retirement in 2023 to be interim chief by then-mayor Ted Wheeler. 'What you want to bring, from a public safety standpoint, is you're not adding to the chaos.' Most protests in Portland since these changes were instituted have been peaceful, but Sergeant Aaron Schmautz, president of Portland's police union, says the city hasn't faced a situation like 2020 that would put the new tactics to the test. 'There's just a lot of nervousness right now,' he said. Portland is not alone in the Northwest. Tensions are also growing in Seattle and Spokane, neighboring Washington's two largest cities, in light of anti-ICE protests and the federal government's response in Los Angeles. Seattle Police Chief Shon Barnes said Tuesday he will do anything in his power to protect Seattleites 'from anyone who comes to the city with the intention to hurt them or inhibit their First Amendment rights,' and was willing to risk arrest to do so. Then on Wednesday, at least eight demonstrators were arrested by Seattle police after a dumpster was set on fire. In Spokane, meanwhile, Democratic Mayor Lisa Brown instituted a curfew after more than 30 people, including a former city council president, were arrested during protests. King said protesters in Portland are willing to put their bodies in the way to stop ICE actions, like physically blocking agents' path or distracting them. And she says trust between protesters and the Portland Police Bureau is still really low. But she added that the community has been having its own conversations about remaining peaceful and deescalating within the ranks at protests. Terrence Hayes, a formerly incarcerated local community organizer who is on the city's criminal justice commission and supports giving the police more resources, said the city's mood has changed since 2020. The months of violence, tear gas, looting and arrests by federal officers are something residents are not excited to revisit. 'I just don't think we're looking for that fight,' Hayes said. 'If ICE start pushing certain lanes, of course people are going to stand up and protest — but I don't think they're going to be inner-city destructive.' King added that 'if somebody is kidnapping an innocent person off the streets … [we] might have to physically get involved.' Over the last week, there have been protests across the city, including outside the local ICE office. The vast majority have been peaceful, Schmautz said, with minor instances of violence or destructive behavior like arson. The department has arrested about 13 people over the last week. For a city so renowned for its protests that it was once called 'Little Beirut' by a staffer for George H.W. Bush (a moniker a local band proudly took as their own), the last week has been notably quiet. Day said this week shows the new policies are already helping deescalate. But 2025 is very different from 2020 in a key way: Then, Portlanders were protesting their own police department. Now, the target is the federal immigration apparatus. The police department will not assist ICE, Day explained, but needs to prevent violence or lawbreaking all the same. He calls the gray area for local police 'a very complex, nuanced challenge.' The chief gave two examples: Earlier this week, Portland Police removed debris piled by protesters that was preventing ICE contractors from entering a parking lot — receiving criticism from city residents for doing so. At the time, the department contends, the contractors were not engaged in enforcement actions and officers believed that moving the debris would reduce tensions. But on another day, police watched passively nearby and did not help federal officers clear a path through a similar group of protesters for a van carrying detained immigrants to pass. Day said in a normal situation, they would clear a blocked street. But with ICE, they 'are not going to actively enforce some of these laws' that are hindering ICE's operation, Day said. But, he added, 'we can't say that the ICE facility, in itself, as it stands, is free game, that anybody can do whatever they want to that building or to that area.' The wild card, according to everyone involved, is the small portion of people who show up and try to escalate conflict and encourage illegal behavior. Nearly everyone who spoke to POLITICO for this article mentioned groups on the right and left who are suspected of coming to peaceful protests in order to incite violence. 'Law enforcement may be called to navigate criminal activity on the fringes of a free speech event, which creates a lot of challenges,' Schmautz said. And at the core of the conversation is Portland's collective identity as a city that is always willing to fight back. Chief Day noted Portland's longstanding protest culture. Free speech demonstrations are one of the city's core values, Schmautz added. King said she and her fellow protesters expect to become a target of the Trump administration in the coming days or weeks. But perhaps Hayes put it best: 'If you push, Portland pushes back,' he said. 'If they come to Portland acting up, Portland's gonna return that LA energy.'
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
‘No Kings,' eh? Where were those protests when Obama, Biden just made up policy?
It's heartening to see 'No Kings' protests planned around the country to object to a president's sweeping changes to immigration policy without congressional approval. They must have missed it in 2012 when President Barack Obama created, out of nowhere, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, an action he took after stating publicly that he did not have the power to do so. And as they rally Saturday in Fort Worth, Arlington and hundreds more cities, No Kings protesters will be standing firm against a commander in chief's irrational and unilateral plans to spend billions of dollars, especially by stretching 'emergency' power. Oh, wait — that was President Joe Biden, making up authority to take student-loan borrowers off the hook and transfer their debt obligations to taxpayers. This protest movement isn't new. It's the same brand of garden-variety, big-government liberalism and social-justice warriors. In other words, the modern left. And it isn't really opposed to increased executive authority. 'No Kings' is a clever new way of framing the same old complaints about President Donald Trump. All of which is OK! It's just the framing and self-righteousness that are cringey. These protests are not a glorious defense of the Constitution, democracy and separation of powers. The 'No Kings' folks love it when a president uses his pen and phone, as Obama memorably put it, to enact policies that they like. It's unfortunate, but one thing that increasingly unites various factions in American politics is the idea of a strong president with a 'mandate' boldly doing the things these voters have wanted for years and telling the opposition: 'Mess around and find out.' (Given the vulgarity of our age, 'mess' is not exactly the word, but you get the idea.) Congress is an afterthought. Building up a coalition by changing minds, applying political pressure and compromising where necessary? That is soooo 1980s. Exploiting loopholes, defying courts and daring others to stop you? That's only authoritarian when the other guys do it. Executive power has been expanding for decades, and both parties have been pouring on the Miracle-Gro. The root of the protest is supposedly to present an objection and counter-message to the big military parade Trump has ordered up in Washington on the same day. It's a thin reed — as Los Angeles proves, progressives have been itching to get into the streets to denounce Trump. The 'No Kings' framing may look new, but it recycles beams and boards from every panicky Democratic response to Republican governance everywhere. Organizers contend that the military parade is an affront because it will cost tens of millions of dollars 'while millions are told there's no money for Social Security, SNAP, Medicaid, or public schools.' Really — no money? In 2024 (the federal fiscal year), the Social Security Administration spent $1.5 trillion. SNAP, the food-assistance program, got $100 billion in federal money. Medicaid? In fiscal 2023, federal and state governments spent $880 billion. And public education? Revenue from all sources topped $878 billion in fiscal 2022. It's perfectly legitimate to agitate for more spending on this or argue against proposed cuts to that. But these programs are awash in cash and almost never see their funding go down. 'No money' is the kind of claim that, were it from the right, media fact-checkers would scrutinize to the penny. The Associated Press has already spent nearly 700 words on facts about the rallies but couldn't quite see this whopper. Another driver of 'No Kings' is deportations of immigrants in the country illegally. These righteous confronters of King Donald must have missed it when King Barack sent so many people home, immigrants-rights groups called him the 'deporter in chief.' In reality, the left craves its own form of authoritarianism. It wants an all-powerful government that can tell you what you can drive, what you can eat, how you can respond to your child's gender transition. It loves King Administrative State and King Bureaucrat every bit much as it dislikes Donald of Orange. Have a great protest, progressives. Express yourselves proudly, and best of luck turning it all into a viable political movement. Just don't pretend you won't be thrilled when King Gavin or Queen Kamala uses the same techniques you now decry. After all, they learned it from King Barack and King Joe. We love to hear from Texans with opinions on the news — and to publish those views in the Opinion section. • Letters should be no more than 150 words. • Writers should submit letters only once every 30 days. • Include your name, address (including city of residence), phone number and email address, so we can contact you if we have questions. You can submit a letter to the editor two ways: • Email letters@ (preferred). • Fill out this online form. Please note: Letters will be edited for style and clarity. Publication is not guaranteed. The best letters are focused on one topic.
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
US Could Make Childbirth Free, To Tackle Falling Birth Rates
America could make childbirth free for privately-insured families, in an effort to tackle declining birth rates. The bipartisan Supporting Healthy Moms and Babies Act, which would designate maternity care as an essential health benefit under the Affordable Care Act, was introduced in the Senate in May. If passed, insurance companies would be required to cover all childbirth-related expenses, including prenatal care, ultrasounds, delivery and postpartum care, without any co-pays or deductibles. Medicaid, America's government‐funded health insurance program, already covers these costs. Democratic New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, who has cosponsored the bill, told Newsweek: "Even with insurance, the costs associated with having a baby can be astronomical, and expenses are even greater for women who have health complications during pregnancy, a high-deductible insurance plan, or gaps in their coverage. By requiring insurance companies to fully cover care throughout pregnancy and a year postpartum, this bill will make childbirth more affordable for families." It comes amid growing concerns about America's population. Fertility rates are projected to average 1.6 births per woman over the next three decades, according to the Congressional Budget Office's latest forecast released this year. This number is well below the replacement level of 2.1 births per woman required to maintain a stable population without immigration. The Donald Trump administration has made this issue one of its priorities, the White House exploring giving women a "baby bonus" of $5,000, according to an April New York Times report. Many trying to tackle this global issue have called for public health policies and financial plans to help make it easier for couples to have children in society. The financial crisis and its effect on housing, inflation and pay is generally named as a major contributor to people's decisions to delay having children, to have fewer children or not to have them at all. Republican Mississippi Senator Cindy Hyde-Smith, who introduced the bill along with Gillibrand, Democratic Virginia Senator Time Kaine and Republican Missouri Senator Josh Hawley, said she hopes her bill will help change this. "Bringing a child into the world is costly enough without piling on cost-share fees that saddle many mothers and families with debt. This legislation would take away some of the burden for childbearing generations," she said in May. "By relieving financial stresses associated with pregnancy and childbirth, hopefully more families will be encouraged to embrace the beautiful gift and responsibility of parenthood." Pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum care average a total of $18,865 with average out-of-pocket payments totaling $2,854, according to KFF, a nonpartisan health policy research organization, based on data from claims between 2018 and 2022. Financial concerns are repeatedly cited as a reason for not having children. Indeed, just a few days ago, the United Nations Population Fund warned of a global birth rate crisis, after finding that one in five had not had or did not expect to have the number of children they wanted. Some 39 percent said this was because of financial limitations. But Suzanne Bell, who studies fertility and related behaviors with the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, said that while "making childbirth cheaper or free is incredibly important," she does not think it will effect the birth rate. "The cost of raising a child, in particular the cost of child care, is very high and far outweighs the cost of childbirth," she told Newsweek. "We desperately need policies that support families with the cost of child care, especially families with low incomes." Beth Jarosz, a senior program director U.S. programs at the Population Reference Bureau, agreed that "reducing health care costs is important, but may not be enough to move the needle on births." "The cost of childbirth is just one of the many costs of having a child, and people are also reeling from the much bigger costs of child care, housing, and other necessities," she told Newsweek. Theodore D Cosco, a research fellow at the University of Oxford's Institute of Population Aging, called the bill "a step in the right direction" but said the same as Bell and Jarosz. "Parents generally aren't deciding whether to have children based on a $3,000 delivery bill, they're looking at the hundreds of thousands of dollars spent actually raising the child," he told Newsweek. But he added: "The policy certainly carries some symbolic weight, signaling bipartisan support for families and could potentially help build momentum for broader reforms, such as child care subsidies or paid parental leave." The other concern is that, while financial concerns are generally accepted as a major contributor to declining birth rates, they are not the lone cause. Bell said that even the policies she calls for "are also unlikely to increase the birth rate, as evidence from other countries with much more supportive policies suggest." Norway is considered a global leader in parental leave and child care policies, and the United Nations International Children's Fund (UNICEF) ranks it among the top countries for family-friendly policies. But it too is facing a birth rate crisis. Norway offers parents 12 months of shared paid leave for birth and an additional year each afterward. It also made kindergarten (similar to a U.S. day care) a statutory right for all children aged one or older in 2008. The government subsidizes the policy to make it possible for "women and men to combine work and family life," as Norway's former Minister of Children, Equality, and Social Inclusion Solveig Horne said at a parental leave event in 2016. And yet, Norway's fertility rate has dropped dramatically from 1.98 children per woman in 2009 to 1.44 children per woman in 2024, according to official figures. The rate for 2023 (1.40) was the lowest ever recorded fertility rate in the country. Financial barriers "are only part of the picture," Cosco said, "psychological, cultural, and structural factors matter too." Newsweek spoke to several experts about Norway specifically, who all cited recent culture changes. For example, "young adults are more likely to live alone" and "young couples split up more frequently than before," Rannveig Kaldager Hart, a senior researcher at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health's Centre for Fertility and Health said. He went on to speak about "intensive parenting," which refers to the modern parenting style in which parents invest time, money and energy into creating successful adults. The expectations of this parenting style "may cause some to postpone or have fewer children than they otherwise would," Hart said. Nevertheless, backers of the American bill seem to believe that it may be part of the solution. "Being pro-family means fostering an economy that makes it feasible to raise a child. But too often, parents find themselves dealing with sky-high medical bills following the birth of a child. This legislation would eliminate out-of-pocket maternity costs for families with private health insurance and prohibit private carriers from imposing cost-sharing on beneficiaries, empowering parents to focus on what matters most," said Hawley. Related Articles Warning Of Global Birth Rate 'Crisis' After Study Of 14 CountriesChina Makes Childbirth Change Amid Falling Birth RateTrump Administration To Give $1,000 Boost to All Newborn BabiesMore Gen Z Delay Having Kids Than Millennials Amid Birth Rate Decline Fears 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
