From temporary pause to full stop. New York Supreme Court Judge Lyle Frank officially blocked the city of New York from removing its roughly 250,000 municipal retirees off their current healthcare plan and onto Aetna’s privatized Medicare Advantage, which the Adams administration inked a deal on this past March.
On June 5, Frank temporarily halted the switch. Last Friday on Aug. 11, he explicitly ordered “that the respondents are permanently enjoined from requiring any City retirees, and their dependents from being removed from their current health insurance plan(s) and from being required to either enroll in an Aetna Medicare Advantage Plan or seek their own health coverage.”
Beth Finkel, state director of AARP New York, said there’s been an overwhelming response and support for city retirees on the ground. “We’re so happy. We’re so excited that they are being taken care of finally,” said Finkel. “The response has been unbelievable. People are so invested in this, literally in their economic future.”
Back in June, NYC Comptroller Brad Lander declined to register the Medicare Advantage contract pending the aforementioned lawsuit. Following Frank’s ruling, he released a statement calling it a “win for the many retirees who fought for the health care that they worked so hard for and were promised.”
“I was and remain seriously concerned about the privatization of Medicare plans, overbilling by insurance companies, and barriers to care under Medicare Advantage,” added Lander. “It is vital that all seniors—and all New Yorkers—get quality health coverage as a basic human right.”
“At the same time, given the growing costs of health care for both retirees and active employees we cannot ignore that there are real cost questions facing the city when it comes to health care. It is time for all parties to come to the table to identify creative and effective solutions.”
Jake Gardener is a lawyer at Walden Macht & Haran LLP and represents the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees, one of the main plaintiffs in the ruling. He said that this is a victory for hundreds of thousands of senior citizens and disabled first responders. He explained that this is the third time in the last two years that the group has sued the city over Medicare plans. They also previously filed to stop the city from charging seniors copays.
“The Mayor and the unions stand to gain hundreds of millions of dollars by forcing retirees into a federally funded Medicare Advantage plan,” said Gardener. “They want to basically save money on the backs of elderly and disabled retirees.”
Gardener said that the Medicare changes posed by the city pit retirees against active union members, like the Municipal Labor Committee (MLC). The MLC publicly supported and helped craft the city’s Medicare Advantage plan.
The Mayor’s office is reportedly “extremely disappointed” with the judge’s ruling and intends to appeal. The office maintained that the Medicare Advantage plan would improve retirees’ current plans and save $600 million annually. “This decision only creates confusion and uncertainty among our retirees.”
Gardener said that when the city and Mayor appeal, there’s a possibility that the appellate court could disagree with Frank’s ruling. There is also a slim but rare chance that the case could make it all the way to the New York State Court of Appeals, he said.
Like Lander, Councilmember Charles Barron — who introduced a bill allowing municipal retirees to keep their existing plans in late June — felt vindicated by Frank’s ruling. He told the AmNews that it was a major victory against privatization and for Black workers.
“It means that [Black city employees] have to be respected and protected, and that the city has to honor their commitment that they made to them when they were making these meager wages and settling for them because they promised them when they retire, they would have adequate healthcare,” said Barron. “This means the city has to honor that. And that means a whole lot for Black workers who struggled all their life. They didn’t make much as it was when they retired. These are not people who retired with some big-time pension and big-time healthcare. These are low-wage workers.
“And now it says to the — this judge and my legislation — that you must honor them and you must protect them and keep up to your commitment to their healthcare. And nothing is more important than healthcare. Healthcare is a human right. And not for corporations to maximize profit over people and their healthcare.”
Despite Frank’s ruling, Barron maintains the importance of passing his bill, which he says will codify this ban. He says 17 of his city council colleagues have so far signed on but says a supermajority is crucial to prevent a potential mayoral veto.
Lander later told the AmNews that he also saw the ruling as a victory for the Black municipal workforce.
“This ruling is a win for the many Black city retirees who fought for the healthcare that they worked so hard for and were promised,” said Lander. “It is vital that all Black seniors — and New Yorkers — get quality health coverage as a basic human right. New York’s Black public sector retirees have contributed so much to this city, and I am deeply grateful for their service.”
Ariama C. Long is a Report for America corps member and writes about politics for the Amsterdam News. Your donation to match our RFA grant helps keep her writing stories like this one; please consider making a tax-deductible gift of any amount today by visiting https://bit.ly/amnews1.
Glad someone is looking out for us. I was confused about transferring until this latest development.
Finally! We are so lucky to have Charles Barron. NYC will be much worse without him.