Palming influence

To the editor:

There has been a common thread running through the twists and turns on the road to change the health benefits plans of active city workers and retirees. That constant is the lack of transparency.

The Office of Labor Relations doesn’t reveal the identities or affiliations of their Evaluating Committee, rebuffing freedom of information law (FOIL) requests. 

The Municipal Labor Committee, exempt from FOIL, operates in secrecy. Prior to a ratification vote on the contract agreement for workers and pre-Medicare retirees, only select union representatives were allowed to review a redacted version, for a short period of time.

A coalition of city workers, retirees and an advocacy organization (Hands Off  NYCare) filed a lawsuit challenging the plan’s legality. (“City workers and retirees sue to block switch to self-funded health plan,” The Chief, this issue)

Hands Off NYCare is a not-for-profit Corporation. Unlike the New York City Organization of Public Service Retirees, it does not solicit donations.  

Their website includes messaging that says “We need accountability,” and “the City has not been transparent with us.” Their Facebook page adds: “We need transparency. Not deals behind closed doors.”

So it is disappointing that Hands Off NYCare will not divulge any information on its sources of funding. As The Chief reports, “It is unclear who or which entities are funding its effort. Neither a representative for the group nor its founder, Wanda Williams, answered in detail about how the group is paying for its effort.”

This only raises questions. Are their attorneys, Holwell, Shuster & Goldberg LLP, performing pro bono work? Do donors include any health insurance companies or lobbyists  that might financially benefit from the contract’s nullification? 

Not that this affects the merits of the case. But alas, this is a missed opportunity to take the high ground in the discourse on candor and disclosure.

Harry Weiner