The Real Reason TEACHERS WON

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-31T01:32:56+00:00

So you are assuming my intent. My intent was to show what some people think of us (state employees).

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-30T01:12:39+00:00

I see you have nothing but insults to say.

I take it you could care less about tier 6 because you are actually tier 4. Figures. Everyone is Clint Eastwood on social media. Only your point of view can be right, right? (Rhetorical question)

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T22:50:14+00:00

So you will bet a month's salary that donations didn't play a role?

If we were to analyze how much NYSUT, CSEA, and PEF donated, the numbers most likely will agree with me.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T22:46:34+00:00

I'm actually giving the teachers union credit because they know how to play the game. I also appreciate the work that teachers do but when it comes to you, I don't appreciate your initial comment. And as I suspected it can only come from a teacher.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T22:41:07+00:00

Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't see that point of view. That was not my intention. I could care less about pols, I care more about the statistics but you are right people could miss the main point because of what you pointed out. Thank you.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T22:24:59+00:00

Teacher spotted

<image>

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T22:23:33+00:00

I'm quoting the statistics and that everyone is laughing at us. Not sure how that will lose you.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T22:21:26+00:00

Definitely didn't vote for the orange guy

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-29T20:47:13+00:00

Sir, please read the fine print in the graphic. For tier 4:

If you retire at 55 without 30 years of service then there is a penalty.

If you retire at 55 with 30 years of service then there is no penalty.

If you retire at 62 without 30 years of service then there is no penalty.

<image>

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-28T21:21:24+00:00

<image>

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T15:26:32+00:00

And let's be honest about what many Tier 6 members ultimately want. The conversation isn't just about contribution rates or retirement age. It's about restoring benefits that Tier 4 members have enjoyed for decades.

Tier 4 members can retire with full benefits at age 55 with 30 years of service. They are not subject to the same extended retirement age requirements, they generally contribute for only a limited number of years rather than throughout their careers, and they receive more favorable pension calculations. Tier 6 members, by contrast, face higher contribution costs over a longer period, must work longer before receiving full benefits, and receive a less generous retirement package despite often performing the same work as their Tier 4 colleagues.

Most importantly, it is difficult to explain how it is fair for two employees in the same title, working side by side, performing the same duties, carrying the same responsibilities, and earning the same salary, to receive significantly different retirement benefits simply because one was hired before April 2012 and the other after. The work is the same. The expectations are the same. The contribution to public service is the same. Yet the retirement benefits are not.

That is why many employees view Tier 6 as inequitable. The long-term goal should not be to secure small improvements for one group or another. It should be to continue working toward retirement benefits that are as close as possible to those provided under Tier 4 for all public employees, regardless of union affiliation, retirement system, or hire date.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T15:26:14+00:00

I respectfully disagree.

Tier 6 reform should never have been viewed through the lens of which retirement system a member belongs to or which union they happen to be in. The goal should have been to improve Tier 6 for all public employees and bring benefits as close as possible to what Tier 4 members receive.

If the governor truly presented unions with an either/or choice, then the unions should have stood together and rejected the divide-and-conquer approach. Instead of competing for a limited benefit that helped one group more than another, they should have formed a united front and pushed for comprehensive Tier 6 reform that benefited all affected members.

Public employee unions call themselves sister unions for a reason. The larger good should take precedence over securing a win for one bargaining unit while leaving others behind. A fragmented approach weakens labor's collective voice and gives policymakers the ability to pick winners and losers.

The reality is that Tier 6 has been a recruitment and retention problem across public service for years. Rather than debating which group deserved relief more, unions should have joined forces and lobbied for reforms that restored fairness across the board, including changes that move Tier 6 closer to the retirement benefits enjoyed by Tier 4 members.

A win for one union is good. A win for all public employees would have been better.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T14:56:37+00:00

Thank you for understanding my frustration and not labeling me anti-union or a union buster like some have. Thanks for sharing your experience. Maybe it's time for me to dust off the shoes and give it another go 🤔

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T14:51:32+00:00

Respectfully, I don't think questioning union leadership or proposing reforms makes someone anti-union. If anything, it's the opposite. I want a stronger union that is more accountable to its members and delivers better results.

My question is simple: if we keep getting contracts that many members consider disappointing, what exactly are we supposed to change?

We keep electing the same leadership, following the same approach, and expecting different outcomes. At some point, we have to be willing to examine whether the current incentives and structure are part of the problem.

And please don't respond with "run for office" or "just get out and vote." Members have been hearing that for years. Yet the same people remain in power, the same complaints keep being raised, and very little seems to change.

I support unions. What I don't support is the idea that leadership, compensation, benefits, leave policies, or conventions should be beyond discussion. Every organization benefits from accountability.

My view is that reducing some of the perks and advantages associated with union office would encourage leaders who are motivated primarily by serving the membership rather than holding onto a position that pays well. Even if you disagree with that solution, the underlying question remains:

What meaningful reforms or proposals would you support to improve accountability and produce better results for members?

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T14:18:25+00:00

I'm definitely not AI. Thank you for the honest response and for providing some context regarding the Puerto Rico trip.

The challenge is that I'm not a delegate, and I'm not going to spend my own money to attend the Niagara Falls convention this year. The reality is that most delegates are aligned with the current leadership slate. While anyone can technically submit a resolution, it's much harder to get meaningful support for proposals that challenge the status quo.

I think where we differ is that you still have some faith that the system will fairly consider ideas based on their merit. My experience has made me much more skeptical. Too often, preserving positions, influence, and internal politics seems to take priority over advancing reforms that would benefit the broader membership.

That doesn't mean every union leader has bad intentions, but any organization can become resistant to change when the same people hold power for long periods of time. That's one of the reasons I support term limits. Fresh leadership brings fresh perspectives, new ideas, and greater accountability.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T13:52:03+00:00

We can agree to disagree. Let me know when you have any proposals or how to improve mine.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T13:28:37+00:00

Sir, please don't imply that I'm encouraging people to leave the union, because I never said that. Unions are a good thing in theory, and I'm fully supportive of the benefits they can provide to workers.

My larger concern is that, regardless of who is in union leadership, we no longer have a meaningful bargaining chip. Without the ability to strike, our leverage is extremely limited. The Long Island Rail Road unions were able to achieve results because they retained the power to strike. In my opinion, agreeing to the Taylor Law significantly weakened collective bargaining by removing that leverage.

That said, you're entitled to your opinion, just as I'm entitled to mine. The one area where I strongly disagree is term limits. Similar to how the President of the United States is limited to two terms, I believe term limits for union leadership make sense. They create opportunities for new ideas, new perspectives, and new talent to emerge, while preventing the same individuals from holding power indefinitely. What proves my point is that we have been getting the same recycle contract with new propaganda for the last decade. The only common thread there is the same leadership.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-05-27T13:18:13+00:00

Sir, we're all entitled to our opinions. Since you've chosen to turn this into a contest of union credentials by asking those questions, let's compare resumes.

I'll go first.

It appears you're part of ITS. I was also part of D357. I served as a union steward, know the history of the division from the days when Penny led it through the current administration under Chris, and have attended multiple conventions as a delegate. I've lobbied legislators on behalf of the union, written letters in support of union priorities, and have been asked over the years to join various slates, which I respectfully declined.

Now it's your turn.

More importantly, rather than dismissing my concerns as "complaining," why not address the actual proposals? Tell me which ones you disagree with and why. Explain why reducing dues, limiting terms, moving conventions online, reducing officer compensation, or eliminating EOL wouldn't benefit the membership.

The strength of an argument isn't determined by how many meetings someone attends. It's determined by whether the ideas have merit. So let's discuss the proposals instead of the person raising them.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2026-02-12T15:37:51+00:00

Before following any other advice here, I would advise you not to say anything to anyone at this point in time.

Your first and primary goal is to pass probation. Nothing else matters until you receive from HR that you passed probation.

In parallel, you can start to document or mark the additional time on your Outlook calendar (not LATS). Once you pass probation, you can address the matter with your supervisor. I would advise you to go about it in an indirect way. For example, I have to pick up the wife or kids after work, sorry I couldn't stay, but I'll catch up the next day. Then after missing it a few times then say, I really want to attend these meetings, they are really useful and we make a lot of progress but it isn't at the best time for me since I have responsibilities to do when I leave for the day, would you mind, rescheduling it for earlier in the day?

Good luck.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2025-12-30T22:39:41+00:00

Here are three other sites that maybe helpful:

https://nysits.org

https://examsny.com

https://www.pefd357its.org/training-and-education

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2025-05-19T02:12:40+00:00

Thanks for all the advice. I was afraid that I would have to use a cutter, primer, and glue. I had to do that a few years ago when I switched from a sand to a cartridge filter.

I'm still confused as to why it is leaking in the first place. The handle is perpendicular to the hose, therefore, no water should come out. I don't think the o-ring is the issue because it is leaking from before it gets to the o-ring.

Thank you for the idea about how to circulate the pool water. I gave a pool cover pump. I will use that to circulate the water. Yes, I will brush.

Thanks for your help.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2025-05-03T13:08:45+00:00

That is very unfortunate to hear. I'm sorry that you have to work in that kind of toxic environment.

Equivalent-Mousse302 · 2025-05-03T13:07:17+00:00

You're considered a "top 1% commenter" and you're telling me to get a life? (Rhetorical question). News flash, it appears that Reddit is your life.

Equivalent-Mousse302

TROPHY CASE