1199 SEIU boss George Gresham accused of corruption — but no Democrat will investigate

New York Post - Apr 14th, 2025

A recent Politico investigation has unveiled allegations against George Gresham, the head of the powerful healthcare workers union 1199 SEIU, accusing him of using the organization as his personal 'piggy bank.' This revelation comes at a critical time, as Gresham is facing a highly competitive election challenge. The accusations, which include financial misappropriations benefiting himself, his family, and allies, have been levied by his opponents, who are using these claims as a basis for their campaign to unseat him. Despite these allegations, Gresham's loyalists within the union maintain that his actions were legitimate. The scandal is unfolding against the backdrop of Gresham's significant influence, given the union's 450,000 members spread across four states and Washington, DC.

The implications of this investigation are significant, as the union is a major player in New York politics and has considerable sway in Democratic circles. While the New York Attorney General, Tish James, may be hesitant to initiate an investigation due to the union's political clout, there is potential for federal authorities, possibly under the Trump administration, to intervene. The outcome of the election and the investigation could have profound impacts on the union's future leadership and its role in political advocacy, as well as raise broader questions about accountability and governance in large labor organizations.

New York Politics George Gresham 1199 Seiu Union Election Financial Misappropriation Politico Investigation

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

4.2

Moderately Fair

Read with skepticism

The news story raises serious allegations against George Gresham and the 1199 SEIU union, which are of significant public interest given the union's size and influence. However, the article's quality is undermined by a lack of verifiable evidence, balanced reporting, and credible sources. The sensational nature of the claims may engage readers, but without detailed support and context, the story's impact and reliability are limited. The article could benefit from a more thorough investigation and presentation of multiple perspectives to enhance its credibility and overall quality.

Accuracy

The story makes several claims that require verification, such as George Gresham using union funds for personal gain and his $300,000 salary. These claims lack detailed evidence or corroboration from reliable sources. The article also suggests Gresham's alleged misconduct has been ongoing for two decades, but it does not provide concrete evidence or historical context to support this assertion. The lack of specific examples or documentation weakens the story's factual accuracy and verifiability.

Balance

The story appears to lean towards a critical stance against George Gresham, presenting allegations of financial misconduct without offering substantive counterarguments or perspectives from his supporters. It mentions that 'Grisham loyalists' defend his actions as 'kosher,' but this is not explored in depth. The article could benefit from a more balanced representation by including detailed responses from Gresham or his allies to the accusations.

Clarity

The article is somewhat clear in its language and structure, presenting the main allegations against Gresham in a straightforward manner. However, the lack of detailed evidence and context can lead to confusion about the validity of the claims. The tone is accusatory, which may affect the reader's perception of the story's neutrality.

Source quality

The article lacks attribution to specific sources or investigations, such as the alleged Politico investigation. It does not cite any documents, interviews, or reports that substantiate the claims made. The absence of credible and authoritative sources undermines the article's reliability and raises questions about the impartiality of the reporting.

Transparency

The article does not disclose the methodology or sources used to gather the information presented. It makes bold claims without explaining how the information was obtained or verified. There is also no mention of potential conflicts of interest, such as the political motivations of Gresham's rivals, which could impact the story's impartiality.