You have no choice. It is part of their new constitution that you contribute.
Wall Street Journal
The mighty Service Employees International Union (SEIU) plans to spend some $150 million in this year's election, most of it to get Barack Obama and other Democrats elected. Where'd they get that much money?
That's a question the Departments of Labor and Justice are being asked to investigate by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation. Specifically, the labor watchdog group wants Justice to query a new SEIU policy that appears to coerce local workers into funding the parent union's national political priorities.
The union adopted a new amendment to its constitution at last month's SEIU convention, requiring that every local contribute an amount equal to $6 per member per year to the union's national political action committee. This is in addition to regular union dues. Unions that fail to meet the requirement must contribute an amount in "local union funds" equal to the "deficiency," plus a 50% penalty. According to an SEIU union representative, this has always been policy, but has now simply been formalized.
Just cough up the cash folks, you have no choice. If you dare fight them, they have control over your job. I know, I know- unions are supposed to protect your job- but who is really fooled by this thinking. Let's stop pretending that they cannot get you fired if they so choose.I want to know how the unions are allowed to get away with this. How is this legal?
This is not the American way.
I know that many like to say that America was built on the backs of labor and I am sure it was.
America was built on the backs of hard working laborers, not the labor unions.
I know the unions like to tell us that you would never get a day off nor would you have medical coverage without them, but is that really true?
I know that a massive majority of Americans are not union workers and most are given a day off and they have medical coverage. So explain that way of thinking.
I fully support employees banning together to stand up for themselves, but what right do the unions have to strong arm their members?
How are these tactics any different than the ones the unions used to stand against?
Unions were formed to protect workers against the strong armed tactics of corporations, so what is up with this?
I like labor unions and I am glad we have them. However, I do not like this. This type of strong armed bullying behavior is exactly why unions were formed in the first place.